C
CWBetts
Guest
If they are in prison, they wont HAVE future victims. Your thirst for vengence is robbing you of common sense.
- Status
B
block
Guest
So you are saying that Pope John Paul II the was incorrect? This amazes me.
P
pete_29
Guest
There are very few supermax prisons. there is one for the whole state of Illinois. I’m not sure what the inmate population is, but I’m pretty sure it’s full.
There is no such thing as an escape proof prison.
C
CHESTERTONRULES
Guest
Have you read any of my posts?
There have been hundreds of fellow prisoners and prison guards murdered in prison by persons previously convicted of murder.
There is almost no way to stop a brutal killer from killing if that is his goal.
Your position leads to the death of innocent people.
How can you continue supporting such a position?
C
CHESTERTONRULES
Guest
He was not speaking as pope, and yes, he was incorrect.
I’m sure he would have been the first to admit that he could be wrong about many issues.
This is not a debatable issue.
Hundreds of people have been murdered, many of these in our best prisons.
It is a fact.
The death penalty administered in a timely manner would have prevented many of these murders.
B
block
Guest
Have you read any of ours?
C
CWBetts
Guest
In my community is a maximum security prison. Do you know the last time I heard of an escape? NEVER. Escape form any prison is exceedingly rare, even less common that false convictions, yet both things do happen. I am more in favor of letting a killer live, than executuing an innocent man.
C
CWBetts
Guest
Perhaps using convicted felons as examples if “innocent victims” is not the best strategy…
C
CHESTERTONRULES
Guest
I respond directly to them.
What point do you think I am missing?
I want to minimize death.
You seem to think that washing your hands of these murders will absolve you somehow.
I understand your position.
Unfortunately, your position increases the number of innocent people who are murdered.
C
CHESTERTONRULES
Guest
That’s for you to decide.
I guess you think it’s fine for car thieves to be executed by other prisoners but it is immoral for the state to execute brutal killers.
I’m not following your logic.
B
block
Guest
But it is not my position, the Pope said it! Who else do we turn to if not him??? I can find countless articles stating the RC Church’s stand on the death penalty. I have posted what bishops have said, I have posted what JESUS said, I have posted what the bible has said and still you stand by what YOU say. You show me statistics but have yet to show me what the catholic church says, which I have. You, my friend, are wrong, and I am sorry to say so.
C
CWBetts
Guest
There is an inherent risk in doing things that will get you sent to prison. If murders in prisons were as frequent as you suggest, then prison ovwerpoulation would not be a problem, because everyone is killing each other at an alarming rate. And no, the state should not execute anyone.
P
pete_29
Guest
That isn’t necessarily true. Inmates have access to many potential victims, not all inside the prison walls. Healthcare staff at the local hospitals are the most likely in my opinion. Health care units at prisons are basicly first aid stations. If an inmate complains of chest pains it’s a good bet he will be traveling by ambulance to the nearest hospital. Strict security is followed, but inmated have 24Hours 7 days a week to figure a way around security. Believe me, inmates can be quite clever. You wouldn’t believe some of the things that I’ve seen made into a weapon.
Court personnel are also on my list. Murderers always have appeals. They have to be transported to court. All it takes is a well hidden shank (prison lingo for knife) and someone dies.
As you can see, many people, including those along the transportation route, can be put in jeopardy no matter how tight security is.
P
pete_29
Guest
I agree. Having an innocent man executed is unacceptable, but I believe there are cases where proof is beyond doubt at all. In these cases I believe capital punishment is acceptable.
In 25 years, the prison I worked at never had an escape. as a matter of fact, we only had a handful of attempts, but given time both the prison you live near and the the prison I worked at will have one.
L
Lujack
Guest
CHESTERTONRULES, the Catechism disagrees with you. Are you going to address what it says at all?
C
CHESTERTONRULES
Guest
The catechism is clearly not opposed to the death penalty.
We know that letting brutal killers associate with others leads to additional murders.
Here’s what the catechism has to say to you on this matter. Please read carefully.
2265 Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others. The defense of the common good requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm. For this reason, those who legitimately hold authority also have the right to use arms to repel aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their responsibility.
2266 The efforts of the state to curb the spread of behavior harmful to people’s rights and to the basic rules of civil society correspond to the requirement of safeguarding the common good. Legitimate public authority has the right and duty to inflict punishment proportionate to the gravity of the offense. Punishment has the primary aim of redressing the disorder introduced by the offense. When it is willingly accepted by the guilty party, it assumes the value of expiation. Punishment then, in addition to defending public order and protecting people’s safety, has a medicinal purpose: as far as possible, it must contribute to the correction of the guilty party.67
The moral law prohibits exposing someone to mortal danger without grave reason, as well as refusing assistance to a person in danger.
Unintentional killing is not morally imputable. But one is not exonerated from grave offense if, without proportionate reasons, he has acted in a way that brings about someone’s death, even without the intention to do so.
67 Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.
scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c2a5.htm
L
LutheranDK
Guest
Again, I’m in unknown waters here, but the quote from your catechism was this:
**2267 Assuming the guilty party’s identity and reponsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death peanlty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.
**
The latter part of the quote clearly does not apply in CERTAIN cases. As it has been pointed out, numerous murders take place in prisons, which means that in some cases, just locking a killer up is not sufficient to protect others from him/her.
And therefore, I would think that exercising capital punishment in those cases WOULD be the “only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor”
R
Robertsxxx
Guest
I blame “Prison Break” for the misconceptions
Anyway, I used to be for Death penalty. Reasons: mostly I guess financial & resource wise… The people that a sentenced to death are not measly thieves & etc. They are REALLY REALLY serious offenders that would be rotting their entire lives in prison without being released through some “good behavior” program or rehabilitation. So those people were seriously disrupting society + would not be contibuting to it back or living in it; thus allowing them to live & spend valuable resources that muchmore needy, good people actually could use seemed like such a shame to me.
Then somebody pointed out to me that the costs of all the trials & other stuff that needs to be done to sentence somebody to a death penalty + they aren’t just killed after a week a two; those fellons spend many many years in prison before the actual execution (there is a lot of time available to determine whether the person was actually guilty or not, over & over, or see if new evidence comes up; of course there are cases when the following happened much later). So by killing them, much more resources were actually spent. So now I changed my position & am against death penalty.
L
LutheranDK
Guest
That is a different matter altogether, and the very comparison is ridiculous…
L
LutheranDK
Guest
I read someone in this thread saying that what we’re discussing isn’t secular law, but if support for capital punishment is in conflict with God’s law.
I would say that the answer to THAT question is a no-brainer: The answer’s “no”, and the evidence is Scripture. If one sits down and reads through the Torah, one finds numerous crimes for which God dictates the execution of the offender.
Now, I’m NOT saying that we as Christians should labor to reintroduce stoning as punishment for working on the Sabbath, so please don’t throw that old non sequitur at me.
What I am saying, is that if God dictates capital punishment for certain offences, capital punishment CANNOT be against God’s will in and of itself, and therefore, supporting capital punishment cannot be, either.
==edit: If any conspiracy nuts happen to read this thread: No, the post number has no symbolic, hidden meaning. Go away already…==
I would say that the answer to THAT question is a no-brainer: The answer’s “no”, and the evidence is Scripture. If one sits down and reads through the Torah, one finds numerous crimes for which God dictates the execution of the offender.
Now, I’m NOT saying that we as Christians should labor to reintroduce stoning as punishment for working on the Sabbath, so please don’t throw that old non sequitur at me.
What I am saying, is that if God dictates capital punishment for certain offences, capital punishment CANNOT be against God’s will in and of itself, and therefore, supporting capital punishment cannot be, either.
==edit: If any conspiracy nuts happen to read this thread: No, the post number has no symbolic, hidden meaning. Go away already…==
- Status