Support the Death Penalty?

[Ray_Scheel]

YES. and in my personal knowledge of the prison system through my work, this is a common punishment for all sorts of offenses.
I repeat:*** There is no need for a civilized society to condone state killing.***

I know of a case wher in inmate in solitary managed to snag teh arm of a volunteer chaplain, pull it into his cell, and cut halfway through it with a blade taken from a shaving razor before a riot team was able to get the door open and subdue the inmate. How do we safely store inmates like those for decades in a manner consistent with the long established and very consistent church teaching on how prisoners should be treated in a way that would not bankrupt the governments concerned?

 

[Ender]

Consult your dictionaries.

I consulted Aquinas instead.

Justice II/II 58-1

• “justice … is indicated in the words ‘Rendering to each one his right’.”

Retribution I/I 21-3

• “Now, retribution according to justice is rendered to a man, by reason of his having done something to another’s advantage or hurt.”

Evil I/I 48-5

• “Evil … is the privation of good”

Vengeance II/II 108-1

• Vengeance consists in the infliction of a penal evil on one who has sinned.
• For it is written of the earthly prince that “he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.”

This all seems pretty straightforward:

• justice consists of giving each person what he has earned by his actions;
• retribution is either a reward or a punishment and justice requires that it be proportional to the action;
• all punishments are evil in the sense that they are a privation of good;
• vengeance is specifically a penal evil which the state has the obligation of inflicting.

Any questions?

Ender:

forgiveness does not eliminate the need for punishment.

That is a perverse argument. Forgiveness cancels the debt. Punishment is the price of the debt. If the debt it cancelled, then the price is set to zero.

How do you explain the concept of purgatory?

Ender

 

[melensdad]

How do we safely store inmates . . . in a way that would not bankrupt the governments concerned?

I am under the impression (been told this many times, never checked a source) that the “appeals” process costs more than the prison costs to house a prisoner for life.

 

[Ender]

I am under the impression (been told this many times, never checked a source) that the “appeals” process costs more than the prison costs to house a prisoner for life.

This is a prudential question and while it may or may not be true, either way it should not be the deciding question. The overriding issue is justice, not cost. The question that must be answered is: what does justice require?

Ender

 

[Ray_Scheel]

I am under the impression (been told this many times, never checked a source) that the “appeals” process costs more than the prison costs to house a prisoner for life.

Yes, it does, but then the level of storage for DR inmates is also considerably tighter than that of the average population. Having to store them for 40-60 years rather than ~10 would significantly increase the cost, and doing so in a way that met the Church norms for the general treatment of inmates (recreation time, etc) within that setting would add on yet more costs.

 

[melensdad]

This is a prudential question and while it may or may not be true, either way it should not be the deciding question. The overriding issue is justice, not cost. The question that must be answered is: what does justice require?

Ender

Well if we are asking what justice requires, and if one of the requisits is that society should not be financially bankrupted by its system of justice, then we must figure out how much justice costs society and if we can afford that version of justice. For if we cannot afford that version of justice, then it clearly is unjust to the society and is consequently overly just to the criminal.

Which is the reason I brought up the point about housing a criminal for life versus the cost of carrying out a death sentence through the whole appeals process.

 

[Ender]

Well if we are asking what justice requires, and if one of the requisits is that society should not be financially bankrupted by its system of justice, then we must figure out how much justice costs society and if we can afford that version of justice.

This is a prudential question. I recognize there are competing claims to justice and that costs need to be rationally determined but I am primarily interested in the moral issues involved: does justice require the execution of individuals convicted of particularly heinous crimes? I believe that it does.

Ender

 

[rpp]

It is not just to bankrupt society to “store” violent murderers for the rest of their natural life. That, however, is not the case in the USA. However, the impression that many have (I have no personal experience, thankfully) is that prison life is both too pleasant and too dangerous.

Pleasant because many inmates seem to have luxuries that many could not afford on the outside, TVs in their cells, computers with web access and email. Some inmates have actually started web-based business (okay, making an honest dollar is good, but from prison?) while other have committed internet fraud while incarcerated (still victimizing people while incarcerated is not protecting society!). In fact, inmates have many rights and filing rights-violation lawsuits is a cottage industry for many bored inmates.

Dangerous because there is the constant threat of violence in prisons.

I think the entire penal system in the USA needs to be re-evaluated carefully. Prison should be unpleasant, but not dangerous. Discipline should be firm and strict, but not brutal. The boot camp programs seem to work out pretty well and seem to have a lower recidivism rate and less inmate violence. Not to mention, shorter terms. Changing the laws and constitution to make that the default method of punishment may be a step in the right direction.

But what to do with people who commit heinous crimes? Crimes like premeditated murder or very serious treason? A boot camp setting is inappropriate as they will never be released. Is execution a reasonable punishment for some?

And what about very serious crimes, such as violent rape and child molestation? I do not think our current penal system handles these people very well at all.

 

[Teeliumtrozzle]

Where do you get that idea, not from the Church!!!

Do you believe that the 10 Commandments are now no longer applicable, because they too are part of the Old Testament?

We no longer have to obey the ceremonial law of the OT ( the concept of being ‘unclean’ for example) , but the Moral Law is unchanging.

Christ Himself said He did not come to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it.

God does not change His Mind on what His Commandments are.

I suppose your right.I just dont like the death penalty though.Jesus Himself, when he was on earth, would never have killed anyone.He always forgave people and gave them a second chance(like with Zaccheaus).I think we should follow his example in that.Still, if the government decides to kill people when they deserve it, I suppose it is justice, and thats fine.

 

[SoCalRC]

Considering the numbers I cited came from what one of the most reputable and best know organization involved in pointing out the errors made in capital punishment cases, that the numbers you claimed were nearly 10x higher and un-sourced suggests to me that they were simply made up.

No, the difference is that the source you cited is talking about cases since the death penalty was reinstated. The 66 was from UCLA and included cases from earlier in the 20th century. That number is harder to use for a specific risk assessment because witnesses die, DNA evidence degrades, etc. So, I used yours.

Further, considering that the number of executions since 1976 is 1096, the instance of cases where significant doubts were raised after execution is only .7%, which is again a 10x difference between what you implied versus what has actually happened.

Read your source - one number is relatively objective (number executed), the other is unknowable, but is citing about 10 cases as highly probable. I don’t need to inflate the numbers, to me .1% (one out of every 1000 executed) would be concerning. Arguing rather it is 7x (the lowest possible extrapolation from the numbers you provided) or 10x that does not sway me.

As inmates awaiting the death sentence, they are subject to a much tighter level of control that would be acceptable for general population inmates. Also, the number of years on death row is dropping quickly as the backlog is finally clearing following the reimplementation of the death penalty after it had been suspended by the courts. In inmate spending 6-10 years on death row is significantly less risk to those exposed to that inmate than one spending 40-60 years in confinement.

Again, you seem to be completely missing the point.

1. We have many violent felons in whose cases we do not persue the death penalty (standards of evidence, circumstances, etc.) This creates a violent prison population which is huge in comparison to the total number of capital cases.
2. When we pursue the death penalty we often get life sentences instead. That is, a criminal conviction is returned, but the jury does not believe that the standard for capital punishment has been met. If we include appeals and commutations, the number is somewhere between 30 and 40%.

So crowded prisons full of violent prisoners with “nothing to lose” is inevitable. So the question becomes, does the trickle of executions of some violent offenders make even a statistically measurable difference in prison risk to inmates and other prisoners?

You keep sneering about bad numbers, and I’m saying that I don’t care which numbers you use. Execution of innocents is not 0. On the other hand, you seem to be saying that, on the one hand, risk to guards and inmates is an argument for the death penalty, on the other, you seem to argue that the risk is so small it can be mitigated with extra security precautions.

Think about it, if we buy into the ‘nothing to lose’ argument, then guards are exposed to capital crime prisoners when they present the highest risk - when death is near and they are the most desperate. If that risk can be made insignificant by certain precautions in the handling of those prisoners how can it be possible be argued that it offsets what seems to be about a 1 in 100 execution of innocent human beings?

Think about it another way. In the US about 13 of every 100,000 life births ends in maternal death. Does the mere existance of that small risk justify abortion? Of course not. 20-50% of all fertilized zygotes end life in a spontaneous abortion. Yet that high mortality rate does not offset our obligation, as Catholics, to treat each as a life as precious as our own. Yet we seem incredibly willing to sacrifice innocent lives to capital punishment on some pretty thin arguments of self protection.

Remember, we don’t have to guess. The US is pretty much alone in the western industrial world on capital punishment. If not executing prisoners elevates risks to other inmates, guards, and the general population, we would expect it to show up statistically in other countries.

Understand, I believe that there are people who unquestionably deserve death. And it is very human to seek retribution, rather we claim it is objective punishment or not. But I have come to believe that I cannot just be pro-life when it is ‘easy’ for me, but also when it is hard. That does NOT make me right, but it is my honest opinion.

 

[Ray_Scheel]

Again, you seem to be completely missing the point.

1. We have many violent felons in whose cases we do not persue the death penalty (standards of evidence, circumstances, etc.) This creates a violent prison population which is huge in comparison to the total number of capital cases.
2. When we pursue the death penalty we often get life sentences instead. That is, a criminal conviction is returned, but the jury does not believe that the standard for capital punishment has been met. If we include appeals and commutations, the number is somewhere between 30 and 40%.

I don’t think I’m missing it at all. You are again attacking the apparent success of the methodology used to determine in a balanced and case by case manner as to whether an offense warrants the death penalty. Not all violent offenders meet that bar, and those in for life rather than on death row do still have something to lose as long as the death penalty is a possibility for future offenses.

You keep sneering about bad numbers, and I’m saying that I don’t care which numbers you use. Execution of innocents is not 0. On the other hand, you seem to be saying that, on the one hand, risk to guards and inmates is an argument for the death penalty, on the other, you seem to argue that the risk is so small it can be mitigated with extra security precautions.

The attacks on guards by already incarcerated felons is also non-zero. That we are trying to determine what is the best response balancing non-zero risks under the current implementation of the capital sentencing process does make it important to try to maintain the right scope when comparing numbers, both in the numbers of innocents that may have been inappropriately executed and in the deterrence effect that use of the death penalty had in discouraging new murders and preventing some incorrigibles from murdering again the only way that is sometimes possible.

Remember, we don’t have to guess. The US is pretty much alone in the western industrial world on capital punishment. If not executing prisoners elevates risks to other inmates, guards, and the general population, we would expect it to show up statistically in other countries.

Remember the need to compare apples to apples. This is the same kind of logic used to argue against personal firearm ownership, and it has the same flaws. In the US, as various states implements death penalty moratoriums, murder rates increased in those specific areas, and as the use of the death penalty resumed, rates fell (with a clear trend that long delays between sentencing and execution diminished the inhibiting effect).

 

[KathleenElsie]

What do we as a society do about those that keep harming others?

 

[Amolibri]

The question of the death penalty

Human Rights Resolution 2005/59

The Commission on Human Rights,
Recalling article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which affirms the right of everyone to life, convinced that the abolition of the death penalty is essential for the protection of this right and recalling article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and articles 6 and 37 (a) of the Convention on the Rights of the Child,
Taking note that the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights provides that no one within the jurisdiction of a State party shall be executed and that each State party shall take all necessary measures to abolish the death penalty within its jurisdiction, 
Recalling the entry into force, on 1 July 2003, of Protocol No. 13 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (European Convention on Human Rights), concerning the abolition of the death penalty in all circumstances, 
Recalling also its previous resolutions in which it expressed its conviction that the abolition of the death penalty contributes to the enhancement of human dignity and to the progressive development of human rights, 
Welcoming the exclusion of capital punishment from the penalties that the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and the International Criminal Court are authorized to impose,

 

[Texas_Roofer]

This varies by state statutes. What you say may be true in some states and not in others. I believe that most states allow appeals on evidence, especially true if DNA evidence can be used to exonerate someone who was convicted of a crime prior to the common use of DNA as evidence. Appeals based on newly entered DNA evidence are becoming very common.

I do not believe this to be correct. If you would cite some states which have this condition, that would be helpful. Thanks for contributing

 

[Texas_Roofer]

~ No human institution is perfect, though the safeguards for capital cases are significantly higher than other criminal proceedings to compensate for the fact that the penalty is irreversible once carried out. The combination of the appeals process and the pardons and parole review does serve to significantly compensate for errors of procedure or evidence at the trial level for both “regular” and capital convictions.

really who does it compensate for? as mentioned 124 have been freed do you really believe zero were executed? I think there is a real mis understanding of what the appeals process is

As far as the case of Leonard Peltier, that seems to be much more complicated than simple ballistics evidence considering his previous history of leading armed protests.

There you go his murder conviction is irrelevant! so long as we believe he is better in jail who really cares. ( so long as it is not me------or my children, relatives, friends) but strangers are okay?

 

[Texas_Roofer]

Do you think the process was better in the 1970’s or is DNA telling us the problem is worse than expected?

 

[rpp]

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/yearexo.jpg

Do you think the process was better in the 1970’s or is DNA telling us the problem is worse than expected?

Is this for the USA? Is it national or just one state?

 

[melensdad]

I do not believe this to be correct. If you would cite some states which have this condition, that would be helpful. Thanks for contributing

Take a look at the court rulings, at least pertaining to California and Nevada. Also look up the Innocence Project. Since 1989, the Innocence Project has used DNA testing to win 172 exonerations - including 14 on death row.

 

[Ray_Scheel]

I do not believe this to be correct. If you would cite some states which have this condition, that would be helpful. Thanks for contributing

There are significantly more post conviction options than appeals based solely on procedural errors. In the case of DNA evidence excluding a defendant, a motion for acquittal may be filed pr a writ requesting release or retrial based on new evidence that the imprisonment was improper. And of course a petition for an executive pardon or commutation is an option entirely out of the judicial scope.

really who does it compensate for? as mentioned 124 have been freed do you really believe zero were executed? I think there is a real mis understanding of what the appeals process is

Considering I directly stated “No human institution is perfect” regarding how the death penalty is applied, that I stated that the instances of executing the innocent was a non-zero risk, and that I recognized that there were several instances in which significant doubt about guilt had been raised post-execution, what is you basis for suggesting I thought zero were executed that I shouldn’t take as an attempt to intentionally misrepresent my position?

However, running the numbers on deterrence and rates of re-offense versus the exoneration rates, rate of innocents being killed within a particular jurisdiction appears to be smaller overall when the death penalty is an available option.

There you go his murder conviction is irrelevant! so long as we believe he is better in jail who really cares. ( so long as it is not me------or my children, relatives, friends) but strangers are okay?

Well, I believe we are at an impasse on this one. To me, that he had previously led armed standoffs with federal agencies and was nominally in charge of a substantial group of individuals participating in a shootout in which two federal agents were shot is very relevant to whether that person belongs in prison for his involvement in those slayings. Again, this is a much more complicated case than how you initially presented it.

Do you think the process was better in the 1970’s or is DNA telling us the problem is worse than expected?

How about pointing out the probable impact of most of the US being under a court imposed moratorium on exercising the death penalty during the 1970s? The statistical impact there form that and the flurry of judicial activity after the moratorium was lifted and states resumed carrying out capital sentences has an amazing streamlining effect when you arrange the exonerations by the year of the sentence versus the year of the exoneration, especially if you factor against the total number of capital convictions by year.

However, yes, the availability of DNA evidence is having an impact on the number of exonerations, but is also increasing the rate of attaining capital convictions. I don’t know of anyone who opposes the clarity DNA evidence can add to the process. There is always room for improvement, I am glad to see this as an aid to increasing the rate of proper convictions and reducing the chance of catching up the innocent.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

Is this for the USA? Is it national or just one state?

USA 1973- to current

Here is a list by state


Here is much more on the subject deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=6&did=412