Write a 1,500 word essay using this outline with hard language and precision with MLA9 in-text citations with the same outline as given below. The introduction should have these: Introduction Paragraph with a Grabber/Hook meant to capture the reader's attention, background information with multiple sentences giving a general overview of the essay's topic, and a thesis statement with the same given below in the outline. It should be rather long with complex language. Then, there should be the first body paragraph, which should use the first Claim/Reason 1. There should be three supporting ideas used, that is the evidence and supports and add more using the same sources and introducing more. Afterward, there should be the second body paragraph, which should use the second Claim/Reason 2. There should be three supporting ideas used, that is the evidence and supports and add more using the same sources and introducing more. Furthermore, there should be the third body paragraph, which should use the third Claim/Reason 3. There should be three supporting ideas used, that is the evidence and supports and add more using the same sources and introducing more. Then there should be a strong counterargument against a rebuttal using a clear-cut claim reason and three supporting ideas used, that is the evidence and supports and adding more using the same sources and introducing more. Then there should be a conclusion paragraph, which will use the same conclusion phrase below in the outline, then restate the specfiic arguments by rephrasing them in different ways with a catchy clincher. EACH PARAGRAPH MUST BE VERY, VERY LONG. YOU MUST FOLLOW ALL RULES; AND HERE IS THE OUTLINE BELOW:

Capital Punishment: an Egregious Epitome; an Unjust MethodologyWrite a 1,000 word essay using this outline with hard language and precision. Capital Punishment: an Egregious Epitome; an Unjust Methodology
Introduction:
Thesis (Statement; viz.,): The death penalty should be abolished in the United States due to its ineffectiveness, potential for executing innocent individuals, and the more humane alternatives available.
I. Claim/Reason 1: The death penalty is an ineffective deterrent of crime
Evidence: Studies show no significant correlation between the death penalty and crime rates
Support: In their study, Donohue and Wolfers (2006) analyze empirical evidence surrounding the death penalty and crime deterrence and find no significant correlation between the two. (Donohue & Wolfers, 791-846)

II. Claim/Reason 2: Death penalty states have consistently higher murder rates than non-death penalty states
A. Evidence; Support: According to data from the FBI Uniform Crime Reports, states with the death penalty generally have higher murder rates compared to states without it. (FBI Uniform Crime Reports)

III. Claim/Reason 3: The risk of executing innocent people is too high. 
Evidence 1: A significant number of death row inmates have been exonerated
Support 1: The National Registry of Exonerations reveals that there have been numerous cases of wrongfully convicted death row inmates being exonerated after reconsideration of their cases. (National Registry of Exonerations)
       B. Evidence 2: The judicial system is not infallible, leading to potential wrongful convictions 
Support 2: The Innocence Project highlights several cases where the judicial system has failed by convicting innocent individuals due to factors such as flawed evidence or witness misidentification. (Innocence Project)

IV. Claim/Reason 4L Existence of more humane alternatives to the death penalty 
Evidence 1: Life imprisonment without parole is a more ethical and effective punishment 1. Support 1: In their book “Courting Death,” Steiker and Steiker (2016) argue that life imprisonment without parole is not only a more ethical alternative to the death penalty but also a more effective method of punishment. (Steiker & Steiker)
Evidence 2: Rehabilitation programs can help reduce crime rates and improve society
Support 2: The National Institute of Justice supports the implementation of rehabilitation programs to reduce crime and recidivism rates, thus showing a more humane and beneficial alternative to the death penalty. (National Institute of Justice)
V. Conclusion
A. The death’s penalties’ lack of association with crime rate reduction, risks with malpractice and ethical concerns – with more humane alternatives (e.g., rehabilitation; lifetime incarceration) implicate the socioeconomic illegality of the death penalty; of – which induces more harm than a proper net benefit.



















Works Cited
A. Donohue, John J., and Justin Wolfers. “Uses and Abuses of Empirical Evidence in the Death Penalty Debate.” Stanford Law Review, vol. 58, no. 3, 2006, pp. 791-846.
B. Death Penalty Information Center. “Deterrence: States Without the Death Penalty Have Had Consistently Lower Murder Rates.” deathpenaltyinfo.org, www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/deterrence-states-without-death-penalty-have-had-consistently-lower-murder-rates.
C. FBI Uniform Crime Reports. “Crime in the United States.” ucr.fbi.gov, www.ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s.
D. National Registry of Exonerations. “Exonerations in the United States.” law.umich.edu, www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/Exonerations-in-the-United-States-Map.aspx.
E. Innocence Project. “Wrongful Convictions.” innocenceproject.org, www.innocenceproject.org/causes/wrongful-convictions/.
F. Steiker, Carol S., and Jordan M. Steiker. Courting Death: The Supreme Court and Capital Punishment. Belknap Press, 2016.
G. National Institute of Justice. “Rehabilitation Programs.” njj.gov, www.nij.gov/topics/corrections/rehabilitation/Pages/welcome.aspx.