To Kill or Not to Kill
Do some people deserve to die for the crimes they have committed, and do we have the right to take their lives? This is a question that people have asked themselves for centuries, and with the death penalty being passed into legislation in some states and not in others, the question continues. Pulitzer Prize winner, Nicholas Kristof, in the New York Times editorial titled “When We Kill” (June 14, 2019), argues that there is no evidence that the death penalty actual deters crime, it costs more to put someone to death then it does to give them a life sentence, and there is a racial bias to the death penalty which undermines the legitmacy of our judical system. Kristof supports these claims by presenting personal testimonies of people who have been wrongfully sentenced to death, which provides unique evidence to backup his claims. Kristof successfully uses rhetorical strategies including ethos, pathos, and logos to make a more persuading argument to his audience.
Kristof mentions early on in his article about how his interest in the death penalty first arose, which was when he was approached about doing a story on a man named Cameron Todd Willingham. Willingham was a man on death row who was believed to be innocent, however Kirstof writes, “I never wrote about Willingham, and he was executed.” (Kristof), which Kristof says drove him to take a deeper look into the death penalty. From there Kristof writes about how he decided to look at individual cases of men wrongfully conivted, and from there he’s able to come to the conclusion that the death penalty has a racial bias. Based on the fact that many of the men he talked to where convicted in large part due to their race. Kristof’s claims are convincing because he has background information and knowledge to back up his argument. He is credible because of his experience and in turn his argument is stronger. This would be an example of Kristof using the rhetorical strategy ethos to strengthen his overall argument. Another example of Kristof using ethos to make his argument more compelling is when he includes a direct quote from the prosecutor of Willingham about his thoughts on the death penalty, “In hindsight, I don’t think the death penalty serves a maeingful purpose,” (Henry M. Coxe III). This is one of the most compelling factors in Kristof’s piece because the prosecutor who fought for Willinghams death sentence, actually say that he really doesn’t see meaning in the death penalty. This is compelling because he has someone with credibility and immense experience with the topic agreeing with his claims that the death penalty overall is flawed. Kristof’s use of the quote would be an example of him using ethos to create a stronger argument because he is presenting an opinion by someone who has even more credibility then himself, which falls in line with what Kristof is arguing. This makes his argument more compelling to the audience because he has other credible opinions, other then himself, stating his claims.
Kristof includes many stories of men wrongfully sentenced to death throughout his article. One specific anecdote Kristof brings up is a case involving two men sentenced to death for a muder they didn’t commit. Kristof writes that Williams and Myers spent 42 years in jail for a crime they did not commit, he adds “…as they emerged from prison, two frail and elderly men, Myers knelt and kissed the ground.” (Kristof), this would be an example of Kristof successfully using the rhetorical strategy pathos. Kristof uses emotional and vivid language in order to paint a picture of what it was truly like for these two men. By using this kind of language Kristof is able to evoke empathy from the reader for these men. Which then makes for an overall more compelling argument because the reader is able to put themselves in those men shoes. Kristof was successful in reaching his audience emotionally with these personal stories because they allow his audience to actualize the serverity of the death penalty. Kristof is successful in creating a sense of pity for these men, which in turn allows his claims to be more persuasive. This is because his claims now have evidence given to the reader by the real life anecdotes Kristof includes. Kristof does an excellent job of creating negative feelings for the death penalty by these unfortunatly true stories, which makes his argument all the more appealing to the reader. Another example of Kristof using pathos successfully is when he writes, “Imagine what it would be like to lose the people you love most, then be convicted of murdering them and finally be strapped to a gurney and executed by lethal injection.” (Kristof), this quote is very powerful and really makes the reader think. Kristof was successful in making the reader ask themselves questions, and in turn question their own beliefs. By doing this Kristof makes his claims more compelling because he brings up good points that people wouldn’t normally ask themselves.
Throughout Kristof’s article he includes various facts and statistics to support his claims. Kristof actually proves every claim he makes in the article, which makes his argument all the more compelling. Kristoff writes, “Murder rates are actually lower in states without the death penalty than those with it.” (Kristof), this would be an example of Kristof using the rhetorical strategy logos to create a more compelling argument. By Kristof supporting his claims with actual facts he provided more evidence to the reader that his argument is sound. He also disproves a lot of misconceptions about the death penalty, “Capital punishment is far more expensive than life prison terms.” (Kristof), by doing this Kristof is strengthening his argument as well as providing information that most people wouldn’t know. Kristof uses logos throughout his article to give all his claims some backing as well as making an overall better and more convincing argument.
Kristof was able to create a compelling argument through his use of ethos, pathos, and logos. Kristof used his knowlege and backgrounf of the death penalty to give himself some more credibilty with the reader as well as including passionate and emtional stories of real people to pull at the readers heartstrings. By doing this, Kristof was able to appeal to the emotions of the reader and inturn make a stronger argument. Also Kristof’s use of facts throughout his article provides evidence that ultimately backs up his claims. This allows for a more compelling argument because the reader was able to see that his claims were credible. Overall Kristof was successful in using the rhetorical devices ethos, pathos, and logos in making a very compelling argument.
Works Cited
Kristof, Nicholas. “When We Kill.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 14 June 2019, www.nytimes.com/2019/06/14/opinion/sunday/death-penalty.html.
Chloe's Writing Blog 