The Pros And Cons Of Abolishing The Death Penalty

The topic of the death penalty is one that has been highly debated throughout history. In the Intelligence Squared debate, Barry Scheck and Diann Rust-Tierney argue for the notion of abolishing the death penalty while Robert Blecker and Kent Scheidegger argue against abolishing the death penalty. Diann Rust-Tierney and Barney Scheck uses logos and ethos to debate against Robert Blecker and Kent Scheidegger who masterfully manipulate ethos and pathos for their case.

Diann Rust-Tierney and Barry Scheck are well qualified in the topic of the death penalty. Diann Rust-Tierney is the executive director of the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty. Her debate partner, Barry Scheck, is a professor at the Cardozo School of Law. However their

This causes her strongest statement to lose logos and ethos. Rust-Tierney and Schneck also bring heavy doses of pathos and logos as they question the same question William Baude poses: “Yet what if someone goes through every possible procedure and after all is said and done still claims to be innocent? What if another court were to actually find him innocent?” (Baude, 20). Employing pathos and logos Baude gives an explanation for why the death penalty is flawed as he tells the tale of a man on death row. Baude claims

“ ….Judgments, right or wrong. This concern with concepts such as finality, jurisdiction, and the balance of powers may sound technical, lawyerly, and highly abstract. But so is the criminal justice system….Law must provide simple answers: innocence or guilt, freedom or imprisonment, life or death.” (Baude, 21).

This quote provides details of why the finality in the decisions regarding death may not accurately represent the justice the accused deserves. It augments the ultimate overarching point made by Scheck and Rust-Tierney that we should not determine

One of their strongest points came from the pathos of justice that comes from putting criminals such as the DC Sniper, who killed several innocent people, to death. Blecker also uses pathos to argue the death penalty is a step above locking people away in a semi-comfortable state for life especially in the cases where the killer is well behaved and avoids most high security lockdown prisons. This creates a feeling of need for justice in many, allowing Blecker to emphasis his point of justice. Another well made and un-countered argument by Scheidegger in his use of pathos when he claims the US shouldn’t abolish it simply to be a “world leader” in lesser punishments. Scheidegger claims those who commit heinous crimes must be served the proper justice. He angrily exclaims “....You hear "Follow Europe 's lead.".... Anders Breivik in Norway set off a bomb outside the parliament building in Oslo, killing eight, then went to an island and killed 69 youths. You know what his sentence was? 21 years in prison, the maximum that Norway