1. Stating Opinion

2. Argumentative Text

3. Hortatory Exposition Text

4. Discussion Text

5. Narrative Text

Here I provide you with a few material about Stating Opinion. Learn it well. But first, please confirm your presence in the link given (above). Then do the exercise given. Submit your task on the time.

Write your opinion based on the situation, don't forget to mention your name first.

1. Risk of Judicial Error: The legal system is not perfect, so there is a possibility that innocent people could be sentenced to death. This is one of the strongest reasons cited by opponents of the death penalty.

2. Does Not Reduce Crime: Studies show that the death penalty does not significantly lower crime rates compared to life imprisonment.

3. Violation of Human Rights: The death penalty is considered a violation of the right to life, which is a fundamental human right. Several human rights organizations oppose it based on this principle.

And I personally disagree with the death penalty, even for serious crimes like premeditated murder or terrorism. I believe that every human life has value, and the risk of wrongful convictions is too great to justify such an irreversible punishment. Additionally, studies suggest that the death penalty may not effectively deter crime more than life imprisonment. I think it's important to consider rehabilitation and the potential for individuals to change. Ultimately, I believe in upholding human rights and the value of life

I support the death penalty because I believe it serves as a deterrent to serious crimes.

Arguments in favor of the death penalty:

Deterrent effect: The death penalty is considered the most severe punishment and can provide a deterrent effect for perpetrators of serious crimes, such as premeditated murder or terrorism.

Justice for victims: Some people believe that the death penalty is an appropriate form of justice for victims' families, especially for violent crimes.

Protecting society: By imposing the death penalty on perpetrators of very dangerous crimes, society feels safer because the perpetrators will not be able to repeat their crimes.

However, I do not agree with applying the death penalty to lesser crimes or those that do not involve direct violence against another person. For example, offenses such as theft or drug use should not be punished with the death penalty. This is because these crimes are often influenced by social, economic, or mental health factors, which are better addressed through rehabilitation rather than extreme punishment. Punishing with the death penalty in such cases is not only disproportionate, but also reflects an overly harsh and inhumane approach to a more complex problem.

Therefore, it is important to have clear boundaries regarding crimes that are worthy of the death penalty. Justice is not only about retribution, but also about understanding the context behind each criminal act and seeking more humane and effective solutions.

People who support the death penalty often argue that this punishment is necessary to uphold justice, especially for very serious crimes such as premeditated murder, terrorism, or sexual violence. They believe that for the victim and his family, the death penalty provides a form of justice that cannot be given by imprisonment.

In addition, supporters of the death penalty argue that this punishment can function as a deterrent, or deterrent, for potential criminals. They argue that knowing that the death penalty may await can reduce the likelihood of someone committing a serious crime.

Some also think that the legal system should have the right to punish people who commit extreme crimes in a fair manner. In their view, the death penalty can be a way to protect society from dangerous and unrehabilitated individuals.

Many Americans still support the death penalty as a legitimate way to uphold justice and security. Abolishing it won't necessarily solve inequality in the justice system, and the U.S. has the right to determine its own punishments.

Rather than delivering justice, the death penalty perpetuates a cycle of inequality and violence. Many other countries have recognized the inhumanity of this practice and have abolished it, leaving the U.S. increasingly isolated in its defense of capital punishment. To truly reflect its values of fairness and justice, America must confront the troubling legacy of the death penalty and work toward its abolition. Ending this practice would not only prevent irreversible mistakes but also mark a step toward a more just and humane soc

The death penalty does not serve as an effective deterrent, and its application often reflects racial and economic disparities rather than justice. By clinging to this outdated practice, America undermines its commitment to human rights and a fair legal system. Abolishing the death penalty would be a step toward addressing the systemic inequities that have long plagued the country’s criminal justice system.

First, the death penalty can provide a deterrent effect. With this punishment, potential criminals will think twice before carrying out actions that could take the lives of other people or destroy the lives of many people. The threat of this harsh punishment could be a deterrent for serious crimes in the future.

Second, the death penalty provides justice for the victim and the victim's family. In cases of particularly brutal crimes, such as serial murder or terrorism, the perpetrator has taken the lives of many people and destroyed their families. The death penalty is seen as appropriate retribution for the crimes they committed and provides a sense of justice for the victims.

Third, the death penalty also eliminates the possibility of the perpetrator to commit another crime. With the death penalty, we ensure that especially dangerous offenders will not be able to repeat their actions, either in prison or if they might escape or receive pardon in the future.

In certain cases, especially extreme and unforgivable crimes, I feel the death penalty is a just and appropriate measure to protect society and punish the perpetrators according to their crimes.

I also believe that the death penalty can serve as a deterrent, preventing others from committing similar crimes because they know that the harshest punishment awaits them. Although not everyone believes in this deterrent effect, for me, the existence of the death penalty demonstrates that the state is firm in protecting its citizens from serious threats. Additionally, in certain cases, the death penalty provides an extra sense of security, ensuring that the perpetrator will never have the opportunity to commit crimes again, whether inside prison or after their sentence is completed.

The death penalty, in my view, can also offer a sense of closure or relief for the victims' families, knowing that the person responsible for their suffering will not return to society. While not all victims’ families feel the same way, for some, knowing that justice has been fully served is important for the healing process.

In my view, the death penalty provides a form of justice that life imprisonment cannot fully achieve. For the victims and their families, knowing that the person responsible for such devastating loss will never harm anyone again can bring a sense of closure and peace. It also reinforces the idea that certain crimes are so severe that society must respond with its strongest consequence.

Moreover, while debates about its deterrent effect continue, I believe that the death penalty does serve as a warning to potential offenders, reminding them that some actions carry irreversible consequences. Although it should be applied carefully and in the rarest cases, I think the death penalty remains an essential option for ensuring justice and public safety in our legal system.