Death penalty

[Pfaffenhoffen]

That last line is argumentum ad hominem. That is a fallacy. I assume it means you are conceding you have lost the argument.

The reason our crime rate is so much higher is that our average age is 35.2—until recently 32.3. The average age in Germany is 42.6.

But while we’re at it, here are the Interpol crime statistics for four countries, from 2001, per 100 000 population:
4161 – US
7736 – Germany
6941 – France
9927 – England and Wales

Hint: ours is the lowest one.

Now admittedly that is the total crime rate, not the violent crime rate, but here’s another interesting statistic: the murder rate in the US is now 5.5 per 100 000. In 1980 it was 10.2. What changed? Partly, our population got older on average.

But we also cracked down on crime, several states that had abolished the death-penalty bringing it back. In addition, several states legalized concealed-carry firearms licenses, which drop the rate for all violent crime by 2% every year that they’re legal.

The statistics do not support your position.

That is the last time I watch statistics. Only people who only know the USA can say that America is not a violent society. Anyone who has visited France and the States believes that France has a higher murder level than the States? That is the way statistics are done. You can have them for all tastes and distort them to whatever purpose you want. Funny that the statistics mentioned here do not say that the USA are the NUMBER ONE in the world with the lowest crime rate in the world. Americans prize so much be NUMBER ONE, why is it so that there are no wish to be NUMBER ONE here, but the wish not to be the worst or one of the worst?

But let me give 2 statistics: one and two.

 

[Ender]

1. To say that whites did not teach anything to the black through the sheer violence, torture, murder of slavery is not Christian.

What is not Christian is to fail to hold people accountable for their own behavior. Blacks who commit crimes today are responsible for their actions, the responsibility does not lie with what whites did 150 years ago. The black murder rate is so out of proportion it skews the rate for the entire nation; without them our rates would be lower than those of Germany and France.

1. You are speaking to a non-native English speaker. Dudley? what is that?

Dudley Sharp is a frequent contributor in death penalty discussions and he has done the research into statistics of this type. I generally don’t bother with them.

4.So killing innocent people to avoid other murders is right? Ends justify means? Catholic doctrine?

We all face the same choice: the possibility of few innocent deaths because the wrong people were executed or the certainty of numerous innocent deaths because the right people were not executed. I no more support the execution of the innocent than you support their murder, but no choice is free. It’s just that your approach will result in more innocent deaths.

Only people who only know the USA can say that America is not a violent society.

Murder rates in the US are higher than in Europe. The murder rate in New York is higher than in London … and it has been for 200 years, including the decade in the early 1900’s when New York had serious gun control laws and London had none.

Crime rates, however, are another thing (and are in fact very difficult to compare because countries compile statistics very differently). The crime rates in England, however, are higher than those in the US and those for London are higher than in New York.

But the reason I generally ignore these data is that they aren’t relevant to the question of the morality of capital punishment.

Ender

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

What is not Christian is to fail to hold people accountable for their own behavior. Blacks who commit crimes today are responsible for their actions, the responsibility does not lie with what whites did 150 years ago. The black murder rate is so out of proportion it skews the rate for the entire nation; without them our rates would be lower than those of Germany and France.
Dudley Sharp is a frequent contributor in death penalty discussions and he has done the research into statistics of this type. I generally don’t bother with them.
We all face the same choice: the possibility of few innocent deaths because the wrong people were executed or the certainty of numerous innocent deaths because the right people were not executed. I no more support the execution of the innocent than you support their murder, but no choice is free. It’s just that your approach will result in more innocent deaths.
Murder rates in the US are higher than in Europe. The murder rate in New York is higher than in London … and it has been for 200 years, including the decade in the early 1900’s when New York had serious gun control laws and London had none.

Crime rates, however, are another thing (and are in fact very difficult to compare because countries compile statistics very differently). The crime rates in England, however, are higher than those in the US and those for London are higher than in New York.

But the reason I generally ignore these data is that they aren’t relevant to the question of the morality of capital punishment.

Ender

So, for you, history does not matter.
25% of MIT admissions are of Chinese origin. History and Confucianism has nothing to do with it? Why is the US Government studying these patterns to improve the US education system? According to you, it is the actual Chinese students who are good and their education and tradition does not matter.
So, up to you, 200 years of slavery did not leave a single spot of influence in today’s black, in today’s black generation, right?
Why is it so that the the only comparison you do is USA-UK, London and New York? There are 200 nations on earth…
I would like to repeat:do you think that, compared to the average civilization in this Earth, the USA** IS NOT **a violent society?
I notice that you do not like statistics. I do, though reading them is more important that quoting them.

 

[Lui]

So, up to you, 200 years of slavery did not leave a single spot of influence in today’s black, in today’s black generation, right?
.

Not to mention 200 years of slavery PLUS another 100+ years where Blacks didn’t have equal rights. It reminds me of Jesse Owens who won 4 Gold medals at the 1936 Olympics:

"Owens was allowed to travel with and stay in the same hotels as whites, while at the time blacks in many parts of the United States were denied equal rights. After a New York City ticker-tape parade of Fifth Avenue in his honor, Owens had to ride the freight elevator at the Waldorf-Astoria to reach the reception honoring him.

Owens said, “Hitler didn’t snub me – it was FDR who snubbed me. The president didn’t even send me a telegram.” On the other hand, Hitler sent Owens a commemorative inscribed cabinet photograph of himself. Jesse Owens was never invited to the White House nor were honors bestowed upon him by president Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR) or his successor Harry S. Truman during their terms. In 1955, President Dwight D. Eisenhower honored Owens by naming him an “Ambassador of Sports.”

How did certain white Christians justify that Blacks had to sit in the back of the bus and use separate toilets in certain States? Did they quote the Old Testament too? Just curious…

 

[Rock_Happy]

We know from DNA analysis that at least 10% of convicts on death row are innocent. The response of some states to this finding has been to limit appeals and DNA analysis. The death penalty if final, when carried out. A good friend of my family was convicted of murdering his wife and served seven years in prison before the actual murderer was somehow discovered.

We know that it is less expensive to incarcerate a person for life than the keep him or her on death row and go through the lengthy appeals process, which in most states is mandated by law.

My opinion is that it is not society’s duty to exact revenge, but to remove the danger from society. Therefore, I favor life imprisonment.

 

[Ender]

We know from DNA analysis that at least 10% of convicts on death row are innocent.

This simply isn’t true and I challenge you to supply the statistics to support this claim.

The response of some states to this finding has been to limit appeals and DNA analysis.

This isn’t true either.

My opinion is that it is not society’s duty to exact revenge, but to remove the danger from society.

The Church’s doctrine is that it is the State’s duty to exact revenge … that is, to punish the guilty for their crimes. Removing the danger is not the primary objective of punishment - that would be justice. If in fact we weren’t concerned with justice we would surely lock up more people than we do now. This would be a safer country if we could lock up those who are a danger to us without having to worry about proving their guilt - but it is justice that forbids what safety would have us do.

Ender

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

We know from DNA analysis that at least 10% of convicts on death row are innocent. The response of some states to this finding has been to limit appeals and DNA analysis. The death penalty if final, when carried out. A good friend of my family was convicted of murdering his wife and served seven years in prison before the actual murderer was somehow discovered.

We know that it is less expensive to incarcerate a person for life than the keep him or her on death row and go through the lengthy appeals process, which in most states is mandated by law.

My opinion is that it is not society’s duty to exact revenge, but to remove the danger from society. Therefore, I favor life imprisonment.

I favor correction. Not all cases have 100% success, but I have seen a program that was done in the States where the prisoners could have their prison sentence reduced if they went through a correction program done by … army sergeants.

You guess. I was tough, very tough on them. But I guess it was as tough as in the army itself.There was an 80% success. That is not bad.

The statistics show that the main criminal are MEN, without a Father figure and with a protective mother, a super-stressed and super-tired mother who could not do it all. Mothers cannot be a Father figure for sheer impossibility.

Statistics showed that in the maximum security prison in England, no prisoner had a Father.

A Father does not need to beat or raise His voice. Just need to be present sometimes and tell the boy his limits and show him that the limits are not to be trespassed. The boy understands the language of me male alpha.

When there is no father or grandfather or uncle or some other father figure, like a male teacher or a priest, the boy thinks that in life there are no limits, so he gets puzzled why the society punishes him for doing such harmless thing as stealing something from others. The question is that for that kind of boy there are no “others”, it is all me…

That Program made me realize that without spending one cent (sergeants are paid by the State) you can do wonders.

As for the remaining, there are drugs and for a few, prison as the last resort … till it is found another better solution.

 

[Joe_5859]

I heard it said once (and I don’t have links to any statistical data) that the number of those executed during the Inquisition (averaged out annually) was roughly equal to the number of those given the death penalty in the state of Texas.

It is interesting to consider that history might look on the U.S. with regards to the death penalty in the same light that many view the Catholic Church regarding the Inquisition.

 

[Ender]

It is interesting to consider that history might look on the U.S. with regards to the death penalty in the same light that many view the Catholic Church regarding the Inquisition.

The question is not whether capital punishment is used - since the Church recognizes that States have that right - but whether it is used justly. Whatever history may come to believe, the Church’s stance on capital punishment will not change.

Ender

 

[MillTownCath]

If you are pro-death penalty, you are not pro-life.

priestsforlife.org/magisterium/bishops/penaltyofdeath.pdf

 

[Ender]

If you are pro-death penalty, you are not pro-life.

There are several things to note about the referenced article. The first is that it was issued by the USCCB, which admittedly doesn’t make it wrong but it does not mean it is necessarily right. No one should confuse the opinions expressed there with Church doctrine.

More significantly, however, is that it contains this statement:

The death penalty arouses deep passions and strong convictions. People of goodwill disagree. In these reflections, we offer neither judgment nor condemnation but instead encourage engagement and dialogue, which we hope may lead to re-examination and conversion. Our goal is not just to proclaim a position, but to persuade Catholics and others to join us in working to end the use of the death penalty.

People of goodwill disagree about the use of the death penalty and the authors “offer neither judgment nor condemnation” for those who disagree with their opinion. You would have to imagine that one of the best ways to convince (at least Catholics) that the death penalty is wrong would be to proclaim it to be immoral, but they didn’t do that … which is not all that surprising inasmuch as the Church has always accepted its use.

You may believe that one cannot support the death penalty and still be pro-life but the Church has never held such a position.

Ender

 

[Joe_5859]

The question is not whether capital punishment is used - since the Church recognizes that States have that right - but whether it is used justly. Whatever history may come to believe, the Church’s stance on capital punishment will not change.

Ender

True enough. I wasn’t trying to use that as an argument. It was just an interesting thought that popped into my head.

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

Not to mention 200 years of slavery PLUS another 100+ years where Blacks didn’t have equal rights. It reminds me of Jesse Owens who won 4 Gold medals at the 1936 Olympics:

"Owens was allowed to travel with and stay in the same hotels as whites, while at the time blacks in many parts of the United States were denied equal rights. After a New York City ticker-tape parade of Fifth Avenue in his honor, Owens had to ride the freight elevator at the Waldorf-Astoria to reach the reception honoring him.

Owens said, “Hitler didn’t snub me – it was FDR who snubbed me. The president didn’t even send me a telegram.” On the other hand, Hitler sent Owens a commemorative inscribed cabinet photograph of himself. Jesse Owens was never invited to the White House nor were honors bestowed upon him by president Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR) or his successor Harry S. Truman during their terms. In 1955, President Dwight D. Eisenhower honored Owens by naming him an “Ambassador of Sports.”

How did certain white Christians justify that Blacks had to sit in the back of the bus and use separate toilets in certain States? Did they quote the Old Testament too? Just curious…

Thanks for the details. I thought Bus Segregation was all over the USA.

 

[Brendan]

If you are pro-death penalty, you are not pro-life.

priestsforlife.org/magisterium/bishops/penaltyofdeath.pdf

‘Even in the question of the execution of a man condemned to death, the State does not dispose of the individual’s right to life. It then falls to the public authority to deprive the condemned man of the good of life in expiation of his fault after he, by his crime, has already deprived himself of his right to life.’

-Pope Pius XII in an address to the Medical Community, 1952

 

[Wardog]

The death penalty is a deterrent to crime. The problem is the uncertainty in identifying the correct culprit. Unless there is absolute, undeniable, evidence to convict, we should err on the side of caution. Americans used to believe that it was preferable to let 99 go free rather than execute a single innocent person.

 

[dwut]

Hi there, Speaking of death prediction, I find it really odd that one of the on-line death prediction services showed me the same death date that I was foretold in my dream about a year ago. yourdeathdate.info/1/index.html - I can’t explain this coincidence in any other way except that there must be some kind of magic involved here.

 

[sw85]

For me the death penalty is a form of murder. There is no reason to kill the person. He can be kept in prison for life. What specific reason is there to kill the person?

That’s rather nonsensical. Murder is by definition illegal, unjust, and illegitimate. If the state (a legitimate authority), in accordance with the law, enacts justice by putting certain classes of criminals to the sword, it is necessarily legal, just, and legitimate.

Personally, I agree that the death penalty should not be used very often. It should be confined to those situations where there is no adequately available way to protect society from the criminal, i.e., where life imprisonment is, for whatever reason, not feasible. But that doesn’t mean the death penalty is *per se *illegitimate, much less “murder.”

I didn’t intend to compare the two directly. I just noticed that people often speak of abortion issues but never about the death penalty. As a Catholic it is not up to us to decide who deserves punishment of death and who doesn’t, is my view.

Well, if they speak more about abortion, perhaps that’s because the scope and magnitude of the sin is much greater. A million babies are slaughtered annually. This is contrast to (the last few years) fewer than 50 extremely violent criminals being put to death annually.

Of course it is not “up to us” to decide who deserves the death penalty; that determination is made by natural law considerations and the word of God. Who is deserving of it has already been objectively determined for us; we only make the determination of who falls into that narrow class of people.

No, there is not any good reason to use the death penalty. Why is the crime rate in many countries that doesn’t have the death penalty much lower than in the USA who has the death penalty with your logic?
I suspect Catholic faith is being misused to support the Republicans.

What are you suggesting, exactly? That the death penalty promotes crime, or simply that it is an inefficient deterrent? Demographic and cultural differences make difficult any comparison between us and other countries; yes, we have a higher crime rate, but we also have a more diverse population across a greater range of climates and socioeconomic statuses. That we have a higher crime rate with the death penalty does not mean that we wouldn’t have an even higher one without it.

For what it’s worth, I agree that the death penalty is an ineffective deterrent – but that doesn’t mean it’s necessarily illegitimate.

Also, your attribution of bad faith is highly uncharitable; you should be more mindful of your duties to others in the future.

Gimme a break! That’s the weakest argument in history.

It really isn’t, though – if the death penalty is not a legitimate punishment for sins, how is it that Christ took upon himself all the punishments for sin that accrued to the whole of mankind?

I’m pretty sure that it means more or less that it is immoral but I guess there will always be loopholes to justify certain actions, especially for political reasons…

Really, now, you owe your brothers and sisters in the faith more charity than that.

I don’t think the Church considers Capital Punishment as something that should be embraced by Catholics. I personally find it disturbing if certain Catholics are actually pro Capital Punishment. Don’t get me wrong, I can understand it in many situations like in the case of that right wing maniac in Norway who murdered about 90 people recently and showed no feeling of regret after that.
But there are also cases where a person might have killed someone when he was 18. He sits on death row for 30 years, regrets and repents his crime, is basically a different person but still gets executed. It also includes the many people who are executed and are actually innocent.

Obviously the Church does not want people “embracing” capital punishment; as has been said the Church teaches that it should be used rarely, if at all. All that’s being said is that it is not *per se *illegitimate.

No, my opinion as a Christian and a human being is that Capital Punishment is always morally wrong.

Well, your opinion is wrong. It is belied by scriptures, by Catechism, by the word of God Himself, and by the natural law. You are, of course, free to continue believing it, in the loose sense that civil society affords you the right to believe nonsense, but I’d hope the fact that you are asserting something without any rational or theological basis would make you more charitable in your dealings with those who disagree.

That happens when people put politics above their faith and even justify certain politics with their faith.

I’m sure the Catholic Church and teachings are against the death penalty, except as you pointed out in rare extreme cases. I find it wrong and suspicious if a Catholic actually embraces and applauds the death penalty.

You keep saying stuff along these lines even though it’s quite clear that YOU are the one speaking contrary to the scriptures, Catechism, the word of God, and the natural law when you say things like “the death penalty is always wrong.”

I actually didn’t ask what the Church says about death penalty anyway. I asked the personal opinions of a Catholic. I think that killing is wrong if there is an option like giving a life-sentence in prison. This is my argument against capital punishment.

Well, obviously that’s the case, but just a few moments before this you said that the death penalty is “ALWAYS” wrong. Either it’s always wrong or it’s not – and if it’s not then would you please stop criticizing those who have been saying, all along, that it’s not always wrong?

 

[jolka444]

Hi there, Speaking of death prediction, I find it really odd that one of the on-line death prediction services showed me the same death date that I was foretold in my dream about a year ago. yourdeathdate.info/1/index.html - I can’t explain this coincidence in any other way except that there must be some kind of magic involved here.

 

[Ender]

If the state (a legitimate authority), in accordance with the law, enacts justice by putting certain classes of criminals to the sword, it is necessarily legal, just, and legitimate.

I agree with this … but what is it that makes an execution a just punishment?

Personally, I agree that the death penalty should not be used very often. It should be confined to those situations where there is no adequately available way to protect society from the criminal, i.e., where life imprisonment is, for whatever reason, not feasible.

Why should it be limited by its need for protection when protection is only a secondary objective of punishment? Shouldn’t its use be determined by the primary objective?

Well, your opinion is wrong. It is belied by scriptures, by Catechism, by the word of God Himself, and by the natural law.

True enough - and what do scripture and the word of God say about the use of capital punishment? I’m sure you know there is nothing that touches on the question of protection.

Nicely structured argument, by the way.

Ender