Regardless of how barbaric it may be, the electric chair should remain the source of execution used by the state of Florida. It has served as a valid execution tool for the last seventy-five years and there is no reason why it should not continue to do so. In the editorial, New Old Sparky isnt Acceptable, Earl Maucker suggests that electrocution should be replaced with lethal injection. He talks about how lethal injection is more technologically modernized and more humane for that matter. Secondly, it is stated that five out of seven Florida Supreme Court justices have urged lawmakers to consider an lternative method to execution in 1997.
Furthermore, thirty-two states are currently using lethal injection as a form of execution. This article expresses the editors feelings towards the electric chair. His view is very clear stating that he is not in favor of this type of execution and would rather see it cease existence. Furthermore, Maucker depicts the electric chair as unconstitutional and suggests alternative actions such as lethal injections. Nevertheless, his view is very bias and provides argumentative grounds for the audience at hand.
Earl Maucker has chosen to write about a controversial topic that is in the back of most readers minds. Therefore, it is not very hard for him to quickly gain the interest of several readers. However, his credibility is another issue. As a newspaper columnist for the Sun Sentinel, Maucker has minimal credibility. As an editor, he makes this very evident trough his use of bias opinions. He shows these one-sided beliefs through exerps like In a grisly report or Just what Florida doesnt need: a new but almost-identical version of its 76-year-old electric chair.
Despite the poor credibility, Maucker displays several facts to back up his views on the subject. For example, he states that five out of seven justices voted in favor of an alternative method to the current style of execution in 1997. In relation to the value of this argument, the author has a valid claim. However, the electric chair is still the better execution method of the two for the state of Florida. Florida, along with Alabama, Georgia, and Nebraska, is one of the only states left that still uses the electric chair as a way of carrying out the death penalty.
Lethal injection might be more humane, but after committing murder, a convict deserves a fierce death penalty. Maucker needs to take a step back from his one-sided beliefs and realize the importance of This editorial is directed towards an educated and experienced audience. It begins with facts about the current execution method and then flows into a very opinionated controversial issue. The author uses simple, yet persuasive words to express his strong beliefs about how lethal injection should be adopted. Several factual opinions are inserted long the way to further emphasize his position.
For example, he states The electric chair needs to be replaced, all right, but not by another electric chair. The author uses a tone which clearly dictates a bias opinion towards this execution method. For instance, the quote State officials were so ashamed of their low-tech, outmoded, barbaric, malfunctioning and inhumane tool of execution that the replacement was done at night, in strict secrecy. shows his one-sided view towards this topic. The author needs to realize that diverse views are present towards Floridas execution method.
In conclusion, the electric chair should remain the source of execution used by the state of Florida. After all, it has proved itself for the last seventy-five years and is very capable of continuing to do so. Lethal injection is a more humane form of execution that is preferred by many Florida residents as opposed to the electric chair. However, lethal injection is the easy way out and these convicts need to experience death in a painful way. Give back to them what they gave to the poor innocent victims that put them there in the
