Support the Death Penalty?

[Voco_proTatiano]

I consulted Aquinas instead.

Justice II/II 58-1

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

That actually comes quite close. I accept that, though, mark you, the concepts incorporated go beyond judicial judgement. It includes the concept of rendering unto Caesar, that which is Caesar’s.

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.”

In other words, retribution is just appropriate payment, either for good or ill. That accords with the Latin. the essence is in how the word is used. It can include atonement and vengeance.

Evil I/I 48-5

• “Evil … is the privation of good”

Nice definition.

Vengeance II/II 108-1

• Vengeance consists in the infliction of a penal evil on one who has sinned.

Is that not exactly what I said: ‘giving evil payment for evil work’

• 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 again is acceptance of real politic.

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;

No! Justice requires it be appropriate. That may be proportional, or it may not. A great evil might follow from a minor offence, should the offendor be punished according to the chance ill that developed from the offence, or for the offence alone?

• all punishments are evil in the sense that they are a privation of good;

No! Punishment might be a chastisement to promote reform, in that case, it is not evil, or more precisely, not evil fo evil’s sake.

• vengeance is specifically a penal evil which the state has the obligation of inflicting.

We seem to be changing our tune here.
We were agreed that Mother Church does not condone vengeance, yet here we are quoting a Church Father, who is seen to be blessing vengeance.
There has to be a misunderstanding here. St Thomas must be just condoning real politic, because in his time, that was the best that could be achieved. The criminal could not be cured, he had to be hanged, whether for a sheep, or a lamb, or even half a loaf.

Any questions?

You seem actually to be saying pretty much what I came in saying, but in many more words.
You seem to think that because St Thomas condoned real politic, then Mother Church blesses vengeance.
Our Lord, and the OT are very clear on vengeance. It might have a part in real politic, and in some senses, the devil has to be paid, but it has no place in Christianity.

How do you explain the concept of purgatory?

Purgatory is a theoretical concept, invoked to explain certain paradoxes. It may be real, or it may be imaginary: there exists no concrete proof for either conjecture.

Ender

There now, is that any clearer.
Your concepts of justice and punishment belong to real politic, and I have no argument with that, but they have no place in Christianity, other than aspects of real politic which must be condoned for want of better, but are not to be blessed.

 

[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

 

[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

 

[Texas_Roofer]

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.

Thank you
It turns out many states are changing their laws to allow new evidence. It is not clear to me if this is in or out of the appeals process. for more info

ncsl.org/programs/cj/postconviction.htm

 

[rpp]

Here is a timely news article that relates to this.

“Prisons must treat inmates with dignity, Pope says”

cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=53360

 

[Texas_Roofer]

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.

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?

Your missing the point there is a huge difference between those who kill unjustly and those who kill justly. If you want me to join in or support a killing the current system is far too willing to convict and perform an unjust killing. That is unacceptable to me, thus I will not support it.

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.

I do care if the numbers are 2:1 or 200:1 I will not participate in unjust killing. AND using this system you can not kill with out great risk of performing and unjust killing

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.

really, now it is good enough if we think…(what)… why was he not in jail for “he had previously led armed standoffs”? The bottom, line he was convicted as the gunman, he was in fact not the gunman. So what the jury believed is incorrect. So why not let a new jury convict him properly??? I say a new jury will let him walk, that is of course my opinion

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.

The statistics are BS, I have a long history of statistical work. The better statistics are the number released. This is called critical failure rates. In closing it is not always did they kill, it is are YOU(and me) sure enough we can kill now?

Thank you for contributing

 

[Amolibri]

Thank you
It turns out many states are changing their laws to allow new evidence. It is not clear to me if this is in or out of the appeals process. for more info

ncsl.org/programs/cj/postconviction.htm

Texas Roofer: Thanks so much for your (name removed by moderator)ut on this.
www.cacp.org is the Catholic org. vs the Death Penalty.

 

[melensdad]

Thank you
It turns out many states are changing their laws to allow new evidence. It is not clear to me if this is in or out of the appeals process.

Certainly things will vary by state, but it is my impression that many of the states now allow for specific appeals, after a conviction, to allow for the introduction of DNA evidence that had not previously been admitted, and often had not even been technically available.

I’m not a fan of the death penalty, I’d guess that I, like the official opinion of the Church, believes it is used too often and is actually rarely needed. But I do allow for some use of it in some extreme circumstances. Not sure if those circumstances often exist here in a western civilization.

That said, I also think our prison system does a poor job of protecting society. When* “life in prison” *sentences don’t mean their life is actually spent in prison, then I think that the criminal justice system is failing to protect society. That does not justify the death penalty in my eyes, it is just another broken part of the system.

 

[Ray_Scheel]

Your missing the point there is a huge difference between those who kill unjustly and those who kill justly. If you want me to join in or support a killing the current system is far too willing to convict and perform an unjust killing. That is unacceptable to me, thus I will not support it.

The justice or injustice of an action undertaken by a legitimate authority is not wholly decided on whether there was perfection in the evidence and the process of arriving at that decision. If it has to be a perfect decision in order to be just, then justice is not possible in any human institution. However, we know that for centuries the Church has recognized that the State had the just authority to enact the death penalty despite that known imperfection, which gives us assurance that perfection is not required in order for justice to be served. It is entirely possible to arrive at a decision in a just manner and yet have that decision be in error / inappropriate.

Further, based on how you’ve chosen to (not) respond to the question I’d actually asked which your above quote was a presented as a response to, I’m now left with the unpleasant conclusion that your suggestion that I personally thought zero (innocents) had been executed was in fact an attempt to construct a personal attack by way of a straw man.

I do care if the numbers are 2:1 or 200:1 I will not participate in unjust killing. AND using this system you can not kill with out great risk of performing and unjust killing

The risk of an incorrect DP conviction and execution is much less now than in years past and is dropping all the time. I find it both interesting and baffling that opposition to the DP is growing stronger in response to its application being made more exactly.

really, now it is good enough if we think…(what)… why was he not in jail for “he had previously led armed standoffs”?

Actually, he had actually been punished for his prior escapades, punishments which obviously did not deter him from continuing to engage in steadily escalating activity of that sort.

The bottom, line he was convicted as the gunman, he was in fact not the gunman. So what the jury believed is incorrect. So why not let a new jury convict him properly??? I say a new jury will let him walk, that is of course my opinion

He was convicted of being a gunman, others were tied as well, and there was no doubt raised by any party that several shooters were involved. A person can be prosecuted as a gunman in a crime just for contributing to the hail of lead, even if bullets from that particular person’s gun did not actually strike anyone else. Though I’d agree that the case smells fishy, the prosecution’s case did not rest solely on the particular ballistics report. Again, repeatedly trying to oversimplify this particular case to make it serve as an example is unconvincing, and especially as applied to the processes for post conviction relief in DP cases.

The statistics are BS, I have a long history of statistical work. The better statistics are the number released. This is called critical failure rates. In closing it is not always did they kill, it is are YOU(and me) sure enough we can kill now?

What statistics are BS? I was still going by the number exonerated. When establishing a year by year rate of the number of exonerations versus the number of convictions, one has to sort on the year of conviction or else it is going to look like the later improvements in technology were the things responsible for increased numbers of false convictions in the first place rather than being the factor in revealing the inappropriate conviction.

Thank you for contributing

Likewise.

 

[SoCalRC]

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.

Actually, it is the conviction rates that most drive cost. It isn’t the automatic appeals, but the dramatically higher costs of the initial trial combined with a common verdict of life, not execution.

However, why do you supposed that they must be detained at a higher cost than the ‘life’ sentences already given in lieu of execution?

The attacks on guards by already incarcerated felons is also non-zero.

And will remain non zero with executions. The question is rather the fate of a small number of supposed violent fellons really changes the risk at all. Statistically, the change seems almost non existant. Certainly it does not show up when we compare numbers with other industrialized nations.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

God’s word, Rom 13, and OT supports the death pentality. It is those who teach otherwise who are wrong. Yes, its that simple.

Then again* I am bias.*

My Father was murdered in FL a few years back. The death pentality was used as a bargining chip to get the bad guys to plead guilty in exchange for life in prision to advoid the death pentality. Frankly, the case against them was air tight and I would love to attend their death sentence being carried out. Not, out of vengence, but out of fair and just Justice of God.

I look upon the bagining chip as being equal to the cities of refuge in the OT, and lets face it the proscutor was out to save the state money and free up the courts for more difficult to prove cases.

Romans 13

1Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. 2Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. 3For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, 4for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer. 5Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience. 6For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. 7 Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed.

 

[SoCalRC]

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.

I think huge numbers of heinous crimes go unpunished as it is. For example, I’ll bet somebody knew that lead was going into the mouths of millions of children… But I take solice in the belief that God will meter out true justice in the hereafter.

 

[Philothea53]

…But I take solice in the belief that God will meter out true justice in the hereafter.

Isn’t that the point?

 

[rpp]

However, why do you supposed that they must be detained at a higher cost than the ‘life’ sentences already given in lieu of execution?

Death row inmates are not allowed to mix with the rest of the prison population or, generally, with each other. Death row inmates do not share their cell with another inmate.

Typically, “Death Row” is a separate wing in the prison with a significantly higher guard to prisoner ratio. Because the nature of their crimes, death row inmates are presumed to be capable of great violence, therefore greater precautions are taken in their housing, exercise, meals and general care.

Lesser density of prisoners, more guards, more precautions, greater separation of prisoners, individualized attention for meals, health care and exercise all add up to significantly greater costs.

Personally, I believe these costs are justified for their own protection and the protection of others. You can imagine that there might be other who seek revenge on prisoners. It is believed that inmate who murdered Jeffery Dahmer was hired to kill him by a relative of one of his victims. Many will claim that executing a serial murder is just. But I do not believe that murdering one could ever be considered just.

 

[SoCalRC]

God’s word, Rom 13, and OT supports the death pentality. It is those who teach otherwise who are wrong. Yes, its that simple.

Not for Roman Catholics. While establishing three infallible teachings, our pope acknowledging that the death penalty is not always unjust but also indicated that he found it doubtful that it would be just to apply it in a country with a modern prison system (like the US).

It is not an infallible teaching, but it uses some of the same arguments and comes from the same document, so we Catholics cannot just dismiss it out of hand. As the first Vatican Council established, the Pope is the absolute moral leader of our Church.

My Father was murdered in FL a few years back. The death pentality was used as a bargining chip to get the bad guys to plead guilty in exchange for life in prision to advoid the death pentality.

I am very sorry for your loss. There is no doubt in my mind that the possiblity of a death sentence does provide a strong bargaining chip in our typical ‘plea bargain’ justice system. While I agree it probably saves money, I am not sure if the whole ‘plea bargain’ approach itself is just (I notice that you would have preferred justice be served with a trial and conviction).

Again, you have my condolences.

 

[SoCalRC]

Death row inmates are not allowed to mix with the rest of the prison population or, generally, with each other. Death row inmates do not share their cell with another inmate.

Yes, but in many trials the death penalty is sought, but not granted. Instead, those prisoners are given life in prison. My understanding is that these convicted persons are not treated as ‘death row’ inmates, but simply like any other long-sentence, violent felon.

 

[rpp]

Yes, but in many trials the death penalty is sought, but not granted. Instead, those prisoners are given life in prison. My understanding is that these convicted persons are not treated as ‘death row’ inmates, but simply like any other long-sentence, violent felon.

That is my understanding as well. Personally, I am not convinced that is appropriate in many cases.

For example the Jeffery Dahmer case. By all accounts, he was a model prisoner. But he was murdered by another inmate hired by a relative of a victim. If I recall correctly, there was another attempt on his life before this. While I did not and would not mourn his death, the murder was wrong and the people involved should be prosecuted. (I do not recall if they identified the people involved or if there were any prosecutions. It would not surprise me if there was only a cursory investigation.)

 

[Texas_Roofer]

The justice or injustice of an action undertaken by a legitimate authority is not wholly decided on whether there was perfection in the evidence and the process of arriving at that decision. If it has to be a perfect decision in order to be just, then justice is not possible in any human institution. However, we know that for centuries the Church has recognized that the State had the just authority to enact the death penalty despite that known imperfection, which gives us assurance that perfection is not required in order for justice to be served. It is entirely possible to arrive at a decision in a just manner and yet have that decision be in error / inappropriate.

exactly, however justice is not the death penalty the error is actually outside of many definitions of justice.

Further, based on how you’ve chosen to (not) respond to the question I’d actually asked which your above quote was a presented as a response to, I’m now left with the unpleasant conclusion that your suggestion that I personally thought zero (innocents) had been executed was in fact an attempt to construct a personal attack by way of a straw man.

I am not following; please restate or reference the post #. I cannot imagine anyone would believe zero innocent people were executed, so how culpable are we?

Think about this if you were the executioner and the jury recommended capital punishment, you however did not believe the person’s guilty was reasonable established maybe they are guilty but maybe not. Would perform the job? why not? Would the conviction render you free of culpablity?

 

[spacecadet]

Just because there is a death pentalty allowed in the Bible and in our Catechism doesn’t mean the way the US handles the death penalty is acceptable under those terms. for more info i’d suggest this book:
amazon.com/Biblical-Truth-about-Americas-Penalty/dp/1555536328/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/103-9752475-1883841?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1189120479&sr=8-1

further having the death penalty costs us tax payers far more than life in prison without parole, because of all the appeals

finally, if you think no innocent person has ever been executed you are mistaken

with that being said, i am not in favor of being soft on crime. life in prison needs to be a real option. personally, i wish they would put all these sex predators in prison for life after the first offense.

 

[SoCalRC]

That is my understanding as well. Personally, I am not convinced that is appropriate in many cases.

For example the Jeffery Dahmer case. By all accounts, he was a model prisoner. But he was murdered by another inmate hired by a relative of a victim. If I recall correctly, there was another attempt on his life before this. While I did not and would not mourn his death, the murder was wrong and the people involved should be prosecuted. (I do not recall if they identified the people involved or if there were any prosecutions. It would not surprise me if there was only a cursory investigation.)

That would seem to touch on an entirely seperate moral question. As a ‘convert’, there is a tendancy to go overboard (I have the same problem as a reformed smoker). But I really do look at situations like this, or the execution of Sadam Hussein (which appears to have brought no closure or stability, only another wave of violence), and shake my head.