Article Analysis: O'Sullivan's View of the Death Penalty

1530 Words4 Pages

The Article provides numerous reasons the United States and Great Britain should have the death penalty. O’Sullivan addresses all the main counter arguments when explain to his audience his conclusion. His supporting evidence includes death penalty decisions in history and several other statistics. Emotionally terms, faulty cause and effects scenarios, and either/or point of views are other ways the author conveys his opinion to the audience.

The article begins with an overall theme threw out O’Sullivan’s piece: does the death penalty appropriately punish certain crimes or increases murder and crime (O’Sullivan 1). Kidnapping and murder cases in California as well as Britain are examined this question then later used as a reason why the death penalty is necessary. The author states in both cases, the overwhelming majority of the general public votes for the death penalty to be impose (O’Sullivan 2). The method of death penalty opposition by the political elites in both countries is soon compared. Great Britain had a more open opposition and California had a more subtle method by adding a dragged out appeal process to the sentence. Next, five reasons that opponents of capital punishments most often used are listed, followed by a rebuttal. The author addresses them as formidable and needed due to an “undemocratic contempt for majority opinion” (O’Sullivan 9). The predominate reference used to rebut the previous reasons, cited the penalty given to the Nazis and the Communists.

The first point, the author attempts to makes his argument threw biased statements and slightly emotionally loaded language. For example O’Sullivan describes the opponents of the death penalty as having realized “that they need form...

... middle of paper ...

...Britain since then. Fore he wrote his piece. Almost needless to say, several things have changed in Great Britain since then. The author’s argument assumes the actions of today will reflect the actions from years ago. Once more, the author’s flawed logic reduces the quality of his argument.

“Deadly Stakes” a controversial but poorly supported article. It addresses the main and most important counter arguments of abolitionists. However the responses to the opposition were filled with too many logical fallacies which gave them less substance. The author did support his overall thesis in the body of his piece but the use of emotional charged language, faulty cause and effect, and personal attracts on his sources made his points weak.

Works Cited

O’Sullivan, John. “Deadly Staked”. National Review Online. National Review, 30. August 2002. Web 14 February. 2012

Open Document