Meaning

1. Koch’s thesis is the only way to protect human life from murder is to not let it happen and to do this, the guaranteed way is the death penalty. The main idea that he wants readers to agree with is that human life and their rights need to be protected.
2. The argument that deals with the death penalty as a deterrent to murder is that the death penalty will scare murderers that they wouldn’t murder. Koch brings up a situation that happened with murderer that was sentenced to life in prison, but they still were able to commit murder. The argument that deals with the death penalty being a form of justice for the murder done is that it gave the murderer exactly what they deserved. Since they gave up someone else’s life, then they should give up their life as well. Both arguments relate to his thesis because they both protect the human life.

Purpose and Audience

1. In this particular essay Koch does not seem to convey a sense of political gain. He just seems to want to get his point across. Koch just wants his audience to how serious this issue is and that it should be stopped with the death penalty. He does not seem to be aiming for votes or political superiority. He wants to make his audience aware that the highest form of capital punishment is the most guaranteed way that murder will not happen.
2. Koch does seem to expect is audience to agree with because he gives reasons on why those who do not agree with him say that the death penalty is not the right way to handle murder situations. Koch set an emotional appeal in his essay. By doing this, he tends to seek a sad and sorrowful reaction from his audience. Giving the readers various examples, showed them that the death penalty was the best option for capital punishment.
3. He places the readers with a responsibility of knowing the difference of state rights and individual rights. They just have to know that that the government can do certain things that citizens and individuals themselves are just not allowed to do. He explains how everyone wants their rights, but they do not want the responsibility that comes along with it. He is just saying you have to do your part in society.

Method and Structure

1. An example of emotional appeal is when Koch talks about the twenty-one year old woman that was assaulted and murdered. Lots of people heard her shouting for help, but they didn’t do anything about it. An example of an ethical appeal is when Koch states his twenty-two years of experience of capital punishment. Lastly, an example of a rational appeal is when Koch explains how though the death penalty is a harsh way to capital punishment, doing absolutely nothing about the situation if far more barbaric and terrible. I think that the emotional appeal is most effective because it goes straight to the heart of the audience. No matter how much someone thinks about a subject, they tend to listen to their hearts. The least effective appeal is the ethical appeal because even though you might be a credible source, you still could have an opinion about a subject that makes no sense at all and agreeing with you just because your credible would be a foolish mistake on the reader.
2. The major premise is that before death, murderers admit they were wrong. The minor premise is murderers realize that they were wrong. The conclusion is that all murderers admit they were wrong and realize what they did was wrong before they die. Koch denies the validity of this because this is not necessarily true for all murderers. Some murders might know that what they did was wrong, but they might not all admit to it.
3. Koch’s strategy in countering the argument is that it’s not the method of the death penalty it’s the death of another human being that one thinks is barbaric. I believe that this method was effective because compares finding a cure to diseases to finding a cure to the death penalty.
4. Koch uses the examples of murders and what they have done to innocent victims to display all his points. For instance, the example he gives of the prison victim who was sentenced to life but still had the chance to kill proved that life sentences is not enough to stop murders from murdering. Another example is of the twenty-one year old woman who was assaulted and murdered. This example proved that if the death penalty isn’t pit into place the criminal will become bolder and more confident in his crimes. The only way to destroy this boost of confidence is to show them the same thing can happen to them.

Language

1. Koch portrays a tone of determination. This determination to convince his audience the death penalty is the one and only way to bring murder to an end is the highest level of capital punishment. By giving a lot of emotional appeal, Koch really draws my attention to his argument especially when the corrections officer was murdered by a convict who was already sentenced to life.
2. Koch’s words indicate that he understands what his opponents are saying, but he feels they are just outright wrong. He feels that some of his opponents just were not thinking sensibly.

Writing Topics

1. I use to think that the death penalty was not the way to go when it came to capital punishment, but after reading this essay by Koch, I realized that it really is the only way to deal with the problem up front and personal. Being a Christian, my religion would say that this form of punishment is cruel and that it is not the right way to solve this problem. Though my religion is to not kill anyone at all, I feel that those who deserve the death penalty should get the death penalty. I use to think that life sentences were enough because murders were not out in the open murdering people. After reading the essay and reading his example of what happened in the prison, that one incident changed my view completely. Though I am still contemplating on whether or not to agree with the death penalty or not.

I think now that I have read the essay and thought about all the possibilities, the only reasonable solution is that one should be put to death only if it is for a reason. If the crime was because of self defense and it could be proven as self defense, then one should not be put to death. Why should someone die for defending their own life? If one thinks they can take someone else’s life, why shouldn’t the government take your own life? Yes, the death penalty is a harsh punishment for anyone, but it is the right one if one chooses to take someone’s life in their own hands.