Humanities Homework Help

Discussion prompt

Should there be a death penalty for first-degree murder?

• Make an argument that either supports or opposes the use of the death penalty in first-degree murder cases. •
• In addition to your main response, you must also post substantive responses to at least two of your classmates’ posts:
  • Identify the premises, terms, and conclusions in your classmates’ posts.
  • Evaluate the language your classmates used in their posts. Is it clear or vague?
  • Are your classmates’ arguments valid?

  (Let’s be honest: If I asked you to describe the last big argument you had, it probably wouldn’t be a) a very pleasant memory or b) an example of your best critical thinking. When most of us get upset, our Cave Man Brain takes over, and it’s a lot of yelling and screaming and cognitive biases. As critical thinkers, that’s the last thing we want! Instead, we want to make our decisions based on reasons. We want to identify the issue, clearly define our terms, and examine the evidence to arrive at a defensible conclusion. For us, arguments aren’t about convincing people we’re right. They’re the tools we use to try and figure out if we’re right. So, although I’m interested in your position on capital punishment, we’re really using this issue as a test case. Can we make a concise, complete, evidence-based and consistent argument about the death penalty? Or an argument about who would have won the NBA title this year? Or whether we should continue shelter-in-place through May? Any argument our classmates can break down into premises and conclusion (the way you see the arguments presented in Chapter 2) will work! Because, as a nurse, you can’t avoid disagreements. But you can practice the thinking habits that will make those disagreements productive and respectful. )Comment 1The death penalty is a widely controversial topic to discuss due to our jurors’ and local prosecutors’ power to end another individual’s life for first-degree murder. First-degree murder can be defined as an unlawful killing that is both willful and premeditated. I support the death penalty for first-degree murder. Although some people oppose the death penalty for moral reasons, I still believe if someone plots a plan to end another human life and succeeds that individual does not deserve to continue living. In regards to that I will say it depends on case by case, for example in self-defense cases and cases where the killer is mentally unstable, it can get convoluted. All cases should be investigated deeply to come up with a decision on how the murderer will be punished. Bad actions lead to consequences, in extreme cases the result is being sentenced to death. In the U.S, the common method of ending a murders’ life is by lethal injection. This is not as unethical as a firing squad, hanging or electrical chair. If a state legalizes the death penalty then those who might premediate a homicide will be more likely to rethink about proceeding with his or her evil actions. Studies show states that enforce the death penalty has experienced a decrease in murder rates. In addition, for the safety of our communities, murderers on death row will not be able to commit any more murders because they will no longer get the chance to.
  Comment 2The virus that causes COVID-19 is spread through respiratory droplets produced when an infected person coughs or sneezes (CDC, 2020). The best way to prevent getting COVID-19 is by practicing social distancing such as staying 6 feet away from other people, not gathering in groups, and staying out of crowded places and avoiding mass gatherings. To further combat the spread of COVID-19, a “Safer at Home” emergency order was issued, which orders all residents of the City of Los Angeles to stay inside their homes and limit leaving their homes beyond what is necessary to take care of essential needs. The ultimate goal for the safer at home order is to “flatten the curve” of COVID-19’s spread. In order to continue to flatten the curve to slow down the spread of COVID-19, the shelter in place should continue until May 15. The reason for the extension is not because everything that everyone has been doing is not working, but because it is working. According to County Director of Health Services Dr. Christina Ghaly, if the safer at home order was lifted on its initial April 19 date and people resumed their normal habits, 96.5% of LA residents would be infected with the coronavirus over the next three months. If the stay at home order is lifted, hospitals will be very quickly overwhelmed with patients. Current social distancing measures would still result in 29.8% of LA residents being affected over the next three months, but that it an extremely lower percentage. However, increasing the efforts to stay apart from one another until May 15 or longer could reduce those projections to less than 5.5% over the next three months (Lin II, 2020). Residents who still continue to go out are still being urged to cut back on going out. There is a new county order requiring the wearing of a face cloth or mask if you are going out. It is heartbreaking to hear about COVID-19 claiming lives daily, but if we all continue to do our part, the statistics going forward are optimistic. We have to all remember to stay positive and take care of one another. We all need to continue to stay home, take measures to stay strong and healthy, and to protect one another by keeping our distance. Human beings are resilient and we will all get through this crisis together!References:Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2020). What you need to know about coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/download…Lin II, R. (2020, April 10). L.A. County stay-at-home order could last into summer; more social distancing essential, officials say. Los Angeles Times.