Regardless of how barbaric it may be, the electric chair should remain the source
of execution used by the state of Florida. It has served as a valid execution tool for the
last seventy-five years and there is no reason why it should not continue to do so. In the
editorial, “New ‘Old Sparky’ isn’t Acceptable,” Earl Maucker suggests that electrocution
should be replaced with lethal injection. He talks about how lethal injection is more
technologically modernized and more humane for that matter. Secondly, it is stated that
five out of seven Florida Supreme Court justices have urged lawmakers to consider an
alternative method to execution in 1997. Furthermore, thirty-two states are currently
using lethal injection as a form of execution.
This article expresses the editor’s feelings towards the electric chair. His view is
very clear stating that he is not in favor of this type of execution and would rather see it
cease existence. Furthermore, Maucker depicts the electric chair as “unconstitutional” and
suggests alternative actions such as lethal injections. Nevertheless, his view is very bias
and provides argumentative grounds for the audience at hand.
Earl Maucker has chosen to write about a controversial topic that is in the back of
most reader’s minds. Therefore, it is not very hard for him to quickly gain the interest of
several readers. However, his credibility is another issue. As a newspaper columnist for
the Sun Sentinel, Maucker has minimal credibility. As an editor, he makes this very
evident trough his use of bias opinions. He shows these one-sided beliefs through exerps
like “In a grisly report” or “Just what Florida doesn’t need: a new but almost-identical
version of its 76-year-old electric chair.” Despite the poor credibility, Maucker displays
...