Unanswered [2] / Urgent [0] / SERVICES
 DrAfT!
Home / Writing Feedback   10

Regulating killing crimes law has to be the top priority taken by officials and authorities.


By punishing murderers with the death penalty, society is also guilt of committing murder. Therefore, life in prison is a better punishment for murderers.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?


Crime Killing Laws



Regardless of admitting that crime and punishment represent a hurdle for society. One cannot but take side completely with the point that criminals who commit homicides should be executed rather than spending a lifetime sentence in jail. Thus, Identifying, and looking at the relationship quality that can be achieved by applying such a policy is to be pivotal of our discussion.

To begin with, criminals killing people deserve an exceptional punishment that can be recognized by the community as a deterring model for anyone thinks about committing the same crime, thus, with implementing a death penalty against those, we alert everyone that such kind of behavior will not be easily tolerated. Furthermore, the victim friends and family will be relieved and curb thinking about revenge, for instance, it has been scientifically proven that family of the assassinated victim will be irritated and seeking a revenge from criminal if they know that he still alive, even if he spent a long time in jail.

Another point that, executing the homicide criminals will benefit the economy by cutting the expenses required to be spent on his cost of living in jail, because it is a wasted money without any profit, instead we put an extra pressure on community without outcomes, and by implementing such sentence we give chance for government expenditure to be assigned to an urging field, such as, healthcare and education.

To sum up, arguing amongst people concerning about killing crimes and its suitable punishment, makes it totally crucial to identify the positive ramifications of executing such criminals. Therefore, regulating such a matter is to be the top priority taken by officials and authorities.

I think you're writing is pretty good already Ahmed, even if there's some minor grammatical errors. The thing that can be improved in this essay is your second point as it is not very convincing. Prisoners have to work too, and prison labor is actually quite profitable for the society. Instead of this point, you can say that the death punishment prevent dangerous criminals from escaping prisons and commit even more crimes.
I think your writing has been so good that I enjoy reading the article. That's enough eventhough it still requires several additional information concerning it. However, you still need to do more in order that you are better in the forthcoming. After all, it is a considerable article according to me.
...deterring model for anyone WHO thinks about committing...
...Furthermore, the VICTIMS' friends and FAMILIES will be relieved and WILL curb THOUGHTS about revenge...
...will be irritated and seeking A revenge from THE criminal if they know that he IS still alive...
...Another point IS that, executing the homicide criminals will (...) be spent on THEIR cost of living in jail, because it is a wasted money ...


You're welcome!
Hi Ahmed,

I think the 3rd paragraph in your essay is out of the scope of your prompt. The prompt is asking do you agree or disagree with "life in prison is a better punishment for murderers" in terms of "punishing murderers with the death penalty, society is also guilt of committing murder ".

If life in prison is a better punishment then these people have the right to have their expenses be covered in the jail...I
f, on the other hand, life in prison is NOT a better punishment then executing these people should be based on their crime not based on the burden of their expenses on the government, so they again have the right to have their expenses be covered in the jail. So, in both cases, this should be out of the discussion.
o they again have the right to have their expenses be covered in the jail. So, in both cases, this should be out of the discussion.

if the question was "agree and disagree" so, you are right
but
it is "To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement"
I completely disagree, so, I think that I should support my point of view with whatever I want
what do you think?
Obviously "anything you want" that will be in the context that and will make sense.

If you completely disagree, I guess then you may argue that "society is NOT guilty of committing murder " and state your justification/reasoning why do you think that way. Will you basis be "what goes around comes around one eventually will have to deal with the consequences of his/her actions.) ?
@ngokhoa99
thanks a lot@mualla
You got a point
I think I could add a third paragraph stating "why society are not guilty?
Nevertheless, giving the proper punishment for killers, the society is not guilty to commit any crimes because it is the right response for such an offense, and no one has the right to judge it if the law system is well-maintained and transparent. In other words, as long as there are rules and regulations, everyone should follow it and accept any consequences, without blaming anyone but himself.

To sum up, arguing amongst people concerning about killing crimes and its suitable punishment, makes it totally crucial to identify the positive ramifications of executing such criminals without blaming society. Therefore, regulating such a matter is to be the top priority taken by officials and authorities.


Home / Writing Feedback / Regulating killing crimes law has to be the top priority taken by officials and authorities.