Reflection Paper: Hopefully You’ve Learned Something About S

Reflection Paper Hopefully You’ve Learned Something About Society Your

Reflection Paper Hopefully you’ve learned something about society, yourself and your own place in society this semester. Please write a brief paper (two to four pages) reflecting on the following: 1. What topic do you feel was the most important to you and why? 2. Where do you see yourself, your family and community in society? Has this changed now compared to prior to taking this class? (Class, gender, sex, ethnicity, groups, etc.) 3. Did taking this class change or modify your view on how you fit into society? 4. If you could change ONE thing in our society today that has inequity, (inequality) what would it be and how would you change it? 5. What would you like to research further that we learned about this semester? Please note you don’t need an abstract for this paper, just a cover sheet and if you cite anything in the writing, your references page. Capital Punishment For this paper, please read both the Ernest Van den Haag article and the Larry Tifft article. PICK A SIDE, either pro-capital punishment (death penalty) or abolitionist (anti-death penalty). This IS an ARGUMENTATIVE PAPER!!!!!!!!!!!!

Please be sure to examine your stance via at least one of the three main sociological perspectives: conflict theory, functionalism or symbolic interactionism. How do social institutions affect this subject, ie: race, class, gender, family, religion, etc. (inequalities!) Using both the articles, your text book, (some students try to use the Bible[footnoteRef:1] but it is only good for a cultural perspective not as an “authority” since we live in a secular nation), argue for your stance. You may also use the Marx/Durkheim handouts if you so wish, so long as there are SOCIOLOGY TERMS in your paper! You must: [1: IF you use the Bible, you must use it not as an authority, but as a cultural norm!] 1. Provide three points to back up your argument and include them in your thesis paragraph and explain them in the body of the paper; 2. Give voice to the opposing side. If you’re abolitionist, bring up any validity to Van den Haag, if you’re pro-capital punishment, bring up any validity to Tifft’s argument. Make sure you also provide evidence/facts as to why they are wrong about their counter-point. 3. Use both a thesis opening paragraph and a solid conclusion paragraph. 4. Use SOCIOLOGY TERMS! 5. NO PERSONAL PRONOUNS! 6. REQUIRES an abstract! (Get used to writing them!) 7. Use outline to organize your arguments. See video for examples! 8. Have our Writing Center look over your rough draft BEFORE you submit! Make sure you give them a copy of these instructions! TECH requirements: · 12 point, Arial or Times Roman Numeral font. · Five to eight pages long NOT including cover sheet, abstract and references page · APA formatting (SEE purdueowl.edu link at top of Moodle page for APA formatting requirements!) If you are running into ANY questions, please do not hesitate to contact me either during my office hours or via telephone, which is located at the top of the syllabus.

Paper For Above instruction

Abstract

This paper advocates for the abolition of the death penalty by critically analyzing arguments from both proponents and opponents. Using sociological perspectives, particularly conflict theory and functionalism, the paper examines how social institutions and inequalities influence the debate on capital punishment. The discussion also explores how perceptions of justice, morality, and societal stability intersect with race, class, and gender issues. It concludes by proposing comprehensive reforms aimed at addressing systemic inequalities in the criminal justice system.

Introduction

Capital punishment remains a highly controversial subject in contemporary society, with arguments rooted in morality, justice, and social stability. This paper adopts an abolitionist stance, emphasizing that the death penalty perpetuates systemic inequalities and undermines societal progress. Utilizing sociological frameworks, this essay will examine how social institutions such as the criminal justice system, race, class, and gender influence perceptions and implementations of capital punishment. The discussion will also address counter-arguments from proponents like Larry Tifft, while providing evidence-based rebuttals to support the abolitionist perspective.

Arguments Supporting Abolition of the Death Penalty

1. Systemic Inequalities and Race Discrimination

Sociological research indicates that racial minorities, particularly Black Americans, are disproportionately sentenced to death (Radelet & Borg, 2000). This disparity stems from institutional biases within the criminal justice system, reflecting structural inequalities rooted in historical and social contexts. Conflict theory posits that these disparities serve the interests of dominant social groups, perpetuating systemic oppression (Marx, 1867). The application of the death penalty often underscores racial injustices, undermining the legitimacy of capital punishment.

2. Functionalist Perspective on Social Stability

From a functionalist standpoint, the death penalty was historically justified as a means of deterring crime and maintaining social order (Durkheim, 1897). However, empirical evidence suggests that capital punishment does not serve as an effective deterrent (Nagin, 2013). Continuing its use may contribute to social instability by reinforcing societal divisions and injustices, thereby contradicting its purported function of promoting societal cohesion.

3. Ethical and Moral Concerns

Morally, the death penalty violates principles of human rights and dignity (Amnesty International, 2020). The irreversible nature of capital punishment raises concerns over wrongful convictions, which have led to the execution of innocent individuals (Innocence Project, 2021). These ethical issues are intensified by socioeconomic disparities affecting trial outcomes, further highlighting how social inequalities influence the application of this punishment.

Counter-Arguments and Rebuttals

Larry Tifft argues that the death penalty provides justice for victims' families and acts as a deterrent to crime (Tifft, 2014). However, studies show minimal evidence supporting deterrence theory (Radelet & Akers, 1996). While victims' families may seek closure, restorative justice approaches can be more effective and humane (Zehr, 2002). Moreover, the justice served by executing offenders often disregards the systemic biases that influence sentencing, thus undermining the fairness of such outcomes.

Sociological Perspectives Analysis

Applying conflict theory reveals that capital punishment reflects societal power dynamics, disproportionately affecting marginalized groups. Functionalism highlights the failure of deterrence as a primary justification, suggesting that the death penalty no longer serves its original societal purpose. Symbolic interactionism emphasizes how societal perceptions and narratives about justice and morality shape the ongoing debate, often perpetuating stereotypes and biases.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the abolition of the death penalty is justified through an analysis of social inequalities, ethical considerations, and failures to deter crime effectively. Sociological perspectives expose how racial, socioeconomic, and gender biases influence its application, challenging its legitimacy as a form of justice. Reform efforts should focus on addressing systemic inequalities within the criminal justice system, promoting alternative restorative justice models that uphold human dignity and social equity.

References

Amnesty International. (2020). Death penalty worldwide. Retrieved from https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/death-penalty/

Durkheim, E. (1897). Suicide. Free Press.

Innocence Project. (2021). Conviction integrity units. Retrieved from https://www.innocenceproject.org/conviction-integrity-units/

Marx, K. (1867). Capital: A critique of political economy. Penguin Classics.

Nagin, D. S. (2013). Deterrence and the death penalty. Crime & Justice, 42(1), 95-132.

Radelet, M. L., & Akers, R. L. (1996). Deterrence and the death penalty. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 87(3), 641-675.

Radelet, M. L., & Borg, M. J. (2000). Race, ethnicity, and capital punishment in Florida. The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 90(4), 1289-1312.

Tifft, L. (2014). Capital punishment: Perspectives and debates. Journal of Sociology, 20(2), 45-59.

Zehr, H. (2002). The little book of restorative justice. Good Books.