Death penalty

[Pfaffenhoffen]

Look, 35% of black executed which is more than the average of back population. Yes, I said the majority and I was wrong. But there are more blacks killed than the nation’s black average.
And " I didn’t read "…but …“but I doubt that they will support your contention either”. You you do not read but you know.
What I was trying to say is that the powerful have hte hands on how to defend themselves as the poor cannot. Death Penalty is unjust.
So, I will give you a simple reading that you can dig yourself:
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-and-death-penalty
I would like you to answer the question: “What if they were killed?”

Your claim was that: "most people condemned to death in the USA are blacks and people with mental disorders or destitute people."

According to the figures you provided, 56% of the people executed were white. I didn’t read the 190 page report from Amnesty International; you’ll have to dig those statistics on mental illness out yourself but I doubt that they will support your contention either.

Ender

 

[Brendan]

Boy, that is why I am in CAF, to hear different points of view. These 2 statements, I never expected to hear in 2011 from a Catholic…
God is unchanging but men are. God educated men through History of Salvation…

The reason the Moral Law is unchanging is because God is unchanging.

What offends God will always offend God, no matter how men change.

What God had once commanded, by defintion, will always be Good and in accord with the Moral Law.

So therefore, Gen 9:6 will always be a Good thing and in full accord with the Moral Law.

God choose to allow divorce, for example. God COMMANDED the death penalty in certain situations. Therefore, if used in the situations that God commanded, it will always and forever be a Just and Loving thing to do. Because God’s commands are, by definition, Just and Loving. Always.

Anything less is Moral Relativism, which the Church (and Pope Benedict) has spoken out against. That is the erronous belief that what is Moral, what offends God, varies by time, place or circumstance.

 

[Ender]

Look, 35% of black executed which is more than the average of back population. Yes, I said the majority and I was wrong. But there are more blacks killed than the nation’s black average.

Yes, as a percentage more blacks are executed than whites. Why is this wrong? Are you aware that blacks commit homicide at a much higher rate than whites? According to Bureau of Justice Statistics, in 2005 (the last year of the particular report) the black homicide rate was seven times higher than the rate for whites.

bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/homicide/race.cfm

And " I didn’t read "…but …“but I doubt that they will support your contention either”. You you do not read but you know.

I have no intention of reading a 190 page report looking for something you think is in it. If it says what you claim you should be able to point me to the page where it says it.

What I was trying to say is that the powerful have hte hands on how to defend themselves as the poor cannot. Death Penalty is unjust.

The death penalty would be unjust if it was applied in cases where it was not deserved. It is not unjust if it is not applied in all the cases where it is deserved. If Bill and Tom commit the same murder but only Bill is executed, his was the just punishment; it is Tom who escapes with the unjust sentence. Why is it better that both sentences be unjust?

So, I will give you a simple reading that you can dig yourself:
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-and-death-penalty
I would like you to answer the question: “What if they were killed?”

But they weren’t. Doesn’t that mean the system is working?

Ender

 

[dudleysharp]

Pfaffenhoffen:

Fact check or at least look at both sides.

Rebuttal to the death penalty racism claims
Dudley Sharp

1. “Death Penalty Sentencing: No Systemic Bias”
   prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/07/death-penalty-sentencing-no-systemic.html
2. “The Death Penalty and Racism The Times Have Changed”, Washington Post reporter Charles Lane, The American Interest, Nov/Dec 2010,
   the-american-interest.com/article.cfm?piece=901
3. SMOKE AND MIRRORS ON RACE AND THE DEATH PENALTY
   BY KENT SCHEIDEGGER
   cjlf.org/deathpenalty/DPenaltyRace.pdf
4. Race, Sentencing and the death penalty.
   prodeathpenalty.com/DP.html#C.Race

and

1. McCleskey V Kemp

Baldus’database and work in McCleskey was quite poor.

Read Federal District Court Judge Forrester’s rejection of Baldus’ database for McCleskey.

A more thorough review is provided by Joseph Katz, who did the methodological review of the Baldus database, which was rife with errors and problems. I have it, if you care to research.

In addition, SCOTUS totally misunderstood the math involved.

They ignorantly wrote: “defendants charged with killing white victims were 4.3 times as likely to receive a death sentence as defendants charged with killing blacks.”

Totally inaccurate.

It was by odds of 4.3 times, which can mean a differential as low as 2%, “t w o” percent, as opposed to the 330% differential represented by 4.3 times.

SCOTUS blew it big time on this.

These two articles, below, give a good explanation of the Baldus problems:

“The Math Behind Race, Crime and Sentencing Statistics”
By John Allen Paulos, Los Angeles Times, July 12, 1998
articles.latimes.com/1998/jul/12/opinion/op-2965

See “The Odds of Execution” within “How numbers are tricking you”, by Arnold Barnett, MIT Technology Review October, 1994
reocities.com/CapitolHill/4834/barnett.htm

Dudley Sharp

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

Let me preface this by saying that I’m not giving you my opinion of anything; all of my comments regarding the morality of capital punishment are based on what the Church teaches. Regarding “my” proportion theory: it isn’t my theory. It is what the Church teaches.

Legitimate public authority has the right and duty to inflict penalties commensurate with the gravity of the crime. (CCC 2266)
This is an objection to all punishment. Why do you think it is an argument against the very punishment that comes closest to being proportionate?
No punishment can restore a killer’s victim; are you suggesting that killers should not be punished because nothing can undo what they have done? If the greatest punishment is inadequate then what is the argument for imposing a lesser one?
The individual has the obligation to forgive but the State has the obligation to punish, nor should anyone believe that because they have been forgiven that the debt of their sins has been eliminated. Your forgiveness does not expiate someone elses sins.

It is a divinely revealed truth that sins bring punishments inflicted by God’s sanctity and justice. These must be expiated either on this earth through the sorrows, miseries and calamities of this life and above all through death,(3) or else in the life beyond through fire and torments or “purifying” punishments. (Paul VI)

Ender

“Commensurate” does not mean kill. If I would go for it, the the punishment for a serial killer would be everyday torture for the rest of his life. Do you agree with this? Death penalty is soft, he does not fell death as a cancer patient does. Ask the victims’ family opinion and they will tell you that they agree with my suggestion of torture. Your quoting of punishment in this world only says that torture is the best punishment.

If you look well into the doc I sent to you, you see the vast majority of criminologists agree that death penalty is not deterrent for anything.

 

[Ender]

“Commensurate” does not mean kill.

“Whoever sheds the blood of man by man shall his blood be shed” (Gn 9:6) That is, whoever murders is to be put to death. You may feel that commensurate does not mean kill but that would seem to be exactly what God has told us to do.

If I would go for it, the the punishment for a serial killer would be everyday torture for the rest of his life.

I have never understood the argument that because we cannot impose the penalty someone deserves we should therefore not impose the maximum penalty available. Is there some kind of reverse sliding scale involved where the more horrific the crimes become the less the perpetrators would be punished?

Your quoting of punishment in this world only says that torture is the best punishment.

Perhaps, but as the Church doesn’t permit it I am limited to what she does permit - execution.

If you look well into the doc I sent to you, you see the vast majority of criminologists agree that death penalty is not deterrent for anything.

First, I don’t believe this. The issue is surely open as to how effective a deterrent it is but every punishment deters some and normally the greater the punishment, the greater the deterrence. It is not credible to believe that the greatest punishment of all has no deterrent effect.

Second, this is irrelevant to the question of what is needed for justice. Deterrence, like protection, is a secondary objective and does not determine the proper level of punishment a crime deserves. This does, however, bring up the question of what it would mean to 2267 if it was determined that capital punishment had a significant deterrent effect. There is at least one study that claimed to find that each execution deterred 18 other murders. If that turned out to be true, wouldn’t it mean that more people should be executed since this would significantly increase the protection it offered society? Given that 2267 speaks only about protection, it is 2267 itself that would call for more executions if they provided a significant amount of deterrence.

What does it say about the moral calculation involved when a moral law could be completely reversed based on a statistical evaluation of crime data?

Ender

 

[dudleysharp]

“Commensurate” does not mean kill.

In the case of premeditated murder and Church teachings, a commensurate sanction does mean execution, precisely.

Look at the Catechism:

The biblical foundation for the death penalty is found in Genesis 9:5-6 and is based, specifically, upon “shedding blood”.

2260: “For your lifeblood I will surely require a reckoning… Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for God made man in his own image.” “This teaching remains necessary for all time.”

2261 Scripture specifies the prohibition contained in the fifth commandment: “Do not slay the innocent and the righteous.” The deliberate murder of an innocent person is gravely contrary to the dignity of the human being, to the golden rule, and to the holiness of the Creator. the law forbidding it is universally valid: it obliges each and everyone, always and everywhere.

“An ‘innocent’ person.”

2258 “Human life is sacred because from its beginning it involves the creative action of God and it remains for ever in a special relationship with the Creator, who is its sole end. God alone is the Lord of life from its beginning until its end: no one can under any circumstance claim for himself the right directly to destroy an innocent human being.”

“An ‘innocent’ human being”

Always and everywhere there is the prescribed sanction of "For your lifeblood I will surely require a reckoning… “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed.”, which, is confirmed in the Council of Kent, that execution represents paramount obedience to that commandment.

“Paramount obedience”

Saint (& Pope) Pius V, “The just use of (executions), far from involving the crime of murder, is an act of paramount obedience to this (Fifth) Commandment which prohibits murder.” “The Roman Catechism of the Council of Trent” (1566).

1. Pope Pius XII: “When it is a question of the execution of a man condemned to death it is then reserved to the public power to deprive the condemned of the benefit of life, in expiation of his fault, when already, by his fault, he has dispossessed himself of the right to live.” 9/14/52
2. Pope Innocent I" "It must be remembered that power was granted by God [to the magistrates], and to avenge crime by the sword was permitted. He who carries out this vengeance is God’s minister (Romans 13:1-4). Why should we condemn a practice that all hold to be permitted by God? We uphold, therefore, what has been observed until now, in order not to alter the discipline and so that we may not appear to act contrary to God’s authority. Innocent 1, Epist. 6, C. 3. 8, ad Exsuperium, Episcopum Tolosanum, 20 February 405, PL 20,495
3. “If the Pope were to deny that the death penalty could be an exercise of retributive justice, he would be overthrowing the tradition of two millenia of Catholic thought, denying the teaching of several previous popes, and contradicting the teaching of Scripture.” -Avery Cardinal Dulles

God/Jesus: ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and ‘Whoever curses father or mother must certainly be put to death.’ Matthew 15:4

This is a New Testament command, which references several of the same from the OT.

Jesus: "So Pilate said to (Jesus), “Do you not speak to me? Do you not know that I have power to release you and I have power to crucify you?” Jesus answered (him), “You would have no power over me if it had not been given to you from above.” John 19:10-11

Jesus: Now one of the criminals hanging there reviled Jesus, saying, “Are you not the Messiah? Save yourself and us.” The other, however, rebuking him, said in reply, “Have you no fear of God, for you are subject to the same condemnation? And indeed, we have been condemned justly, for the sentence we received corresponds to our crimes, but this man has done nothing criminal.” Then he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” (Jesus) replied to him, “Amen, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.” Luke 23: 39-43

It is not the nature of our deaths, but the state of salvation at the time of death which is most important.

Jesus: “You have heard the ancients were told, ˜YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT MURDER” and “Whoever commits murder shall be liable to the court”. But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever shall say to his brother, “Raca”, shall be guilty before the supreme court and whoever shall say, “You fool”, shall be guilty enough to go into fiery hell." Matthew 5:17-22.

Firery hell is a considerable more severe sanction than any earthly death.

The Holy Spirit: God, through the power and justice of the Holy Spirit, executed both Ananias and his wife, Saphira. Their crime? Lying to the Holy Spirit - to God - through Peter. Acts 5:1-11.

No trial, no appeals, just death on the spot.

God: “You shall not accept indemnity in place of the life of a murderer who deserves the death penalty; he must be put to death.” Numbers 35:31 (NAB) full context usccb.org/nab/bible/numbers/numbers35.htm

For some crimes, there is no mitigation from a death sentence.

 

[dudleysharp]

Pfaffenhoffen wrote: Jesus’ Law: Love your enemies, do goo to whomever does you bad, pray for those who persecute you. Boy, such a command !

God/Jesus: ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and ‘Whoever curses father or mother must certainly be put to death.’ Matthew 15:4

This is a New Testament command, which references several of the same from the OT.

Such a command!

Jesus: "So Pilate said to (Jesus), “Do you not speak to me? Do you not know that I have power to release you and I have power to crucify you?” Jesus answered (him), “You would have no power over me if it had not been given to you from above.” John 19:10-11

Jesus: Now one of the criminals hanging there reviled Jesus, saying, “Are you not the Messiah? Save yourself and us.” The other, however, rebuking him, said in reply, “Have you no fear of God, for you are subject to the same condemnation? And indeed, we have been condemned justly, for the sentence we received corresponds to our crimes, but this man has done nothing criminal.” Then he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” (Jesus) replied to him, “Amen, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.” Luke 23: 39-43

It is not the nature of our deaths, but the state of salvation at the time of death which is most important.

Jesus: “You have heard the ancients were told, ˜YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT MURDER” and “Whoever commits murder shall be liable to the court”. But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever shall say to his brother, “Raca”, shall be guilty before the supreme court and whoever shall say, “You fool”, shall be guilty enough to go into fiery hell." Matthew 5:17-22.

Firery hell is a considerable more severe sanction than any earthly death.

The Holy Spirit: God, through the power and justice of the Holy Spirit, executed both Ananias and his wife, Saphira. Their crime? Lying to the Holy Spirit - to God - through Peter. Acts 5:1-11.

No trial, no appeals, just death on the spot.

God: “You shall not accept indemnity in place of the life of a murderer who deserves the death penalty; he must be put to death.” Numbers 35:31 (NAB) full context usccb.org/nab/bible/numbers/numbers35.htm

For some crimes, there is no mitigation from a death sentence.

 

[dudleysharp]

Pfaffenhoffen wrote:

So, I will give you a simple reading that you can dig yourself:
deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-and-death-penalty
I would like you to answer the question: “What if they were killed?”

Answer: They weren’t.

Question, what if the 138 “innocents” removed from death row is a simple deception, meant to fool those who don’t fact check?

Hint, it is.

Question: What if innocents are more protected with the death penalty?

They are.

The Death Penalty: Saving Innocent Lives
Dudley Sharp

Innocence

Of all human endeavors that put innocents at risk, is there one with a better record of sparing innocent lives than the US death penalty? Unlikely.

1. “The Death Penalty: More Protection for Innocents”
   homicidesurvivors.com/2009/07/05/the-death-penalty-more-protection-for-innocents.aspx
2. Opponents in capital punishment have blood on their hands, Dennis Prager, 11/29/05, townhall.com/columnists/DennisPrager/2005/11/29/opponents_in_capital_punishment_have_blood_on_their_hands
3. “A Death Penalty Red Herring: The Inanity and Hypocrisy of Perfection”, Lester Jackson Ph.D.,
   tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=102909A

The false innocence claims by anti death penalty activists are legendary. Some examples:

1. “The Innocent Executed: Deception & Death Penalty Opponents”
   homicidesurvivors.com/2009/10/08/the-innocent-executed-deception–death-penalty-opponents–draft.aspx
2. The 130 (now 138) death row “innocents” scam
   homicidesurvivors.com/2009/03/04/fact-checking-issues-on-innocence-and-the-death-penalty.aspx
3. Sister Helen Prejean & the death penalty: A Critical Review"
   homicidesurvivors.com/2009/05/04/sister-helen-prejean–the-death-penalty-a-critical-review.aspx
4. “At the Death House Door” Can Rev. Carroll Pickett be trusted?"
   homicidesurvivors.com/2009/01/30/fact-checking-is-very-welcome.aspx
5. “Cameron Todd Willingham: Another Media Meltdown”, A Collection of Articles
   homicidesurvivors.com/categories/Cameron%20Todd%20Willingham.aspx

Deterrence

Of course the death penalty deters.

All prospects of a negative outcome deter some. It is a truism. The death penalty, the most severe of criminal sanctions, is the least likely of all criminal sanctions to violate that truism.

1. 27 recent studies finding for deterrence, Criminal Justice Legal Foundation
   cjlf.org/deathpenalty/DPDeterrence.htm
2. “Deterrence & the Death Penalty: A Reply to Radelet and Lacock”
   homicidesurvivors.com/2009/07/02/deterrence-and-the-death-penalty-a-reply-to-radelet-and-lacock.aspx

NOTE: Pfaffenhoffen, this survey, above, was one you mentioned. Read my review.

1. “Death Penalty, Deterrence & Murder Rates: Let’s be clear”
   prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/03/death-penalty-deterrence-murder-rates.html
2. This is out of date, but corrects a number of the misconceptions about deterrence.
   “Death Penalty and Deterrence”
   homicidesurvivors.com/2006/03/20/the-death-penalty-as-a-deterrent–confirmed–seven-recent-studies-updated-61204.aspx
3. “The Death Penalty: More Protection for Innocents”
   homicidesurvivors.com/2009/07/05/the-death-penalty-more-protection-for-innocents.aspx

 

[dudleysharp]

If you look well into the doc I sent to you, you see the vast majority of criminologists agree that death penalty is not deterrent for anything.

Sometimes, fact checking is crtitical. A review of the criminologists.

“Deterrence & the Death Penalty: A Reply to Radelet and Lacock”
homicidesurvivors.com/2009/07/02/deterrence-and-the-death-penalty-a-reply-to-radelet-and-lacock.aspx

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

The reason the Moral Law is unchanging is because God is unchanging.

What offends God will always offend God, no matter how men change.

What God had once commanded, by defintion, will always be Good and in accord with the Moral Law.

So therefore, Gen 9:6 will always be a Good thing and in full accord with the Moral Law.

God choose to allow divorce, for example. God COMMANDED the death penalty in certain situations. Therefore, if used in the situations that God commanded, it will always and forever be a Just and Loving thing to do. Because God’s commands are, by definition, Just and Loving. Always.

Anything less is Moral Relativism, which the Church (and Pope Benedict) has spoken out against. That is the erronous belief that what is Moral, what offends God, varies by time, place or circumstance.

I never saw any President of the USA ask the Pope if the condemnation of such or such person was an exceptional use of the “don’t kill” law. Why Texas executes so many and other states so little? Why is it that from alll civilized nations, the uSA is the only one to have the detach penalty? Is the USA the only one to define God’s law. I have seen many times the Pope interceding for death row prisoners and the USA making deaf ears. Is this the Moral Law, no matter what? Interpretation by the USA is right by the rest of the worls is wrong? The Pope is wrong the USA is right?

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

Sometimes, fact checking is crtitical. A review of the criminologists.

“Deterrence & the Death Penalty: A Reply to Radelet and Lacock”
homicidesurvivors.com/2009/07/02/deterrence-and-the-death-penalty-a-reply-to-radelet-and-lacock.aspx

Did you read the Text?

Within this Survey, the response to question 12 finds that 100% (or 77) of the criminologists agree that the death penalty may deter some

. The highlight is mine. Of course, SOME.

These studies find executions deter from 4-28 murders per execution.

Is this a serious study? 4-28??? Exaggerating 4-400 ! No statics specialist would accept that margin…

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

Yes, as a percentage more blacks are executed than whites. Why is this wrong? Are you aware that blacks commit homicide at a much higher rate than whites? According to Bureau of Justice Statistics, in 2005 (the last year of the particular report) the black homicide rate was seven times higher than the rate for whites.

bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/homicide/race.cfm
I have no intention of reading a 190 page report looking for something you think is in it. If it says what you claim you should be able to point me to the page where it says it.
The death penalty would be unjust if it was applied in cases where it was not deserved. It is not unjust if it is not applied in all the cases where it is deserved. If Bill and Tom commit the same murder but only Bill is executed, his was the just punishment; it is Tom who escapes with the unjust sentence. Why is it better that both sentences be unjust?
But they weren’t. Doesn’t that mean the system is working?

Ender

As you well aware, blacks came to America as slaves. They were owned by whites, tortured, killed without judgement, deported, had not civil rights at all. My father still talked to me that in America there were facilities for whites and for blacks and I said to may father that that could not be possible, and that he was inventing. Later on, I discovered that my father was right. There were groups of whites,like the kKK, whose sport was to massacre the blacks, as if there were not enough massacres. It was a coward stance for they massacred defenseless people they did not go against the USA Army.

No other ethnic group was treated like that. (Let us remember that the present President did not come from that background and that he is mixed, not pure black). They were taught on how to behave in America. Now, as they do what they were taught to do, as they treat whites as they were treated (with 100000% much less violence) instead of recuperating them and teaching them and counseling them. let’s kill them. Easier but not right.

What do you say to this (click here)

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

Yes, as a percentage more blacks are executed than whites. Why is this wrong? Are you aware that blacks commit homicide at a much higher rate than whites? According to Bureau of Justice Statistics, in 2005 (the last year of the particular report) the black homicide rate was seven times higher than the rate for whites.

bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/homicide/race.cfm
I have no intention of reading a 190 page report looking for something you think is in it. If it says what you claim you should be able to point me to the page where it says it.
The death penalty would be unjust if it was applied in cases where it was not deserved. It is not unjust if it is not applied in all the cases where it is deserved. If Bill and Tom commit the same murder but only Bill is executed, his was the just punishment; it is Tom who escapes with the unjust sentence. Why is it better that both sentences be unjust?
But they weren’t. Doesn’t that mean the system is working?

Ender

1. To put somebody on the death row and free him is the sign that the System is working? I do not want that system for my country. No European Country has that system (well, I know that Atlantic separate us). So, the system is working. so, according to your opinion, the system discovered all innocent people (how do you prove when courts make such gross mistakes?) and all condemned are guilty (100% sure, you?). I tell you, if you say Yes, you must be a person who really believes in the System. But your answer is the common answer (it is not new) when defending a system full of holes (at least we brought him up from the hole !!!)

 

[Ender]

Pfaffenhoffen:

Now, as they do what they were taught to do, as they treat whites as they were treated

Actually, the majority of black murders are of other blacks.

1. To put somebody on the death row and free him is the sign that the System is working?

To not execute the innocent is a sign that the system is working.

So, the system is working. so, according to your opinion, the system discovered all innocent people (how do you prove when courts make such gross mistakes?) and all condemned are guilty (100% sure, you?).

No, I suspect it has not been 100% accurate, but I am quite sure that if there have been people executed for crimes they didn’t commit that number is exceedingly small. As you admitted yourself, executions do deter some from murdering so we have the choice of supporting executions, knowing we risk executing an innocent person, or not executing anyone and knowing for a fact that this will lead to the deaths of innocent people both because of the lack of deterrence and repeat killings by those given the opportunity to do so.

I tell you, if you say Yes, you must be a person who really believes in the System. But your answer is the common answer (it is not new) when defending a system full of holes (at least we brought him up from the hole !!!)

The system is not as full of holes as you imagine but even if it was, we still have to recognize that neither choice (execute or not execute) fully protects the innocent from wrongful death, but executions surely protect better.

Ender

 

[Brendan]

I never saw any President of the USA ask the Pope if the condemnation of such or such person was an exceptional use of the “don’t kill” law.

No Head of State would need to ask the Pope for an exception to the 5th Commandment, the Council of Trent already provided one.

On the 5th Commandment

Execution Of Criminals

Another kind of lawful slaying belongs to the civil authorities, to whom is entrusted power of life and death, by the legal and judicious exercise of which they punish the guilty and protect the innocent. The just use of this power, far from involving the crime of murder, is an act of paramount obedience to this Commandment which prohibits murder.

The end of the Commandment is the preservation and security of human life. Now the punishments inflicted by the civil authority, which is the legitimate avenger of crime, naturally tend to this end, since they give security to life by repressing outrage and violence. Hence these words of David: In the morning I put to death all the wicked of the land, that I might cut off all the workers of iniquity from the city of the Lord. Ps 101:8

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

Actually, the majority of black murders are of other blacks.
To not execute the innocent is a sign that the system is working.
No, I suspect it has not been 100% accurate, but I am quite sure that if there have been people executed for crimes they didn’t commit that number is exceedingly small. As you admitted yourself, executions do deter some from murdering so we have the choice of supporting executions, knowing we risk executing an innocent person, or not executing anyone and knowing for a fact that this will lead to the deaths of innocent people both because of the lack of deterrence and repeat killings by those given the opportunity to do so.
The system is not as full of holes as you imagine but even if it was, we still have to recognize that neither choice (execute or not execute) fully protects the innocent from wrongful death, but executions surely protect better.

Ender

1. Blacks kill Blacks, that is “the system” whites taught.
2. I register that you ready to kill innocents to keep the System functioning. Did you like to be put to death so that the System would go on working?
3. Rather, does not function. How can you explain that Europe does not have death penalty and has got a lower criminal rate?
4. How to explain that Hong-Kong (just an example), has the same density of population of New York yes much lower crime rate?
5. How to explain that you do not dare to erase from the Constitutions the amendment that allows people to bear arms? In the Pilgrims’ time, ok. But … now? when you have the most powerful army in the world?

 

[Ender]

1. Blacks kill Blacks, that is “the system” whites taught.

It would be no less reasonable to say blacks kill because little green men control them. If your position depends on claims as outlandish as this one even you should be able to see its weakness.

1. I register that you ready to kill innocents to keep the System functioning. Did you like to be put to death so that the System would go on working?

I simply pointed out that, while innocent people may die through wrongful execution, a lot more innocent people will surely die at the hands of killers who we fail to execute. There is no perfect solution but there is a better one, and the better one includes capital punishment.

1. Rather, does not function. How can you explain that Europe does not have death penalty and has got a lower criminal rate?

I don’t know Continental crime statistics. If Dudley is still on this thread he can answer this. I do believe, however, that the statistics are not as you presume, at least for England.

1. How to explain that Hong-Kong (just an example), has the same density of population of New York yes much lower crime rate?

But lower in New York than in London. Dudley?

1. How to explain that you do not dare to erase from the Constitutions the amendment that allows people to bear arms? In the Pilgrims’ time, ok. But … now? when you have the most powerful army in the world?

Irrelevant. In fact, all of your points are irrelevant to the question of the morality of using capital punishment.

Ender

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

It would be no less reasonable to say blacks kill because little green men control them. If your position depends on claims as outlandish as this one even you should be able to see its weakness.
I simply pointed out that, while innocent people may die through wrongful execution, a lot more innocent people will surely die at the hands of killers who we fail to execute. There is no perfect solution but there is a better one, and the better one includes capital punishment.
I don’t know Continental crime statistics. If Dudley is still on this thread he can answer this. I do believe, however, that the statistics are not as you presume, at least for England.
But lower in New York than in London. Dudley?
Irrelevant. In fact, all of your points are irrelevant to the question of the morality of using capital punishment.

Ender

1. It is easy to make statements and ask the others to investigate… I investigated …
   Usa-3465; UK- 2034; Austria - 1677; South Africa - 1609; Sweden - 1123; Belgium - 1006 (…) France- 504; (;:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::; Oman- 0.91; Mauritania- 0.76; Finland- 0.71; (…); Senegal - 0.33; (…) Iceland - 0.00. Now I understand why you compared with UK (where you, USA, came from) and not with Iceland, which, up to now, belongs to the Planet Earth.
2. To say that whites did not teach anything to the black through the sheer violence, torture, murder of slavery is not Christian. So, blacks were brought into slavery by “little green men”? You want to forget what whites did to blacks. John Paul II asked for forgiveness. And the United Nations has a day of remembrance of Slavery. So you know which days is it? The Unesco has a program in full speed on remembrance of Slavery. Do you know it? What are its Objectives? What is its name? No wonder that the USA, up to a few years ago, did not belong to UNESCO. Funny, no?
3. You are speaking to a non-native English speaker. Dudley? what is that?
   4.So killing innocent people to avoid other murders is right? Ends justify means? Catholic doctrine?

Irrelevant. In fact, all of your points are irrelevant to the question of the morality of using capital punishment.

It is funny your conclusion. Very funny the way you treat the “other”. Very, very funny… no comments…

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

No Head of State would need to ask the Pope for an exception to the 5th Commandment, the Council of Trent already provided one.

On the 5th Commandment

In the USA, there are problem with these words of the Council of Trent:

1. 
   *]the legal and judicious exercise
   *]The just use of this power
   
   The system is not “judicious” I do not see the “The** just **use of this power”. Take OJ Simpson. Take the dozens of cases where prisoners in death row are free.
   
   Moreover, in Europe, and I do not talk about other countries which have extremely low crime rates, the same end (the safey of persons) is got without death penalty, don’t you see’.
   
   I am with the Council of Trent not with the Death Penalty in the USA. Boy, you can change!!! If you are a technologically advanced country cant you find a way to correct people without killing them ???