Argumentative Essay 2- First Draft- Should the law of capital punishment be passed again?-07.05.2014

Salih ÖZKAN

May 7, 2014

First Draft- 7. Essay- Argumentative essay 2

Should the law of capital punishment be passed again?

The capital punishment is the punishment which involves killing someone who has committed a crime or crimes. Until the mid-twentieth century, the capital punishment was being employed for the people who had committed a crime or crimes. However, this law is fortunately no longer in use. Yet, today, the restoration of capital punishment is being argued by the authorities. Although some people may think that the restoration of capital punishment is necessary, I believe that the capital punishment should not be passed again because it may cause an innocent person to die, prison can sometimes improve a person, and execution is more expensive than life imprisonment.

First, the state should not restore the law of capital punishment because innocent people may be executed. Some people may think that the judges are the one who have got a lot of experience, so they are able to decide whether one is guilty or not. However, as they are also human beings, there always possibility exists that they make mistakes. According to a research that was done by Michael Radelet, in the United States, from 1900-2007, 426 people convicted of capital crimes, were later found innocent. 403 were released from death row, but 23 had already been executed. Is there any way to bring them to life?

Second, the state should not pass the law of capital punishment again because prison gives people the chance to change. Proponents of the restoration of capital punishment may think that capital punishment is sometimes the only way to provide the justice.  However, prisoners have the opportunity to change their bad behaviors, while executed people do not have any opportunity to do so. For example, Caryl Chessman, who had been claimed to be a rapist,  had taught people how to read and written several books before he was executed. As another example, Jaturun Siripongs, who had killed two liquor store employees, became a Buddhist monk while he was in prison. No matter how terrible the mistakes they have made, people can change.

Finally, the restoration of capital punishment should not be accepted because execution is more expensive than life imprisonment. Some people may think that taxpayers should not pay their tax for prisoners. However, the money spent for execution is more than the money spent for life imprisonment. According to the Los Angeles Times's report, in California, keeping people in prison for life costs 136 million dollars; however, executing them costs more than $250 million. The government spends millions of dollars on execution decision.

In sum, the restoration of capital punishment should not be passed again because innocent people may be executed,  prison help people change their bad behaviors, and imprisoning criminals is less expensive than executing them. Executing someone is violent and it undermines the respect the country gets from other countries. The core countries like France, Germany, and Switzerland have already abolished the capital punishment because they are aware of its bad results. Therefore, to be like one of those countries, the state should not focus on the restoration of capital punishment.

________________________________________________________

Radelet, Michael. In Spite of Innocence. as on Amnesty USA website and "The Innocence List" on www.deathpenaltyinfo.org. May 11, 2006.

"Caryl Chessman.". The Biography.com website. http://www.biography.com/people/caryl-chessman-17169566

D. Hatfield, Larry. "Siripungs put to death". SFGate. February 9, 1999. http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Siripongs-put-to-death-3098221.php#photo-2282619

Williams, Carol J. Los Angeles Times. "Death penalty costs". June 20, 2011 http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jun/20/local/la-me-adv-death-penalty-costs-20110620

Salih ÖZKAN- May 1, 2014- 6. Essay-First Draft- Argumentative essay 1- Should schools provide moral education for youth?

Salih ÖZKAN

May 1, 2014

6. Essay-First Draft- Argumentative essay 1

Should schools provide moral education for youth?

Morality is a concept that decides whether one's behavior is right or not. The youth learn their culture's moral values when they start to communicate with others. Although the youth learn those values from their parents, the current education system offers moral education at schools. Instruction in values should be left to parents because morality is not something to be learnt with books, teachers need to focus on teaching other lectures that parents cannot teach, and parents are the only ones who can teach their children how to behave.

First, some people may think that schools are the places that students can learn anything if they are taught well. However, no matter how teachers try, moral values cannot be taught. Students can only develop their morality by communicating with others. For example, students may develop their moral values when they learn the rules of the games and have quarrels with each other. However, when they study the books that are designed for teaching the morality, their behaviors do not change according to what they study. Furthermore, as students might feel the pressure of the examination of these lectures, teachers may affect their students' morality in a bad way while they are willing to help them develop it.

Second, as teachers need to focus on teaching students other lectures that parents cannot teach, instruction in values should be left to parents. Proponents of moral education at schools may claim that as teachers are the people who know about the moral values more than others, they should be the ones who teach those values. However, parents may not want a teacher to tell their children how to behave. My friend Murat, who was living in Germany, wanted his parents to send him to Turkey to study and his parents accepted his request. In Turkey, when he called a teacher by his first name, his teacher got frustrated and punished him by making him stand up on one foot. Being humiliated, Murat turned back to Germany and never came back. To avoid problems like that, teachers should only engage in teaching their lectures as they are supposed to.

Finally, instruction in values should be left to parents as parents are the only ones who can teach their children these moral values. According to Sigmund Freud(154), children most develop their moral values at the age of 3-6. He suggests that if parents cannot help their children to develop their moral values at that time, these children cannot easily apprehend what is right or wrong. Because of that, parents play a vital role in teaching their children the moral values. However, if parents believe that their children will get educated about the morality when they start going to school, they might pay no attention to teach the moral values. After that, when these children start going school, they may start to act up.

To sum up, instruction in values should be left to parents because teachers cannot teach the moral values like math, teachers should engage in teaching their lectures, and nobody can care about the children's morality more than parents. Today, the moral education still continues. Being a student for 14 years, I have not seen anything but embarrassment from these lectures. Generally, teachers give the answer sheet before the examination and students do not even have any idea why they take these lessons. Therefore, the Ministry of National Education should start the process and instruction in values should be left to parents.

___________________________________________________________

Yıldırım, I. (Editor) Eğitim Psikolojisi. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık, 2008