This article argues against the death penalty, stating it is immoral and ineffective as it is supposed to lessen crime. The article talks about the decline in public support for the death penalty and shows multiple issues with its application, for example racial bias. The intended audience is the public and policymakers, especially people who have an interest in criminal justice reform. It also includes ethos, as it highlights the morality of the stop of the death penalty and presents data to support its claims. This approach is successful because it goes into readers’ values and concerns about fairness. The source explains the complications around the death penalty, showing how it wrongly affects neglected groups and increases questions about how efficient it is. One weakness of the article is its bias, it comes from a publication known for its liberal point of view, which does not represent opposing arguments. Finally, the article is suitable to my viewpoint on the death penalty as it gives a modern point of view on the debate. 

This source examines the controversies surrounding the death penalty in the United States and worldwide. It provides data on the standard of the death penalty, pointing out its inequalities,mainly among excluded groups. The article is intended for people concerned with social justice, human rights, and legal reforms, as it tries to raise awareness about the moral consequences of the death penalty. The source uses pathos and logos to argue against the death penalty. It also explains the death penalty by showing a balanced view of the issue, including the risks of executing innocent people. However, it's possible that it shows a bias against death penalty, as it mainly shows its failures and injustices without discussing potential arguments in its benefit. In conclusion, this source is important to my topic,giving a strong foundation for understanding the arguments against the death penalty.

In this article on the Death Penalty, it presents how the financial tribulations are a substantial issue in the allocation and implementation of the death penalty in the United States. It would be smart if we considered a financial regulation to change the policy on the death penalty, this article also stresses on how less resources are dedicated to such extreme cases as life imprisonment without parole. As well as, pointing out that the death penalty distorts the normal work of the legal system. The nature of the message targeted here is to people who are decision-makers, practitioners of law, and the average intelligent member of society optimistic about a proactive approach towards crime and its related costs. Such a bold presentation is protected by the effective inclusion of economic references that add weight to the author’s argument that the death penalty is expensive. Not only does the original base on which these excerpts are drawn help one grasp in a more detailed manner what the death; penalty is from an economic view, but it also questions the moral ground of the death penalty as it has not removed from the cost of criminal behaviors. However, the author shows all of them are against death penalty implications as they have addressed the issue in a very business-oriented manner. There is so much that concerns them with the issue including the costs as opposed to the morality of the act. The source is useful since it touches on issues including the death penalty, and specifics around the financial area and is quite far from presentiments as it gives a more critical impression the issues. 

This article explores the debate around the death penalty, centering on the different views of supports and people against the death penalty. Supports say, the death penalty is the right punishment for very serious crimes, while non-supporters feel that it violates the basic right to life. The intended audience includes educators and policymakers interested in ethical and social justice issues. The article successfully uses ethos by referencing notable philosophers which increases its credibility. Also, the article helps clear up the complications of the death penalty debate by sharing many viewpoints, making it a valuable resource for understanding the topic. However, the article may show a bias by leaning more toward the non-supporter perspective, potentially overshadowing the supporter arguments. Lastly, this article is important in supporting my statement on the death penalty, because it gives a good overview of the moral factors involved.