A Current Issue Topic: The Death Penalty: Is it ever be justified? Is it just? Is it an effective deterrent or punishment to crime? Is it applied fairly and consistently?

Order Description
Research-Based Argumentative: 2000 words, correct heading, typed, double-spaced, MLA style Documentation, a Works Cited Page.
The Death Penalty Casebook: 17:483-494. A Current Issue Topic: The Death Penalty: Is it ever be justified? Is it just? Is it an effective deterrent or punishment to crime? Is it applied fairly and consistently? For this assignment, you will use Koch (483), Bruck (489), Prejean (701). Shemtob and Lat (53); and outside sources, including Mill (handout), and case readings from Stewart (Gregg v Georgia, 1976) and Blackmum (Dissenting Opinion in Callins v. Collins, 1994). You will use a minimum of 8 outside sources that combine internet, books, and periodicals to write a 2000 word researched argument paper that applies the Toulmin Model to address the issue of whether or not the punishment of death is consistent with normative principles and factual / legal claims about capital punishment policy.
As you do your research keep these points in mind in regard to the difference between a fact claim and a value claim:
*A fact claim argues something measurable, not something moral or a policy. You should be able to find information that is statistical in nature to support your claim. A value claim makes a moral judgment – moral/immoral, humane/inhumane, just/unjust, fair/unfair.
*The death penalty is wrong is not a fact claim because we cannot measure “wrong.” *A fact claim is only as good as its information, so use credible sources. *A fact claim should be directed at a specific audience who might care about the issue and is not necessarily supportive of your claim. *A fact claim should explore information that supports views contrary to your claim and respond to or refute them. *A fact claim should be well documented. *A fact claim will contain warrants or reasons, so list them.
Employ the following tips and hits to frame your value claim:
The thesis must be a moral judgment. Do not confuse it with a claim of fact.
*Do not use words “good” or “bad” in your claim because these terms can be vague and contradictory.
*Do use language that is more clearly based on criteria, like “moral/immoral,” “humane/inhumane,” “just/unjust,” “fair/unfair.” *Clarify any conditions applicable to the claim. *Defend the claim with both principles and consequences.
Organization of the argument:
Introduction: Presentation of the issue and then statement of your position on capital punishment I a well-shaped and interesting thesis statement.
Body: *Presentation of supporting arguments for your position *Presentation of counterargument *Rebuttal of counterarguments
Conclusion: First, answer possible objection to your supporting arguments; then end paper with concluding statement.
Paper evaluation criteria:
Clarity:
Organization: Issue and position dominating the beginning of the paper, arguments to support the position and statements, and the disarming of counterarguments are presented in a logical sequence.
Ambiguity: Terms clearly defined and delineated, free from expression with unintentionally multiple meanings: no vagueness, no improper word choice.
Correctness: Correct grammar, spelling, punctuation, usage, MLA style, and a “Works Cited” page.
Argument:
The logic of the argument is sound and comprehensive, premises are acceptable to a reasonable reader, conclusion follows from premises, all related counterarguments are addressed.

A Current Issue Topic: The Death Penalty: Is it ever be justified? Is it just? Is it an effective deterrent or punishment to crime? Is it applied fairly and consistently?

Order Description
Research-Based Argumentative: 2000 words, correct heading, typed, double-spaced, MLA style Documentation, a Works Cited Page.
The Death Penalty Casebook: 17:483-494. A Current Issue Topic: The Death Penalty: Is it ever be justified? Is it just? Is it an effective deterrent or punishment to crime? Is it applied fairly and consistently? For this assignment, you will use Koch (483), Bruck (489), Prejean (701). Shemtob and Lat (53); and outside sources, including Mill (handout), and case readings from Stewart (Gregg v Georgia, 1976) and Blackmum (Dissenting Opinion in Callins v. Collins, 1994). You will use a minimum of 8 outside sources that combine internet, books, and periodicals to write a 2000 word researched argument paper that applies the Toulmin Model to address the issue of whether or not the punishment of death is consistent with normative principles and factual / legal claims about capital punishment policy.
As you do your research keep these points in mind in regard to the difference between a fact claim and a value claim:
*A fact claim argues something measurable, not something moral or a policy. You should be able to find information that is statistical in nature to support your claim. A value claim makes a moral judgment – moral/immoral, humane/inhumane, just/unjust, fair/unfair.
*The death penalty is wrong is not a fact claim because we cannot measure “wrong.” *A fact claim is only as good as its information, so use credible sources. *A fact claim should be directed at a specific audience who might care about the issue and is not necessarily supportive of your claim. *A fact claim should explore information that supports views contrary to your claim and respond to or refute them. *A fact claim should be well documented. *A fact claim will contain warrants or reasons, so list them.
Employ the following tips and hits to frame your value claim:
The thesis must be a moral judgment. Do not confuse it with a claim of fact.
*Do not use words “good” or “bad” in your claim because these terms can be vague and contradictory.
*Do use language that is more clearly based on criteria, like “moral/immoral,” “humane/inhumane,” “just/unjust,” “fair/unfair.” *Clarify any conditions applicable to the claim. *Defend the claim with both principles and consequences.
Organization of the argument:
Introduction: Presentation of the issue and then statement of your position on capital punishment I a well-shaped and interesting thesis statement.
Body: *Presentation of supporting arguments for your position *Presentation of counterargument *Rebuttal of counterarguments
Conclusion: First, answer possible objection to your supporting arguments; then end paper with concluding statement.
Paper evaluation criteria:
Clarity:
Organization: Issue and position dominating the beginning of the paper, arguments to support the position and statements, and the disarming of counterarguments are presented in a logical sequence.
Ambiguity: Terms clearly defined and delineated, free from expression with unintentionally multiple meanings: no vagueness, no improper word choice.
Correctness: Correct grammar, spelling, punctuation, usage, MLA style, and a “Works Cited” page.
Argument:
The logic of the argument is sound and comprehensive, premises are acceptable to a reasonable reader, conclusion follows from premises, all related counterarguments are addressed.

A Current Issue Topic: The Death Penalty: Is it ever be justified? Is it just? Is it an effective deterrent or punishment to crime? Is it applied fairly and consistently?

Order Description
Research-Based Argumentative: 2000 words, correct heading, typed, double-spaced, MLA style Documentation, a Works Cited Page.
The Death Penalty Casebook: 17:483-494. A Current Issue Topic: The Death Penalty: Is it ever be justified? Is it just? Is it an effective deterrent or punishment to crime? Is it applied fairly and consistently? For this assignment, you will use Koch (483), Bruck (489), Prejean (701). Shemtob and Lat (53); and outside sources, including Mill (handout), and case readings from Stewart (Gregg v Georgia, 1976) and Blackmum (Dissenting Opinion in Callins v. Collins, 1994). You will use a minimum of 8 outside sources that combine internet, books, and periodicals to write a 2000 word researched argument paper that applies the Toulmin Model to address the issue of whether or not the punishment of death is consistent with normative principles and factual / legal claims about capital punishment policy.
As you do your research keep these points in mind in regard to the difference between a fact claim and a value claim:
*A fact claim argues something measurable, not something moral or a policy. You should be able to find information that is statistical in nature to support your claim. A value claim makes a moral judgment – moral/immoral, humane/inhumane, just/unjust, fair/unfair.
*The death penalty is wrong is not a fact claim because we cannot measure “wrong.” *A fact claim is only as good as its information, so use credible sources. *A fact claim should be directed at a specific audience who might care about the issue and is not necessarily supportive of your claim. *A fact claim should explore information that supports views contrary to your claim and respond to or refute them. *A fact claim should be well documented. *A fact claim will contain warrants or reasons, so list them.
Employ the following tips and hits to frame your value claim:
The thesis must be a moral judgment. Do not confuse it with a claim of fact.
*Do not use words “good” or “bad” in your claim because these terms can be vague and contradictory.
*Do use language that is more clearly based on criteria, like “moral/immoral,” “humane/inhumane,” “just/unjust,” “fair/unfair.” *Clarify any conditions applicable to the claim. *Defend the claim with both principles and consequences.
Organization of the argument:
Introduction: Presentation of the issue and then statement of your position on capital punishment I a well-shaped and interesting thesis statement.
Body: *Presentation of supporting arguments for your position *Presentation of counterargument *Rebuttal of counterarguments
Conclusion: First, answer possible objection to your supporting arguments; then end paper with concluding statement.
Paper evaluation criteria:
Clarity:
Organization: Issue and position dominating the beginning of the paper, arguments to support the position and statements, and the disarming of counterarguments are presented in a logical sequence.
Ambiguity: Terms clearly defined and delineated, free from expression with unintentionally multiple meanings: no vagueness, no improper word choice.
Correctness: Correct grammar, spelling, punctuation, usage, MLA style, and a “Works Cited” page.
Argument:
The logic of the argument is sound and comprehensive, premises are acceptable to a reasonable reader, conclusion follows from premises, all related counterarguments are addressed.