Non-Fiction Reading Response

The Upfront Magazine article “To Kill or Not to Kill?” By Patricia Smith, is a thought-provoking article about the death penalty, and whether or not it should be continued in the United States. The author discusses many graphic botched executions, and includes that a punishment of death is irreversible- and in a world full of human error, there’s always the possibility of taking the life of an innocent person. The author of this article clearly has sided with those opposing the death penalty, and wants to teach readers that killing people, no matter what the circumstance, is always wrong.

One example of how the author conveys this message is by how the article discusses many botched executions (situations where the lethal injection didn’t work.) These circumstances are awful to read about, because they sound painful and unbearable, even for a capital criminal. The author put this evidence in specifically to horrify the reader with the truth of the death penalty. The text states, “Everyone watching the execution of Clayton Lockett last April knew instantly that something had gone terribly wrong. Lockett was strapped to a gurney in the death chamber of the Oklahoma State Penitentiary and had been given an injection when he started kicking, twitching, and then writhing and moaning in agony.” This text example helps to support the author’s point because it uses Clayton Lockett as an example of how the death penalty can go horribly wrong. The quote uses graphic language to disgust the reader. This is one example of why the author believes the death penalty should be abolished- it can have many dangerous and harmful effects.

Another example of how the author supports their thesis is with the example that death is simply too final in a world where mistakes can occur. The death penalty is irreversible, and you can never be 100% sure that a criminal committed a crime- there will always be a chance that they are innocent. The author includes specific data in order to prove their point- the article states, “In recent years, exonerations of death row inmates, based on DNA and other evidence, have led to charges that the death penalty is simply too irreversible a punishment. Since 1973, 144 death row inmates have been exonerated.” The author includes the statistic because they want to realized that 144 innocent people were dealt the ultimate punishment, and didn’t deserve it. There are absolutely more innocent people who have been put to death. The author proves this point by using statistics, because it is an understandable format for the reader- also, because the numbers are shocking and will definitely persuade the reader. This is another reason why the author is opposed to the death penalty- mistakes can happen, and death is completely irreversible.

The author of this article used persuasive tactics to prove the point that the death penalty is wrong. Before reading this article, I didn’t see anything wrong with the death penalty- everyone around me had been telling me that killing and committing other awful crimes is wrong- naturally, I thought that murderers and criminals deserved the ultimate punishment. But, after reading this article, my opinion has definitely changed. I realize that in a world full of human error, the “murderers” being executed may be innocent people being punished for someone else’s crime.  I have also learned that the death penalty can be dangerous and detrimental to health- the accounts the author included of botched executions sounded agonizingly painful. This article has taught me that maybe, the punishment doesn’t always fit the crime.