I have to write a personal statement. Any help?

Can you help me write a good introduction and thesis statement?

• Here is the prompt: Your task is to find 6-8 sources that support the pro and con side of a current controversial issue. Use the sources to support your own position[NOT proving] the opposing side as well. My controversial topic is the death penalty. My position is that I am against it I am extremely confused on how to write a thesis statement based on the above prompt. Anyways here is my introduction to my research paper. Can you help me edit it and make it better? Also what would be a good topic sentence or hook to draw my readers' attention? Over the past thirty-five years, the death penalty has been the fate of many individuals convicted by a court of law of a criminal offense. The death penalty or capital punishment is an issue that has sparked controversy and anxiety in today’s society. Capital punishment refers to “a sentence of death by execution”, for the crimes committed. In order to receive the death penalty an individual needs to commit certain types of crimes known as “capital crimes” or “capital offences”. Capital crimes include treason, perjury, kidnapping, rape, terrorism and murder. Today, executions are carried out by either a lethal injection or electrocution. Countries like the United States can allow the convict to have a degree of “amnesty” by letting the convict choose other methods such as a gas chamber, hanging or even a firing squad. Although vast majorities are against the death penalty, there are people who are in favor of the death penalty and are in disagreement with solutions to stop the death penalty and many, might even ignore and evade solutions that are in front of them such as using life imprisonment or even a parole. For some of them, the key to stop violence and murder is to destroy the source of the problem in which the criminal is the culprit of such reasoning. The death penalty has been bestowed upon serial killers who have surprised the nation with their heinous actions, criminals charged with felonies, and the wrongly convicted. The death penalty is executed in thirty-four states and abolished by sixteen states in the United States. Many against the death penalty argue against it by claiming the killing of a human being by the state in the name of justice is both cruel and violates the right to life while those against it support the death penalty claiming the nation has the right to keep the murderer from ever killing again which can effectively deter future crime. Proposed Thesis Statement: Arguments in support of the death penalty are flawed claiming the death penalty brings justice to the victims’ families, is less costly than imprisonment and act as an effective crime deterrent. Whereas arguments advocating the abolishment of the death penalty are practical, moral retribution does not justify the murder of another human being, the cost of executions are higher than life imprisonment and there is no scientific data that supports the death penalty is an effective crime deterrent. I know it is too long which is why I need your help to shorten it and make it better. Also I do not think this is a valid thesis statement. Any help is appreciated preferably from someone who has written a research paper with a similar prompt.

• Answer:

  A good place to start is at http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/student-resource-center Click on ideas for research papers and debates. In the meantime, here's my take, with sources below: For the worst crimes, life without parole is better, for many reasons. I’m against the death penalty not because of sympathy for criminals but because it doesn’t reduce crime, prolongs the anguish of families of murder victims, costs a whole lot more than life in prison, and, worst of all, risks executions of innocent people. The worst thing about it. Errors: The system can make tragic mistakes. Cameron Todd Willingham was executed for setting the fire that killed his children, based on what even the Texas Forensics Science Commission acknowledges was junk science. Modern forensics has shown the fire was accidental, not arson. We’ll never know for sure how many people have been executed for crimes they didn’t commit. As of now, 140 wrongly convicted people on death row have been exonerated. DNA is rarely available in homicides, often irrelevant (as in Willingham’s case) and can’t guarantee we won’t execute innocent people. Capital juries are dominated by people who favor the death penalty and are more likely to vote to convict. Keeping killers off the streets for good: Life without parole, on the books in most states, also prevents reoffending. It means what it says, and spending the rest of your life locked up, knowing you’ll never be free, is no picnic. Two big advantages: -an innocent person serving life can be released from prison -life without parole costs less than the death penalty Costs, a surprise to many people: Study after study has found that the death penalty is much more expensive than life in prison. Since the stakes are so high, the process is far more complex than for any other kind of criminal case. The largest costs come at the pre-trial and trial stages. These apply whether or not the defendant is convicted, let alone sentenced to death. Crime reduction (deterrence): The death penalty doesn't keep us safer. Homicide rates for states that use the death penalty are consistently higher than for those that don’t. The most recent FBI data confirms this. For people without a conscience, fear of being caught is the best deterrent. Who gets it: The death penalty isn't reserved for the worst crimes, but for defendants with the worst lawyers. It doesn't apply to people with money. Practically everyone sentenced to death had to rely on an overworked public defender. How many people with money have been executed?? Victims: People assume that families of murder victims want the death penalty imposed. It isn't necessarily so. Some are against it on moral grounds. But even families who have supported it in principle have testified to the protracted and unavoidable damage that the death penalty process does to families like theirs and that life without parole is an appropriate alternative. It comes down to whether we should keep the death penalty for retribution or revenge in spite of its flaws and in spite of the huge toll it exacts on society.