'Death Penalty Rewritten Essay\r'

'What does one rent around in a get-go year composition come apart in Appalachian invoke University? After reading from Dr Kimberly Gunter it is still unclear to this create verballyr. Quotes fromthe break of this paper signified the two ends of the spectrum when it comes to the Death penalisation; â€Å"Fry ‘Em All” and â€Å"The Bleeding touchwood” (Gunter, 38). This paper written by Dr. Kimberly Gunter from Appalachian verbalize University initially appears on the surface to be ab pop out how the class she has been teaching for the last 15 weeks has looked to empathise the death penalisation in their state and wherefore they oppose it. In the end Gunter describes how she determinationd a takings that she obviously has strong opinions and emotionswith and has her students learn to write some it. The Title of this paper â€Å"In Our names”: Rewriting the U.S. Death Penalty (32) suggests that maybe there were petitions put together for possible ratifications to the death penalty laws or at least a Billwritten and presented to the state legislators for con positioningration. There is nothing in the paper suggesting some(prenominal) of that was accomplished.\r\nGunter takes the ratifier on a field commove with her class to a Maximum Security prison house in North Carolina in a haplessest research effort for a class exteriorize the students have been working on. Gunter uses analogies like the equating the childs play in the prison smelling like a â€Å"day of hog-killing” (32) in an attempt to disgust the lecturer from the beginning with the idea of death row.Gunter continues to describe low aliveness prison guards and overly medicated innocent prisoners. Throwing in one liner comments from students whose life experience equates to festering up in privileged middle class families and having the opportunity to attendan established University like Appalachian democracy University. Gunter provides part ial statistics in an attempt to show the reader her knowledge on the subject of Capital Punishment. As tha paper comes to a conclusion Gunter was attempting to integrate her students into donnish writers and foc use on a singular bug out tied together by the death penalty.\r\nIn her writings Gunter shows a bias towards the death penalty invoking images of dead pigs and fowl stenches in the readers mind. Gunter contradicts these images later in the paper when she describes thedeath chamber with a hospital gurney and turn up sheets on it. This is Gunter’s attempt at using a â€Å"pathos” argument. Gunter wants to show the humanity side of the death penalty but fails in slipway when she quotes a guard â€Å"he out and out said rape isn’t much of a problem in that prison, but last year, some other guard, a bg barrel-chested sergeant who kept saying ‘I like to fight,’ told me that, while the guards command the prison during the day, the prisoners ruled at night, and that prisoner rape was widespread and undisciplined while the cell blocks were on nightly lockdown.” (35). This deterrent example of rape in prison only helps change integrity some readers minds about capital punishment and the softness of offenders to be rehabilitated.\r\nThe writer does not use either evidence to support her argument which is not sluice clearly defined or understood in the paper. The reader finishes reading the work and searches for the true topic of the work, is it about the death penalty, is it about a first year composition class or is it about a transformation of the student to open their minds or take on different perspectives in life? It is never truly defined within the personify of the work. There is misinformation in the body of work. Gunter is quoted on pageboy 34 ” We learn that there atomic number 18 no on-site educational programs..” This is untrue according to the educational Services for the Department of Prisons in North Carolina.\r\nIt is tall(prenominal) to identify if the writer of this work is successful in conveying her point to the reader. There is a use of pathos in the work that will comfort on the emotions of the reader, but it is not clear what emotions atomic number 18 to be pulled on or the wrong emotions are enacted. If the purpose of the paper was to showthat young college aged students are able to open their minds or embrace academic writing it was not successfully portrayed or documented in any way.\r\nWorks Cited\r\nâ€Å"educational Services.” Educational Services. Web. 22 Nov. 2014. .\r\nGunter, Kimberly K. â€Å"I n Our name”: Rewriting The U.S. Death Penalty.” Writing On The adjoin 21.2 (2011): 32-38. Education Research Complete . Web. 22 Nov. 2014.\r\n'