Persuasive Outline Speech Purpose statement: My purpose is to persuade the audience to oppose the death penalty/ No to death penalty.

Audience analysis: Neutral Strategy 1 (quote): The church states that, "Across the country, police are being laid off, prisoners are being released early, the courts are clogged, and crime continues to rise." This quote, one would think, should not refer to the Philippines ., our admirable and superior country, but sadly, it does. The question is, why is something as depressing as this taking place and how can we put a stop to it? This is one of the reasons why the death penalty is wrong. Another reason is that the death penalty is hypocritical and that we may be condemning innocent people who were mistakenly charged of murder. With reasons such as the probability of killing innocent people, the hypocrisy, and there being a vast problem with cost, the death penalty is proven wrong and we should try do something to stop it! Killing innocent people Here's a scary thought; in a span of Martial law from 1971-1985, there where a lot people convicted to death row after evidence fully demonstrated their guilty. Clearly the risk of executing innocent people that this large and growing number of cases represents, call for some radical changes in our system of justice like the death of Echegaray (the person who died of lethal Injection). There is no doubt that many more innocent people, will be on the death row particular innocent people who did not commit any crimes at all. Cost of capital punishment is resource/time consuming . The economic recession has caused cutbacks in the backbone of the criminal justice system. In some part of the world , the budget crisis resulted in the early release of 3,000 prisoners. But in other penitentiary , prisoners are serving only 20% of their time and re-arrests are common. For example Georgia, USA is laying off 900 correctional personnel and New Jersey has had to dismiss 500 police officers. Yet these same states, and many others like them, are pouring millions of dollars into the death penalty with no resultant reduction in crime. The exorbitant costs of capital punishment is actually making our country less safe.

Badly needed financial and legal resources are being diverted from effective crime fighting strategies. Literally hundreds of millions of dollars have already been spent on the death penalty, which is calculated to be carried out on only a few people each year, has done nothing to stop the rise in violent crime. Such a method of punishment is incredibly burdensome to the taxpayers, the criminal justice system, and the judicial system. Death penalty cases are extremely expensive and time-consuming. A million dollars spent pursuing the execution of one defendant could provide for more effective crime reduction programs or services to our society, such as: additional police officers; drug rehabilitation programs, education, libraries, ambulances, or even patrol cars for the police. Politicians could address this crisis, but instead worry about appearing soft on crime. So, they either endorse executions or remain silent. 3rd major argument, Hypocrisy From the book Criminal Justice, Opposing Viewpoints, I quote, "Why do we kill people who kill people to show that killing people is wrong?" and that, as you know, is a question referring to the hypocritical manner of the death penalty. If it is said, "Thou shalt not kill" be it a religious conviction or just a moral principle, either way, it is not concerned with the guilt or innocence of the person being executed. To explain this, I will state another quote from the same reference, "It's wrong to kill. It's wrong for these people to have killed, but it is also wrong for the state to premeditate another murder. Two wrongs do NOT make a right." From the book, "The Death Penalty, Justice or Legalized Murder?" I would now like to share a story that was the driving force in turning the Murder Victims Families for Reconciliation (MVFR) into a national organization: In the early 1990's, Marietta Jaeger's seven-year-old daughter Susie had been kidnapped from a Montana campground on June 25, 1973. The side of the canvas of the tent in which she had been sleeping with four older siblings had been slashed, and Susie's stuffed animals were strewn on the ground outside. A year after Susie vanished, the kidnapper phoned her mother. Ms. Jaeger tape-recorded the call and before long, the FBI zeroed in on a suspect in the case. His name was David and the voice on the phone call matched his. When his home was searched, body parts of several women and children, who had been missing, were discovered in his freezer.

David confessed to killing Susie, and told police that a week after the kidnapping, he strangled her until she was dead and then dismembered her body. Marietta told Montana state prosecutors that she was opposed to their seeking the death penalty for David. The issue had not been decided when David settled it by hanging himself in his jail. The question remained as to why she didn't want her child's murderer executed. She answered with this statement, "How do we best honor the memory of a loved one? Doesn't she deserve a more beautiful memorial than killing a chained, restrained, defenseless person? How does that provide peace for the victim's family?" Indeed, she adds, "a vindictive mind-set creates bitterness and lets the criminal claim one more victim." Overall, the death penalty as we would think should be a help to our society, but in reality it's far from it. The high probability of killing innocent people, the never ending cost drain, and it's hypocrisy all leads to the conclusion that the death penalty is not a wise solution to crime and will not help us in the future. We are the future, and we need to be aware of the issues that capital punishment causes. We need to abolish the death penalty to make for a better future. A future where funding for more beneficial crime solutions can make our country a safer place.