WS-Toulmin Method

Toulmin Method

Amber Young- Capital Punishment: Society’s Self Defense

 Claim: “…capital punishment is necessary for the safety and well-being of the general populace.”

            Qualifier: “…society has the right to execute…”

            Exception: “…the guilt must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.”

 Reason 1: “Capital punishment is societies means of self defense.”

            Amber Young says that capital punishment is societies way of protecting itself from murderers. She says that if Colorado had killed Ted Bundy, all of the girls in Florida would not have been killed. This is not a good reason though because he was only convicted of kidnapping in Colorado. Regardless of capital punishment, Ted Bundy would have eventually gone free. Basically, the entire support system of her essay is irrelevant.

 Reason 2: “The preservation of life, any life…. is not an absolute value for most people.”

            Amber uses the loss of life in the military, as well as deaths caused by automobile accidents to support her claim that people value some things more than life. From her perspective, if capital punishment isn’t instituted, then cars should be outlawed because people are killed as a result of them quite often. These comparisons are very different, almost to the point of making the argument ridiculous. Comparing automobile accidents to lethal injections makes no sense. However, it is true that in the bigger picture, some things are more important than life. But, Amber never really gives a good explanation of what can be gained by capital punishment.

 Reason 3: “…many prisoners would prefer to die than to languish in prison.”

            This is a huge generalization. I’m sure that there are plenty of people who would rather not be executed. All of the sudden, Amber decides to show some sort of demented compassion to the guilty, which is a pretty weak attempt to support the overall argument.

 Refutation:

 The possibility of executing an innocent person is one of her concerns. Amber refutes by claiming that it isn’t very likely, and some innocent people might have to be killed for the greater good.

The founding fathers didn’t specify whether the right to life, or liberty is more important, so it isn’t unconstitutional. Amber claims that safety and self-defense are the most important parts of the constitution. This is just one opinion however, and she provides no real explanation as to why her opinion is the correct one.