1 RUNNING HEAD: CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IN TODAYS SOCIETY CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IN TODAYS SOCIETY 3 Capital Punishment in Todays Society Josh Sedlmeyer Baker College Introduction Capital punishment refers to the practice of inflicting death on an individual as a punishment for a crime committed. Capital punishment is usually carried out after a proper legal trial. It can be carried out through lethal injection, firing squad, gas chamber, hanging and electrocution. There is still a sizeable number of countries that use this mode of punishment. In the United States, the practice is currently lawful in 32 states. Capital punishment is mostly used as punishment for serious types of murder crimes. However, regardless of the severity of the crimes committed, this practice raises various ethical and moral concerns. The ineffectiveness of this practice by far outweigh its applicability. Factors against capital punishment a) The right to human life Each and every human being has an irrefutable right to life. This is true even for those who have committed murder. Sentencing someone to death and then executing them is therefore a violation of this right, irrespective of the crime they have committed. Melusky and Pesto (2011) assert that the value of someone’s life is permanent and that not even the bad conduct of an individual can destroy this value. In addition, the very action of executing someone causes too much anguish to the condemned individual. This amounts to torture. Even with the adoption of the lethal injection that is said to be less inhumane, Berlatsky (2010) notes that post mortem findings of executed felons indicate that the levels of anesthesia used permitted wakefulness and the ability to experience pain. b) Unfair application of capital punishment According to recent statistics, a large number of capital punishment sentences are usually flawed, arbitrary, discriminatory and unfair (Scherdin, 2014). In his book, Marzilli (2008) observes that minorities and the poor are more susceptible to capital punishment. He also acknowledges the results of a study that was conducted in 1983 by Professor David Baldus on the issue of capital punishment in Georgia. The figures of this study indicated that murderers whose victims were white were eleven times more likely to be convicted to death than their counterparts whose victims were black. Carrying out capital punishments therefore raises the risk of convicting and executing innocent individuals. Marzilli (2008) also notes that the justice system does not always provide the accused poor persons with apt lawyers, capable of swaying the capital punishment convictions that await them. In addition, it is possible for jurors and key witnesses to make mistakes. If this occurs, it is more than possible for innocent people to be sentenced to death for a crime they did .

1. 1
RUNNING HEAD: CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IN TODAYS
SOCIETY
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IN TODAYS SOCIETY
3
Capital Punishment in Todays Society
Josh Sedlmeyer
Baker College
Introduction
Capital punishment refers to the practice of inflicting death on
an individual as a punishment for a crime committed. Capital
punishment is usually carried out after a proper legal trial. It
can be carried out through lethal injection, firing squad, gas
chamber, hanging and electrocution. There is still a sizeable
number of countries that use this mode of punishment. In the
United States, the practice is currently lawful in 32 states.
Capital punishment is mostly used as punishment for serious
types of murder crimes. However, regardless of the severity of
the crimes committed, this practice raises various ethical and

2. moral concerns. The ineffectiveness of this practice by far
outweigh its applicability.
Factors against capital punishment
a) The right to human life
Each and every human being has an irrefutable right to life.
This is true even for those who have committed murder.
Sentencing someone to death and then executing them is
therefore a violation of this right, irrespective of the crime they
have committed. Melusky and Pesto (2011) assert that the value
of someone’s life is permanent and that not even the bad
conduct of an individual can destroy this value. In addition, the
very action of executing someone causes too much anguish to
the condemned individual. This amounts to torture. Even with
the adoption of the lethal injection that is said to be less
inhumane, Berlatsky (2010) notes that post mortem findings of
executed felons indicate that the levels of anesthesia used
permitted wakefulness and the ability to experience pain.
b) Unfair application of capital punishment
According to recent statistics, a large number of capital
punishment sentences are usually flawed, arbitrary,
discriminatory and unfair (Scherdin, 2014). In his book,
Marzilli (2008) observes that minorities and the poor are more
susceptible to capital punishment. He also acknowledges the
results of a study that was conducted in 1983 by Professor
David Baldus on the issue of capital punishment in Georgia.
The figures of this study indicated that murderers whose victims
were white were eleven times more likely to be convicted to
death than their counterparts whose victims were black.
Carrying out capital punishments therefore raises the risk of
convicting and executing innocent individuals. Marzilli (2008)
also notes that the justice system does not always provide the
accused poor persons with apt lawyers, capable of swaying the
capital punishment convictions that await them.
In addition, it is possible for jurors and key witnesses to

3. make mistakes. If this occurs, it is more than possible for
innocent people to be sentenced to death for a crime they did
not really commit. This is coupled by the fact that the legal
system is greatly flawed. The U.S jurors for a majority of
capital punishment cases are required to be death eligible. This
is to mean that the potential juror should be willing to convict
an accused person with the full knowledge that a death penalty
is a real possibility in the case. This factor leads to the high
possibility of a jury that is biased, in relation to death penalty.
This requirement does not therefore permit the admission of
jurors who are opposed to the death penalty (Sullivan, 2014). In
this sense, death sentences are not reached in a transparent
manner.
c) The Cost Of Capital Punishments
Capital punishments are an expensive affair in the U.S.A.
The conviction and execution costs for Oklahoma City Bombing
convict Timothy McVeigh cost approximately $13 million. In
the state of California, the present legal system takes a
whopping $137 million in a year. The California Commission
for the Fair Administration of Justice opines that a system
without death penalties would only cost the state $11.5million
(Wolf & Sarat, 1997). A majority of these costs are incurred
during the trial and in the period prior to the trial. In the event
that a case does not result into a death penalty, tax payers have
to pay for pretrial, trial and retrial procedures as well as the
costs of holding the accused for life in case they are charged
with life imprisonment. This is mostly because death penalty
trials usually require more investigation. This practice therefore
derails important resources that would be paramount for other
sectors of the economy. If the death penalty system was
abolished, more resources would be channeled towards
prevention of crime, emergency services, and rehabilitation and
treatment programs. Crimes such as domestic violence and child
abuse would therefore be given more attention.

4. Refutation of the opposition’s claims
a) Retribution
Individuals who advocate for capital punishment argue that
the death penalty offers retribution. They hold that the guilty
deserve to be punished, in a proportionate measure to the extent
of their crime. In upholding this argument, an individual who
murders another can only be punished adequately by being
subjected to death himself. According to them, the measure of
punishment should be served on the basis of the criminal’s
conduct and the vulnerability of the victim at the time of the
crime. However, this argument does not hold water because
capital punishment is more of a vengeance act as opposed to
retribution. Criminals are sometimes subjected to worse
punishments than they initially committed. In addition, the
criminal goes through immense anticipatory suffering before he
is finally put to death because the death row may take a long
time to materialize. This punishment is by far much more than
just snuffing out the life of the criminal.
b) Deterrence
Pro capital punishments also argue that by executing
criminals through death penalties, potential offenders are
deterred from committing the same crime. Scherdin (2014)
strongly argues that there are no conclusive findings to
propagate this argument. He further states that recent studies
have also not shown a correlation between homicide cases and
capital punishment. Contrary to the reasoning of the propagators
of this school of thought, capital punishment does not also
provide deterrence because in some cases, the offender cannot
be deterred due to the existence of a mental defect or illness.
Subjecting such an individual to death is therefore an
ineffective mode of punishment.
In addition, a majority of the crimes leading to death
penalty usually result from a state of heightened emotion
whereby the individual does not think through the consequences
of his actions at that time(Wolf and Sarat, 1997). In addition,
there exists no proof to show that death penalty serves the

5. purpose of deterrence more than the one served by life
imprisonment. Deterrence cannot also be used to justify capital
punishments because it is mostly effective if it is carried out
immediately after the occurrence of the crime. However, this is
not usually the case because most capital crimes drag on for
years. The deterrence effect is therefore very dilute by the time
the trial is being completed.
c) Closure
People often argue that capital punishment provides
closure and vindication to the family and friends of the victim.
Nonetheless, this cannot excuse cannot be used to solely justify
the cutting off of life from another human being (Berlatsky,
2010). Different people grieve differently. Some people may not
find any closure from the mere death of another individual. This
reasoning cannot therefore provide sufficient justification for
carrying out capital punishment.
d) Prevention of Re-offence
Some people feel that putting an offender to death is the
only way to prevent him from committing the offense again.
However, Marzilli (2008) contends that this is not a solid reason
to put a person to death. He argues that there are other ways to
prevent an offender from committing a crime again. He
proposes measures such as imprisonment without parole. Even
though some criminals have been known to escape from prison,
this number is on the minority.
Conclusion
As much as some people may feel offended and robbed of their
loved ones, subjecting any individual to death for a capital
crime is disproportionate and inhumane. At the end of the day,
no one really gains from the death of the propagator. In any
case, the loss will still be imminent even after the execution of
the offender. Human life is precious and as such, it should be
guarded by all means possible. However, justice should
continue to be carried out on propagators through other more
long term means, capital punishment should be abolished.

6. References
Berlatsky, N. (2010). Capital punishment. Detroit, Mich:
Greenhaven Press/Gale, Cengage Learning.
Marzilli, A. (2008). Capital punishment. New York: Chelsea
House.
Melusky, J. A., & Pesto, K. A. (2011). Capital punishment.
Santa Barbara, Calif: Greenwood.
Scherdin, Lill (2014). Capital Punishment : A Hazard to a
Sustainable Criminal Justice System?. Retrieved from
http://www.eblib.com
Sullivan, J. T. (2014). The demographic dilemma in death
qualification of capital jurors. Wake Forest Law Review, 49(4),
1107-1172.
Wolf, R. V., & Sarat, A. (1997). Capital punishment.
Philadelphia, Pa.: Chelsea House Publishers.
Running head: CYBERCRIME ANALYSIS
1
CYBERCRIME ANALYSIS
2
Cybercrime Analysis
Josh Sedlmeyer
Baker College

7. Cybercrime Analysis
Cybercrimes are criminal offenses committed over the internet
using computers and other electronic gadgets. Another name for
cyber-crime is computer crime. Individuals who commit
computer crimes are referred to as cyber criminals or hackers.
With the various forms of smartphone and computer technology
in the world today, cybercrime has taken different forms in
different types of technologies. With the development of the
internet and the advancement of technology, computer crimes
also have evolved from simple attacks to more complex and
lethal attacks. Computers criminals use computers to perpetrate
these unlawful acts on their target. These unlawful activities
usually include, gaining of unauthorized access in to private and
government electronic databases and information, fraud or
manipulating unsuspecting internet users and spread of
malicious software programs such as ransom ware, viruses of
worms. Cybercrime offenses committed by hackers also range
from theft of people’s information and personal details to
corporate espionage and cyber terrorism.
According to Broadhurst Roderic, Grabosky Peter, Alazab
Mamoun & Chon Steve, (2014), computer crimes has become an
issue of major concern in the world today due to the devastating
effects of some attacks. This problem usually faces the internet
community and that involves any individual who uses the
internet for services such as email services, electronic
commerce, and for social purposes such as Facebook. These
attacks have also been on the rise due to advancement in
computer technology and lack of proper action being taken to
solve the problem. This statement by the author is accurate
since as new technologies emerge the cases of computer crime
increase. Computer hackers usually have the skills to break

8. people’s passwords or to use their social engineering skills to
manipulate people to give up their details such as login details
to their private accounts. The attackers could then impersonate
the individuals and carryout any kind of activity they would
want. This is referred to as identity theft whereby an individual
uses information about another person to impersonate him or
her over the internet without the victims concern. Computer
crime was not taken seriously in the past but with the growing
patterns of more advanced attacks, people should take the issue
more seriously and take measures to improve cyber security
thus resolving the problem. From the above information
provided by the authors of the article, it is clear that computer
crime is not taken with the seriousness it deserves in the
society. The authors attribute their argument to the rise in
criminal activities and proper strategies not being implemented
to curb the vice.
The history of cybercrime dates back to 1950 when certain
individuals began using telecommunication systems to their own
advantage and without authorization of telecommunication
companies. The most common criminal activity back then was
phone phreaking. Phone phreaks were individuals who liked to
explore phone and telecommunication systems to understand
how the systems worked. This led them to discovering flaws in
the systems. Phone phreaks exploited the flaws and were able to
make free telephone calls both nationally and internationally,
which was illegal. With the advancement of technology and the
dawn of computers, phone phreaks have evolved to become
computer criminals with advanced and complicated skill in
computer hacking and cracking. The authors through this
information show how computer crimes have evolved over the
past and people’s reactions towards it. People do not take the
activities seriously and this leads to rise and more harm being
caused to both people and corporations due to activities such as
industrial espionage.
According to Clough. (2010), cyber crimes are divisible
into three broad categories. One of them is cybercrimes

9. perpetrated against a person. Some of these misbehaviors
include identity theft, hacking and stealing of personal
information such as credit card information, violation of
people’s privacy or cyber stalking, social engineering and using
this information to threaten and harass people. Hackers steal
people’s identities by gaining unauthorized access to people
information such as social security numbers in the United
States. They also use techniques such as social engineering
skills to get people to give up their personal information and
details to them. They can then use the information to
impersonate the victim or sell the information online to other
computer criminals. When the information is sold, other hackers
to perform illegal activities online using the victims personal
details. For instance, computer criminals known as carders use
peoples credit card information to impersonate the legitimate
owners of the credit cards and to buy products on electronic
commerce sites such as amazon. Martin et al. (2004) states that
technological advancement allows people to conduct business
and pay their bills over the internet. This provides a platform
for lawbreakers to steal people’s information and use it to their
benefit. Another common form of computer offenses committed
against a person is cyber stalking or violation of people’s
privacy, which is illegal. According to Stonec (2011), computer
hackers use their skills to hack and gain access to people’s
social sites such as Facebook. They use their unauthorized
access to cause harm to the victim by either harassing them or
threatening them with the aim of exploiting them financially or
to gain other form of favors.
The second category of cybercrimes classification is cyber-
crimes committed against property. One significant example of
this wrongdoing manifests in spread of malicious software or
virus programs and ransom ware. These software temporarily
disable or cause permanent damage to computers and other
computing devices. They also delete or destroy personal
information and data while giving the attackers access to the
victim’s computer. This software include viruses, worms, key

10. loggers, and Trojans, bots and ransom wares. Going by Yar
(2013), Ransom ware is a software that disables people’s
computers rendering them unusable. Their developers program
them in a way that when they are launched in the victim’s
computer, they disable the computer and demand their victims
to pay a certain amount to the developers in order for their
computers to function. Key loggers are malicious soft wares
used by computer criminals to record keystrokes in the victim’s
computers and to send the information back to the attackers
over the internet. The information collected by the key loggers
may include personal information such as passwords of even
government secrets. This information when sent back to the
attackers is then sold for money or used against the victims.
Spread of malicious softwares to other peoples computers
without their consent for any purpose is illegal and perpetrators
are punishable by the law.
The third category of cybercrimes are misconducts committed
against the Government. Hackers commit these crimes by
breaking into, hacking and cracking military and government
websites without authorization. Such activities portray cyber
espionage, which is illegal. They also lead to cyber terrorism,
which causes information warfare and disruption of government
and military networks therefore disrupting their activities.
It is therefore evident that drastic measures should be taken to
solve cybercrime issues and to punish perpetrators and computer
criminals. Several approaches can be used to solve the
insecurity and attacks carried out over the internet. One of the
approaches is to implement more secure internet protocols that
are not prone to hacking and that offer more security. Computer
developers and professional programmers should design,
develop and implement a more secure internet framework that is
secure and that lacks the loopholes in the internet platform
today. This could resolve the cyber-crime problem or at least
reduce the problem to manageable levels.
The other approach to the computer crime problem is that all
countries in the world should come up with a convention on

11. how to handle cybercrime situations globally. This is because;
there are computer attackers who perpetrate these criminal
activities in foreign countries. These are illegal acts whose
repercussions should be stipulated by the law. By coming up
with international laws against cybercrime and related
activities, the activities would therefore be reduced by the
initiative. Governments in different countries should also come
up with ways of analyzing the internet traffic that goes in and
out of their countries. This would enable them to watch over the
internet activities in their countries and in the cases of computer
attacks, they would be able to handle them effectively. In the
effort to curb computer crimes, governments should also
develop and implement strategies on how to contain the
situations in cases of cyber terrorism and attacks.
Another solution to the whole problem would be through
educating and sensitization of the public on how to protect
themselves from internet attacks and other cybercriminal
activities. This would be a very effective approach to solving
the problem since the attackers would not have victims to
exploit. By educating people on the different types of attacks,
how to identify them and how to protect themselves, people
would also be able to identify and report the criminals to law
enforcement agencies.
Moreover, governments in different countries should create law
enforcement agencies to specifically deal with cases on
computer fraud and criminal activities. The agencies should
have the personnel with the ability to trace and identify the
attacker’s locations and their criminal activities. This would be
a significant step to countering computer crimes since cyber
criminals would cease to perpetrate their criminal activities.
However, these solutions to cyber-criminal activities also have
some limitations. One of the limitations is that the
cybercriminal activities are always evolving. This would limit
the effectiveness of the application of these remedies. Another
problem is that due to the nature of the internet, it would be
virtually impossible to catch these attackers due to

12. impersonation techniques and use of stolen data to carry out
their criminal activities.
According to the writer, this article is aimed at young people
and the youth who spend most of their time on the internet
either researching on useful projects or chatting on social media
sites such as Facebook. The targeted audience also includes the
internet community at large or rather people who use the
internet to carryout activities such as business transactions or
electronic commerce. Through his article, the writer aims to
educate these people on the dangers that the internet poses to
their own security and fraud. The article appeared in the New
York Times magazine. Therefore, the audience for this article
was presumably the public. The article was also probable
directed towards people who utilize the internet on a day-to-day
basis in their lives.
Going by the author’s article, the characters in his article are
individuals with no compassion and people who exploit other
people in order to gain from them. The spirit that prevails in the
culture of the writer’s article is a culture of exploitation and
survival for the fittest. This is evident through the article since
the poor and others exploit people without the knowledge.
The entire article evokes sorrow due to the level of exploitation
that people are exposed to in the world over the internet. The
different techniques that are used to subject people too theft and
fraud cause sadness and sorrow. The thought of how people also
lose their money and property is another issue.
Conclusively, the authors present well-argued out points in their
article. Their arguments are also credible since they use
supportive evidence and information to back up their arguments.
The information in the article also proves that authorities have
been reluctant to take the necessary measures to curb computer
crime activities. The article is very informative and evokes
critical thinking from the arguments presented by the author.

13. Reference
Broadhurst Roderic, Grabosky Peter, Alazab Mamoun & Chon
Steve. (2014). Organizations and Cyber crime: An Analysis of
the Nature of Groups engaged in Cyber Crime. International
Journal of Cyber Criminology, Volume 8 (1), 1-20.
Clough Jonathan. (2010). Principles of Cybercrime. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Martin Clemens. Et al. (2004). Cybercrime: A Reference
Handbook. California: ABC-CLIO.
Yar Majid. (2013). Cybercrime and Society. California: SAGE.
Stonec Larmas. (2011). Definition of Cybercrime. Retrieved
from http://www.brighthub.com/internet/security-
privacy/articles/3435.aspx
ENG 102 Essay #3: Proposal Essay
Rough Draft - 50 points Due: Saturday of Seminar 6
Peer Review - 50 points Due: Monday of Seminar 6
Final Draft – 250 points Due: Wednesday of Seminar 6
Total Assignment Points: 350
Topic: Instructor-approved topic
Purpose: To write a proposal that demonstrates the elements of
an effective argument

14. Description of Assignment:
· A proposal argument
· Identifies and defines the problem
· Proposes and demonstrates a feasible solution
· Convinces readers that the proposed solution is fair and will
work
· Makes an arguable claim
· Considers multiple perspectives – anticipates and responds to
likely objections
· Adequately supports claims with relevant evidence and
reasoning (Sufficient, Typical, Adequate, Relevant). Questions
and challenges a source’s credibility by examining the author’s
credentials, assumptions, affiliations, and implications, all of
which could be used in the paper’s discussion.
Source(s) Required:
· At least six (academic, credible, reliable) varied sources must
be used with not more than two deriving from the Internet.
· Source information gained from the library databases is not
considered Internet sources.
· Information gained from reference sources such as an
encyclopedia (e. g. Wikepedia.org) or a dictionary will not
count as acceptable source material.
· The more authoritative sources used, the more convincing the
research looks; the fewer authoritative sources used, the less
credible the research looks.
· Sources can be in the form of journals, magazine articles,
books, newspapers, government documents, etc.
Audience: You are writing to a target audience with comparable
knowledge regarding the topic. You should identify and
demonstrate an awareness of the target audience based upon the
topic selection. If you are struggling with identifying a target
audience, you can consult Chapter 16 in Baker College
Composition.

15. Format: 8-10 double-spaced pages, not including title page and
reference page using APA format
Textbook Support: You will find chapter 22 in Baker College
Composition useful for this assignment. Also, pages 56-69 of
The Writer’s Brief Handbook contain examples and specific
suggestions for this type of essay. You can also consult the
Library Research Guide for Composition II.