Blog Post 17: Revised QRG Paragraph

ORIGINAL:
In questioning the analysis of one’s mental state, we must also consider the implications of our actions. Ghandi says, “an eye for an eye will make the world go blind.” Thus, when the death sentence is carried out we are essentially hypocritically stripping the world of an opportunity of healing while simultaneously torturing and abusing the rights and sentience of individuals. Wayne Goodwyn of NPR depicts a botched lethal injection in Ohio through intense emotional imagery in order to convey the immorality of the death penalty to his readers. ‘"Suddenly he opened his mouth," Kiefer says. "His mouth sort of made this funny round shape, and you could see this expulsion of air, and we all jumped. This was something different."...The executioner eventually came out, turned on the death chamber microphone, and tried to reassure everyone that Wood was asleep, and it was OK. But Kiefer says the sounds emanating from the condemned man that were suddenly brutally audible behind the executioner's voice only added another layer to everyone's distress. An hour passed.’ Hence, the death penalty undermines morality in that it ends the lives of those who cannot help their actions. Even if a mental illness is not diagnosed, the human brain is programmed to defend itself when it feels under attack. Any dramatic shift in neurotransmitters will result in a mood change that often results in dangerous action. The bottom line is, most criminals are not themselves in the moment that they are committing a crime; yet, the death penalty literally ends the individual of their right to life and the potential of health.

REVISED: 

In questioning the analysis of one’s mental state, we must also consider the implications of our actions. Ghandi says, “an eye for an eye will make the world go blind.” Thus, when the death sentence is carried out we are hypocritically stripping the world of an opportunity for healing, while simultaneously torturing and abusing the rights and sentience of individuals. Wayne Goodwyn of NPR depicts a botched lethal injection, taking place in Ohio, through intense emotional imagery to convey the trauma of the death penalty to his readers. ‘"Suddenly he opened his mouth," Kiefer says. "His mouth sort of made this funny round shape, and you could see this expulsion of air, and we all jumped. This was something different."...The executioner eventually came out, turned on the death chamber microphone, and tried to reassure everyone that Wood was asleep, and it was OK. But Kiefer says the sounds emanating from the condemned man that were suddenly brutally audible behind the executioner's voice only added another layer to everyone's distress. An hour passed.’ Hence, the death penalty undermines morality in that it ends the lives of those who cannot help their actions. Even if a mental illness is not diagnosed, the human brain is programmed to defend itself when it feels under attack. Any dramatic shift in neurotransmitters will result in a mood change that often results in dangerous action. Overall, most criminals are not themselves in the moment they are committing a crime; yet, the death penalty ends their individual right to life and potential of regaining health.

**** I removed a lot of unnecessary filler words in order to make my writing more concise. I also fixed a few verbs so that they were in the active voice, and changed some vocab words so that my sentences flowed better.

Updated Draft of QRG

The Death of the Death Penalty: Transition Towards Morality

With the 2016 election approaching, America is constantly highlighting new points of controversy, and their desired outcomes based on the various points of view, and arguments of the candidates. This brings me to a central component of the justice system that has sparked controversy amongst the world for decades; the debate over the practice of the death penalty in judicial systems.

Typically, conservative politicians were known to support the practice of the death penalty in legal systems. These views are supported on the basis that capital punishment presents itself as a “useful tool” of justice. Seeing as conservatives rallied in favor of the death penalty, one can deduce the tendencies of liberal voters to refute capital punishment.

Today, The Huffington Post’s Kim Bellware attempts to shed light to the traditional political values threaded in modern society, and the revolutionary changes appearing in the upcoming election. Bellware’s article reflects a shift in the current debate over the constitutionality and morality of the death penalty, and seeks to depict the growing condemnation of the practice of capital punishment in national courts from both political parties. Bellware analyzes this societal change through the drift of conservative opinions through a recap of various viewpoints from Republican politicians: ‘"The more you know about this issue, the more you’re going to be concerned about the death penalty and the way it’s being carried out. People are waking up and saying, ‘this really isn’t worth it anymore.’"’

That being said, the death penalty ultimately undermines morality and constitutionality in that psychological treatment and individual rights are sacrificed in order to satisfy a modern obsession with supremacy and revenge; thus shedding light to a convoluted form of criminal justice that collectively damages standards of humanity as a whole.

What are the differentiating perspectives of the debate?

Some argue, through their rage and emotions towards the horror of felonies, like murder or mass fraud, that capital punishment essentially contributes toward the betterment of society by ridding the population of ruthless criminals whom solely cause destruction. In other words, an eye for an eye. This mentality would lead to a better society in that the plague of crime would be lessened, and those convicted of harm would receive a punishment as grave as their actions: death. This ideal was generally considered a conservative outlook in political races.

Others may refute this perspective by analyzing the nature of humanity. Most stable individuals do not wake up in the morning with a burning desire to kill, or damage the world in some terrible way. Hence, psychoanalysis can prove that elevated emotional levels, no matter what extent, or mental illnesses of any severity are the underlying causes to most crimes leading to the death penalty. With this in mind, an argument supporting the scientific and psychological exploration, as well as treatment, of criminals suffering from mental deficits (as opposed to execution or lethal injection) would lead to a more advanced field of neuroscience, and a better world as a whole that avoided unnecessary death and a society of healed convicts. Essentially, the death penalty condemns murder, but appears hypocritical in that mentally obstructed individuals who cannot help their irrational behaviors are in the same sense “murdered”, and punished in the same way as the victim. This argument tends to embody liberal traditions in political history.

Where do we draw the line between right and wrong?

Typically, individual perspectives rest upon personal values, morals, and perception of rights. For example, most hold belief in the entitlement to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. More specifically, health-care, gun control, education, and foreign policy present themselves in the news as “hot-topics” of debate.

Bellware addresses personal morality through the questioning of values and human nature. As a population, the belief of peace, and fear of killing are engraved into our minds. Thus, Bellware’s controversial analysis attacks emotional appeals in order to reflect the inhumane aspects of the death penalty. Bellware implements direct evidence from Republican politicians and their shifting viewpoints due to an enlightened sense of humanity:“"But on the opposite end of the spectrum, you have someone like [Texas Gov.] Rick Perry, who says he sleeps quite fine after signing somebody’s death warrant," Hyden said. "I have to feel troubled when I hear things like that."’

We base our decisions on morality through experiences we have lived through. Therefore, if you lost a family member in the military, you are most likely inclined to offer support (monetary or emotional) to the army fund nationally so that the other soldiers may not be sentenced to the same fate as the one you lost. Most decisions within the voting polls are drawn from personal moralistic views. The tendency to side with the candidate, or belief system, that supports our positions can be long traced in history- it is common knowledge that we stand up for what we believe in.

How do we assess one’s mental state in terms of justice and morals?

An individual suffering from mental illnesses or elevated emotional reactions is not in their “right mind” when a crime is committed. A psychopath does not possess the capacity to feel guilt- their brain literally does not produce the chemicals that result in synaptic connections inducing feelings of compassion, love, or aggression. One who is mentally ill may be experiencing symptoms of paranoia- that is, picturing outside forces or make-believe voices insisting on the completion of a task or adherence to a belief system. Schizophrenics cannot filter sounds or voices, and everything sounds mutilated and corrupt. Mental illnesses are not made up, or representative of someone “crazy”. Mental illnesses are chemical imbalances that completely alter the sanity of an individual; suddenly, merciless murder cannot be separated from a simple trip to the grocery store.

In questioning the analysis of one’s mental state, we must also consider the implications of our actions. Ghandi says, “an eye for an eye will make the world go blind.” Thus, when the death sentence is carried out we are essentially hypocritically stripping the world of an opportunity of healing while silmultaneously torturing and abusing the rights and sentience of individuals. Wayne Goodwyn of NPR depicts a botched lethal injection in Ohio through intense emotional imagery in order to convey the immorality of the death penalty to his readers. ‘"Suddenly he opened his mouth," Kiefer says. "His mouth sort of made this funny round shape, and you could see this expulsion of air, and we all jumped. This was something different."...The executioner eventually came out, turned on the death chamber microphone, and tried to reassure everyone that Wood was asleep, and it was OK. But Kiefer says the sounds emanating from the condemned man that were suddenly brutally audible behind the executioner's voice only added another layer to everyone's distress. An hour passed.’

Hence, the death penalty undermines morality in that it ends the lives of those who cannot help their actions. Even if a mental illness is not diagnosed, the human brain is programmed to defend itself when it feels under attack. Any dramatic shift in neurotransmitters will result in a mood change that often results in dangerous action. The bottom line is, most criminals are not themselves in the moment that they are committing a crime; yet, the death penalty literally ends the individual of their right to life and the potential of health.

If the death penalty clearly resembles murder, why do we continue to use it?

When tragedy strikes, humans naturally attempt to ease their pain and sense of loss. These actions present themselves in many forms, from a desperate search for closure, or burning bloodthirst to avenge the victim, or even belief in equal punishment (back to the eye for an eye ideal). But what could we do to prevent natural human reactions in order to better society and simultaneously address the pain experienced by those who lost loved ones?

Ultimately, the lack of knowledge about the death penalty and general thirst for revenge result in a seemingly indifferent mindset amongst the public. The Huffington Post constructed a statistical poll in order to determine the national population’s perception of the morality and cosntituionalty of the death penalty. “While 44 percent of Americans in the HuffPost/YouGov poll say the death penalty is usually applied fairly, 26 percent say it's generally unfair and 30 percent aren't sure. That means 39 percent of Americans who think the death penalty is usually applied unfairly support it anyway, as do 43 percent of those who don't think it deters crime, and 47 percent who think that innocent people are at least occasionally executed.”

What would the world look like without the death penalty?

If more individuals continue to shift towards an anti-capital punishment stance, opportunities for scientific advancement, unity, increased compassion, and human understanding are inevitable. Every single person born onto this Earth holds the possibility of greatness- of bettering society in some way, whether through service, intellectual achievements, or simply fulfilling one’s duty of acting as a good samaritan. However, anatomical inhibitions prohibit these aspirations and expectations of society. We are a very egotistical world- we support selfishness in that we strive to be the best individuals we can be, even if those around us are struggling. This is essentially a response to the overwhelming immensity of corruption in our world. If we were overcome with devastation and depression everytime a crisis occurred, humans would live in a dark society. Thus, we fight for self happiness, and sometimes it infringes upon our altruistic focuses. A general sense of compassion towards individuals who make terrible, terrible mistakes would lead the public to recognize the definition of humanity, and that those who deserve another chance (not without disciplinary action) would ultimately spark collective healing, and treatment for those who need it. With this transition, our globe would shift towards a community of unified individuals working together to promote societal growth.

So where does this leave us?

Currently, activists are striving to end the death penalty through various social media projects and legal actions. Rena Silverman of the New York Times intends to offer insights on the controversy through a new movement called the Final Word. This project, created by Marc Asnin, utilizes the iconic “selfie” to depict the opinions of various photographers describing their opposition to capital punishment. Asnin’s purpose is to illuminate a call for social justice, and support the humanization of criminals who are often considered worthless in the justice system.

With this in mind, it is imperative that we opt to bless every individual, criminal or not, with the same opportunity for growth and health in order to change the world for the better. The death penalty is a major obstruction to this overarching goal, and will continuously undermine morality and constitutionality if it is not combatted. However, statistical evidence proves that the trending shift towards anti-capital punishment is blossoming, and eventually, humanity will be restored to its full potential of successful compassionate individuals.

QRG Draft 1

The Death of the Death Penalty: Transition Towards Morality

With the 2016 election approaching, America is constantly highlighting new points of controversy, and their desired outcomes based on the various points of view, and arguments of the candidates. This brings me to a central component of the justice system that has sparked controversy amongst the world for decades; the debate over the practice of the death penalty in judicial systems.

Typically, conservative politicians were known to support the practice of the death penalty in legal systems. These views are supported on the basis that capital punishment presents itself as a “useful tool” of justice. Seeing as conservatives rallied in favor of the death penalty, one can deduce the tendencies of liberal voters to refute capital punishment.

Today, The Huffington Post’s Kim Bellware attempts to shed light to the traditional political values threaded in modern society, and the revolutionary changes appearing in the upcoming election. Bellware’s article reflects a shift in the current debate over the constitutionality and morality of the death penalty, and seeks to depict the growing condemnation of the practice of capital punishment in national courts from both political parties.

That being said, the death penalty ultimately undermines morality and constitutionality in that psychological treatment and individual rights are sacrificed in order to satisfy a modern obsession with supremacy and revenge; thus shedding light to a convoluted form of criminal justice that collectively damages standards of humanity as a whole.

What are the differentiating perspectives of the debate?

Some argue, through their rage and emotions towards the horror of felonies, like murder or mass fraud, that capital punishment essentially contributes toward the betterment of society by ridding the population of ruthless criminals whom solely cause destruction. In other words, an eye for an eye. This mentality would lead to a better society in that the plague of crime would be lessened, and those convicted of harm would receive a punishment as grave as their actions: death. This ideal was generally considered a conservative outlook in political races.

Others may refute this perspective by analyzing the nature of humanity. Most stable individuals do not wake up in the morning with a burning desire to kill, or damage the world in some terrible way. Hence, psychoanalysis can prove that elevated emotional levels, no matter what extent, or mental illnesses of any severity are the underlying causes to most crimes leading to the death penalty. With this in mind, an argument supporting the scientific and psychological exploration, as well as treatment, of criminals suffering from mental deficits (as opposed to execution or lethal injection) would lead to a more advanced field of neuroscience, and a better world as a whole that avoided unnecessary death and a society of healed convicts. Essentially, the death penalty condemns murder, but appears hypocritical in that mentally obstructed individuals who cannot help their irrational behaviors are in the same sense “murdered”, and punished in the same way as the victim. This argument tends to embody liberal traditions in political history.

Where do we draw the line between right and wrong?

Typically, individual perspectives rest upon personal values, morals, and perception of rights. For example, most hold belief in the entitlement to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. More specifically, health-care, gun control, education, and foreign policy present themselves in the news as “hot-topics” of debate.

We base our decisions on morality through experiences we have lived through. Therefore, if you lost a family member in the military, you are most likely inclined to offer support (monetary or emotional) to the army fund nationally so that the other soldiers may not be sentenced to the same fate as the one you lost. Most decisions within the voting polls are drawn from personal moralistic views. The tendency to side with the candidate, or belief system, that supports our positions can be long traced in history- it is common knowledge that we stand up for what we believe in.

How do we assess one’s mental state in terms of justice and morals?

An individual suffering from mental illnesses or elevated emotional reactions is not in their “right mind” when a crime is committed. A psychopath does not possess the capacity to feel guilt- their brain literally does not produce the chemicals that result in synaptic connections inducing feelings of compassion, love, or aggression. One who is mentally ill may be experiencing symptoms of paranoia- that is, picturing outside forces or make-believe voices insisting on the completion of a task or adherence to a belief system. Schizophrenics cannot filter sounds or voices, and everything sounds mutilated and corrupt. Mental illnesses are not made up, or representative of someone “crazy”. Mental illnesses are chemical imbalances that completely alter the sanity of an individual; suddenly, merciless murder cannot be separated from a simple trip to the grocery store.

Hence, the death penalty undermines morality in that it ends the lives of those who cannot help their actions. Even if a mental illness is not diagnosed, the human brain is programmed to defend itself when it feels under attack. Any dramatic shift in neurotransmitters will result in a mood change that often results in dangerous action. The bottom line is, most criminals are not themselves in the moment that they are committing a crime; yet, the death penalty literally ends the individual of their right to life and the potential of health.

If the death penalty clearly resembles murder, why do we continue to use it?

When tragedy strikes, humans naturally attempt to ease their pain and sense of loss. These actions present themselves in many forms, from a desperate search for closure, or burning bloodthirst to avenge the victim, or even belief in equal punishment (back to the eye for an eye ideal). But what could we do to prevent natural human reactions in order to better society and simultaneously address the pain experienced by those who lost loved ones?

What would the world look like without the death penalty?

If more individuals continue to shift towards an anti-capital punishment stance, opportunities for scientific advancement, unity, increased compassion, and human understanding are inevitable. Every single person born onto this Earth holds the possibility of greatness- of bettering society in some way, whether through service, intellectual achievements, or simply fulfilling one’s duty of acting as a good samaritan. However, anatomical inhibitions prohibit these aspirations and expectations of society. We are a very egotistical world- we support selfishness in that we strive to be the best individuals we can be, even if those around us are struggling. This is essentially a response to the overwhelming immensity of corruption in our world. If we were overcome with devastation and depression everytime a crisis occurred, humans would live in a dark society. Thus, we fight for self happiness, and sometimes it infringes upon our altruistic focuses. A general sense of compassion towards individuals who make terrible, terrible mistakes would lead the public to recognize the definition of humanity, and that those who deserve another chance (not without disciplinary action) would ultimately spark collective healing, and treatment for those who need it. With this transition, our globe would shift towards a community of unified individuals working together to promote societal growth.

So where does this leave us?

With this in mind, it is imperative that we opt to bless every individual, criminal or not, with the same opportunity for growth and health in order to change the world for the better. The death penalty is a major obstruction to this overarching goal, and will continuously undermine morality and constitutionality if it is not combatted. However, statistical evidence proves that the trending shift towards anti-capital punishment is blossoming, and eventually, humanity will be restored to its full potential of successful compassionate individuals.

Blog Post #12: QRGs: the Genre

Quick Reference Guides: The Genre

http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/stemcells/quickref/

1.) What do the conventions of this genre - the Quick Reference Guide - seem to be? [Remember, convention in this context meaning “a custom or a way of acting or doing things that is widely accepted and followed”]   

The conventions of a Quick Reference Guide include a properly formatted layout, well spaced margins and lines, appropriate fonts, and well-phrased headings. All together, these conventions will provide an informative and effective manual that is simple and easy for the audience to navigate, as well as provide an opportunity to gather broad ideas of a subject.

2.) How are those conventions defined by the author’s formatting and design choices?

These conventions are defined by the author's formatting and design choices in that each Guide is specifically designed with pictures and different presentations of questions to convey similar displays that offer efficient and accessible information for a general public. An audience examining Quick Reference Guides will be searching for a broad overview of a topic in order to gain a basic understanding of the controversy at hand. Thus, the conventions and formatting are designed to create a page that is easy to navigate to ensure paraphrased and simple information will be at hand. 

3.What does the purpose of these QRGs seem to be?

QRGs serve to quickly inform readers with up-to-date information on a controversial topic to enable the formation of an opinion within an individual. If an opinion is not formed, general information is at least provided so that one can begin to find interest or curiosity about a topic. 

4.) Who is the intended audience for these different QRGs? Are they all intended for similar audiences? Or different? How & why?

A general public without prior knowledge interested in a specific topic of controversy is the intended audience of a Quick Reference Guide. All Quick Reference Guides have a similar intended audience, but depending on the topic, the audience will have different values and perspectives (political or religious affiliations, cultural values, etc...) that enable them to form opinions on the debate at hand. Thus, a broad audience creates similarities in the level of knowledge of Quick Reference Guide readers; however, the issue creates a shift in topics of concern amongst a general audience.

5.) How do the QRGs use imagery or visuals? Why do you think they use them in this way?

QRGs use imagery in order to encapsulate their discussion topic. A visual provides an easily accessible form of memory for readers, in order to allow absorption of information and a point of reference for the reader. A visual also provides aesthetically pleasing media for the audience, thus creating a more attractive web-page that individuals will want to visit. 

Blog Post #11 Cluster of The Death Penalty Controversy

This image is a "Wordle" of various terms and debate topics associated with the controversy over the constitutionality and morality of the Death Penalty. In order to create this image, I brainstormed various terms that are commonly used in articles, interviews, podcasts, and other medias analyzing the debate over capital punishment.

Blog Post #10 Draft 2 Annotated Bibliography

1.) Bellware, Kim. "More Conservatives Are Coming Out Against The Death Penalty." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 27 Apr. 2015. Web. 14 Sept. 2015.

Bellware’s article reflects a shift in the current debate over the constitutionality and morality of the death penalty, and seeks to depict the growing condemnation of the practice of capital punishment in national courts from both political parties (even though conservatives traditionally were in support of the death penalty).  In the future, this article will serve as a transition point to depict the result of the current debate over capital punishment. As of now, this article asserts the movement of a traditionally pro-death penalty group to begin to favor the abolishment of this form of justice.

2.)  Goodwyn, Wayne. "Botched Lethal Injection Executions Reignite Death Penalty Debate." NPR. NPR, 6 Jan. 2015. Web. 10 Sept. 2015.
   
                 Goodwyn asserts that the botched lethal injection, taking place in Arizona, sets an example as to why capital punishment is both immoral and unconstitutional. Utilizing images, direct evidence (i.e. quotes), and detailed emotional narratives, Goodwyn attempts to persuade his readers into refuting support for the death penalty. Although the author addresses counterarguments, he quickly invalidates them with story-like evidence to portray the inhumane horrors of forced death. This article offers a deep perspective of personal depictions and emotions (from witnesses) on lethal injection, while silmultaneously providing a basic understanding of the controversy at hand to Goodwyn's audience of the general public. As this story was published on NPR, a broad audience of many values is predicted to tune into the story; thus, Goodwyn serves to undermine existing premonitions that the death penalty is a correct form of justice, and alter the mindsets of all viewers into fighting capital punishment along his side. 



3.) The Gospel of Hemp. Facebook, 2013. Web. 05 Sept. 2015. 
Dokupil's Article: Dokoupil, Tony. "Life in Prison for Selling Marijuana: Meet the People New Pot Laws Forgot." Msnbc.com. NBC News Digital, 08 Sept. 2015. Web. 10 Sept. 2015.

             Dokupil's article seeks to undermine the death sentence by shedding light to the abuse of civil justice in courts today. It is common belief that marijuana is a recreational drug, and many believe the use of this narcotic should be legalized, and freely expressed. For these reasons, this article focuses on undermining punishment for the use of marijuana by ridiculing court-ordered life-long sentences on individuals caught with the drug to display the overuse of death sentences in American cases. Dokupil's audience is aimed towards those relating to the use of marijuana, or those against the delegation of lifelong prison sentences for seemingly minor allegations. Dokupil utilizes statistical evidence, photographic images, and hyperlinks to similar cases in order to fully analyze the severity of the pressing issue at hand.


4.)  Edwards-Levy, Ariel. "Most Americans Want Their State To Allow The Death Penalty." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 04 June 2015. Web. 14 Sept. 2015.

Edwards-Levy indicates the acceptance of capital punishment in modern American society in his article that depicts overall statistical support for the death penalty. The author’s use of graphs, charts, statistical evidence, and collective data undermine the argument supporting the abolishment of the Death Penalty as a form of justice based on constitutionality and morality. Political differences are analyzed as well within the statistics. In the future, this data will be used as a point of comparison; as time continues, statistical evidence will shift, either pro or against the use of capital punishment in the justice system. With this in mind, this article will act as a reference point to determine either a shift or static nature of public opinions and votes on the death penalty.

5.) The National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty. Facebook, 2009. Web. 05 Sept. 2015.
          This Facebook group posts various memes, articles, personal quotes, and television programs/podcasts related to the abolition of the Death Penalty. The audience of this page is focused on the like-minded cause and tends to assert personal opinions (in the comments sections of the posts) related to condemning capital punishment. The National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty primarily serves to gather followers to not only refute capital punishment, but overall act as a collective whole in order to spark action throughout the nation to eventually end the use of forced death. The page was started in 2009, and now has 90 million followers.


6.) Phillips, David P. "The Deterrent Effect of Capital Punishment: New Evidence on an Old Controversy." Chicago Journals. The University of Chicago Press, July 1980. Web. 05 Sept. 2015.
                 Phillips utilizes scholarly writing techniques, and thorough analyzations of the pros and cons of capital punishment in order to both inform an interested public about the effects and process of the death penalty, and subtly discourage this practice in court. The author utilizes charts, graphs, direct studies and evidence from other established scholars, and persuasive voice in order to fully convey his claim. Ultimately, this resource sheds light to the practice of capital punishment, and the short-term success of the actions taken within it in order to suggest the need for a new system of justice in national courts.
7.) Poveda, Tony G. "American Exceptionalism and The Death Penalty." Jstor.org. Social Justice/Global Options, July 2000. Web. 5 Sept. 2015.
                 Poveda juxtaposes America's non-conformist tendencies with the implementation of capital punishment in national courts. In a scholarly journal, Poveda utilizes direct research-based evidence, charts, historical background, and basic conceptual understandings to inform his audience on the relationship he is offering a new perspective towards.


8.) Reilly, Ryan J. "Justices Breyer, Ginsburg Say It Is 'Highly Likely' The Death Penalty Is Unconstitutional." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 29 June 2015. Web. 14 Sept. 2015.

Reilly’s article reflects the conservative perspective of the support of the death penalty in that it does not violate the 8^th amendment (deems it constitutional), and subtly utilizes direct quotations and common pro-capital punishment arguments to undermine the implementation of the death penalty in the nation. Evidence derived from national Supreme Court Justices, and other politicians serve as a political interpretation of the controversy, and strive to inform a curious public on the current debate over the constitutionality of capital punishment. In the future, this article will be used to observe the conservative side of the debate supporting the death penalty, and offer material to liberal voters to condemn capital punishment as a form of constitutional justice.

9.) Silverman, Rena. "Selfies Against the Death Penalty." New York Times' Lens. The New York Times Company, 6 Oct. 2014. Web. 11 Sept. 2015.

Silverman intends to offer insights on a new movement related to the nationally controversial topic of the Death Penalty through imagery and direct evidence on “Photographer’s Selfie Against the Death Penalty.” Silverman analyzes the power of aestheticism and visual-based emotional appeals to depict the effects of the death penalty on individuals. The project, “Final Word” mentioned in the article strives to undermine the constitutionality, and especially the morality, of capital punishment in order to call the national public to spark action against executions and lethal injection. This article reflects the inspiration and determination behind the project, while simultaneously utilizing new visual material that illuminates a deep perspective on the abuse and horrors prisoners on death-row face. This project will be used to highlight the inhumanity of the death penalty in the future, and ultimately add to a growing case to remove the use of capital punishment.

10.) De Vogue, Adriane. "Supreme Court Backs Use of Lethal Injection Drug - CNNPolitics.com." CNN. Cable News Network, 29 June 2015. Web. 10 Sept. 2015.
            Adriane de Vogue offers a news-style article informing the acceptance of a new lethal injection drug in Oklahoma. Through direct quotations, evidence, and recollections of key ideals of the debate over the death penalty, de Vogue strives to primarily educate the general public about the issue at hand, as well as offer a subtle bias aimed to condemn the use of lethal injection. After reading, the audience will have gained new information about the use of lethal injection nationally, as well as potentially altered opinions about the controversy. Thus, de Vogue's purpose is to both inform and persuade a general public that lethal injection is both inhumane and unconstitutional, and ultimately, should be replaced by a new method of justice.

#9 Bibliography Draft

1    1.)  Goodwyn, Wayne. "Botched Lethal Injection Executions Reignite Death Penalty Debate." NPR. NPR, 6 Jan. 2015. Web. 10 Sept. 2015.

   
                 Goodwyn asserts that the botched lethal injection, taking place in Arizona, sets an example as to why capital punishment is both immoral and unconstitutional. Utilizing images, direct evidence (i.e. quotes), and detailed emotional narratives, Goodwyn attempts to persuade his readers into refuting support for the death penalty. Although the author addresses counterarguments, he quickly invalidates them with story-like evidence to portray the inhumane horrors of forced death. This article offers a deep perspective of personal depictions and emotions (from witnesses) on lethal injection, while silmultaneously providing a basic understanding of the controversy at hand to Goodwyn's audience of the general public. As this story was published on NPR, a broad audience of many values is predicted to tune into the story; thus, Goodwyn serves to undermine existing premonitions that the death penalty is a correct form of justice, and alter the mindsets of all viewers into fighting capital punishment along his side. 



2.) The Gospel of Hemp. Facebook, 2013. Web. 05 Sept. 2015. 
Dokupil's Article: Dokoupil, Tony. "Life in Prison for Selling Marijuana: Meet the People New Pot Laws Forgot." Msnbc.com. NBC News Digital, 08 Sept. 2015. Web. 10 Sept. 2015.

             Dokupil's article seeks to undermine the death sentence by shedding light to the abuse of civil justice in courts today. It is common belief that marijuana is a recreational drug, and many believe the use of this narcotic should be legalized, and freely expressed. For these reasons, this article focuses on undermining punishment for the use of marijuana by ridiculing court-ordered life-long sentences on individuals caught with the drug to display the overuse of death sentences in American cases. Dokupil's audience is aimed towards those relating to the use of marijuana, or those against the delegation of lifelong prison sentences for seemingly minor allegations. Dokupil utilizes statistical evidence, photographic images, and hyperlinks to similar cases in order to fully analyze the severity of the pressing issue at hand.

3.) The National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty. Facebook, 2009. Web. 05 Sept. 2015.
          This Facebook group posts various memes, articles, personal quotes, and television programs/podcasts related to the abolition of the Death Penalty. The audience of this page is focused on the like-minded cause and tends to assert personal opinions (in the comments sections of the posts) related to condemning capital punishment. The National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty primarily serves to gather followers to not only refute capital punishment, but overall act as a collective whole in order to spark action throughout the nation to eventually end the use of forced death. The page was started in 2009, and now has 90 million followers.


4.) Phillips, David P. "The Deterrent Effect of Capital Punishment: New Evidence on an Old Controversy." Chicago Journals. The University of Chicago Press, July 1980. Web. 05 Sept. 2015.
                 Phillips utilizes scholarly writing techniques, and thorough analyzations of the pros and cons of capital punishment in order to both inform an interested public about the effects and process of the death penalty, and subtly discourage this practice in court. The author utilizes charts, graphs, direct studies and evidence from other established scholars, and persuasive voice in order to fully convey his claim. Ultimately, this resource sheds light to the practice of capital punishment, and the short-term success of the actions taken within it in order to suggest the need for a new system of justice in national courts.

5.) Poveda, Tony G. "American Exceptionalism and The Death Penalty." Jstor.org. Social Justice/Global Options, July 2000. Web. 5 Sept. 2015.
                 Poveda juxtaposes America's non-conformist tendencies with the implementation of capital punishment in national courts. In a scholarly journal, Poveda utilizes direct research-based evidence, charts, historical background, and basic conceptual understandings to inform his audience on the relationship he is offering a new perspective towards.

     6) De Vogue, Adriane. "Supreme Court Backs Use of Lethal Injection Drug - CNNPolitics.com." CNN. Cable News Network, 29 June 2015. Web. 10 Sept. 2015.

            Adriane de Vogue offers a news-style article informing the acceptance of a new lethal injection drug in Oklahoma. Through direct quotations, evidence, and recollections of key ideals of the debate over the death penalty, de Vogue strives to primarily educate the general public about the issue at hand, as well as offer a subtle bias aimed to condemn the use of lethal injection. After reading, the audience will have gained new information about the use of lethal injection nationally, as well as potentially altered opinions about the controversy. Thus, de Vogue's purpose is to both inform and persuade a general public that lethal injection is both inhumane and unconstitutional, and ultimately, should be replaced by a new method of justice.