The Church’s position is rendered in the form of an “if-then” statement. If the conditions are as we imagine, then the death penalty is not permissible.
You can always continue to increase the isolation of the invidivdual prisoner until they are rendered incapable of doing harm. Hence the isolation cells that are being used now precisely to protect the general prison population and prison guards from those deemed too dangerous.
The same 2267 that you quoted only allows it when there is no other way to protect other human life. That same 2267 feels that the means are available to most modern states to do just that.
The question is not what goes on in prisons, the question is does the state have the means at its disposal to fix or replace those prisons. The end of 2267 that I quoted above essentially says the state does.
With no intention to offend, I think you miss the point.
How do you propose to do that? What means will you use to keep a Corrections Officer from working for the man who has the power to kidnap, torture and murder his six-year old daughter?
The incident I described happened inside one of the most secure prisons in the country. And it was by no means an isolated incident.
Tommy Silverstein was in exactly such a facility – Marion, Illinois – when he put together a plot to murder Corrections Officers. Two Corrections Officers were killed on the same day.
I know a lot of Corrections Officers – men who deal with criminals like this on a day-to-day basis who will hotly deny what you say.
You assume that only criminals on death row are killers. In fact, some of the most brutal murderers are serving lesser sentences.
So explain how the Tommy Silversteins and other murderers manage to kill Corrections Officers while in solitary confinement?
So you are willing to sacrifice that number of lives?
How? Explain how you would use more guards to keep the Silversteins at bay. How would you use more guards to keep prisoners from controlling guards by threatening their families?
The reality is that the threat is enough. In the case I cited, the guard in question was under control of the inmate from then on.
So how did an inmate in Marion, in solitary confinement and with no communication with other prisoners put together and successfully execute a plot to kill two Corrections Officers on the same day?
Tell me how would you “improve” our prisons?
Yes you can, but only after they cause harm to someone.
Which, in reality, is shown to not be the case with the large number of crimes that occur inside of prisons.
No, the Church is making a statement that the State can do so yet this is not a dogmatic statement, it is an opinion.
Most people who have never been inside a prison have a very distorted view of what prisons are, what sort of people are imprisoned, and what happens in there. The judtgement that we are nearly at the stage where we can simply incarcerate people – regardless of any special circumstances – and protect society is not based on real experience in any penal system.
That is the way we do it now, but we could do it sooner for people convicted of serious enough crimes. In any case, the mere potential to do harm is a a slipperly slope argument. You can always argue that someone who is in jail because of a lesser crime might go on to murder someone. Effectively there is no way to make prisons safe because even people convicted of crimes less than murder may murder once they are in prison.
I believe the prisoners in the isolation cells we are discussing are isolated to the extent that they have no physical contact with the guards.
I will grant that there is a large number of crimes committed in prison, but the Justice Department’s own statistics show that the murder rate in prison is now quite low. Low enough that many prisoners are probably safer than they were when they were out on the streets.
I doin’t know your source, but I know people with firsthand knowledge of the incident.
And how do you propose to prevent contact with the outside? Will you rely on Corrections Officers to prevent it? The same Corrections Officers whose families are at risk?
The US Bureau of Prisons has been in business a long time, and does everything you can think of and more.
Murder is not the only index of prisons out of control. Tell us about gang activity in prisons. Tell us about drugs in prison. Tell us about homosexual rape in prison.
Tell us what you know that the US Bureau of Prisons doesn’t know, and hasn’t already tried?
I am sorry, where does the Catholic Church say that the Cathechism is the opinion of the Catholic Church? Last I checked, it was essentially the definitive teaching of the Church. I will grant that it does not fall under the concept of infalibility, but it is still the teaching of the Church. In any case, even if it is in fact an opinion, the fact that it is the Church’s opinion means it should bear special weight for the faithful.
When you use arguments like this, you throw away your credibility.
And therefore we should not throw away the tools needed to deal with the most violent and depraved.
He was given the shank by a fellow prisoner, Randy Gometz, moments before he stabbed Clutts. In other words, the guards let him come into close contact with another prisoner. (this is documented in the court records projectposner.org/case/1985/768F2d790)).
The families of the corrections officers are not at risk if the incarcerated are not allowed contact with the outside, are they? Its simple, a man who has no contact with the outside world can’t work with his gang or crime orginization to gain the information about the guards guarding him or to order harm done to their families. If the guards guarding him are compromised, bring in new guards to institute the isolation from the outside world.
To the limits of the resources made available to them. I am sure that most Correctional Officials could do better with more resources.
Murder is the only one of the crimes that could merit the Death Penalty. If the prisons protect the prisoners and the guards from that, then they effectively have removed the justification for the death penalty. The Cathechism definitely requires that punishment be proportionate the offense. None of the other crimes listed reach that level.
And if the prison guards are bribed, then they are as culpable for the actions as the prisoners. The threat argument is more compelling, but are you seriously arguing that the majority of prison guards live in a constant state of fear for their life and the lives of their families? If so, then why do they continue to work as correctional officers?
The most basic thing to try, I tihnk, is actually funding and staffing the Federal and State correctional institutions to the level that is actually necessary to match the stunning growth in the prisoner population over the last 20 years.
I admited that the position did not fall under infallibility. That being said, I still maintain that being included in the document that define’s the Church’s Teachings, it bears special weight. Certainly, it is not a matter of opinion that the Death Penalty be a last resort. While we have over crowded, under staffed and under funded prisons, I don’t think we can argue that we tried everything else to secure the population.
Ok, I will grant that we may differ with the Church… but I don’t think that means we are given license to ignore the Church. We can argue that there might always be a necessity to execute some, but I don’t think we can blanket statements about crime X automatically meriting. Further, I think this only tenable when all alternatives have been exhausted.
Tools that are often applied with bias and malice.
You mean if he had been executed based on the conviction that was vacated by the courts because it was based on perjured testimony?
That is correct – but they didn’t “let” him come in contact with anyone. He broke away from them, ran the length of the cell block with them in pursuit, and thrust his cuffed hands through the cuff slot in Gometz’ cell. Gometz unlocked his handcuffs with a key made from a ball point pen insert, and slipped him the shank.
Once again, there is nothing you know the US Bureau of Prisons doesn’t know and hasn’t already tried.
The old “throw money at the problem” approach cannot change human nature.
You assume people are not human. It is the threat of death (for themselves or their families) that compromises many Corrections Officers. That same dynamic influences police and courts as well.
So that means it doesn’t happen? We can ignore it and assume all Corrections Officers are angels?
What is this “majority” business? If one is compromised, all are compromised.
Throwing money at the problem will change the whole dynamic, eh?
Interesting responses. And with respect, your arguments are academic, and far removed from the reality of exactly the type of individuals that we’re discussing.
Dan, no doubt we can find this. And as we both know, the numbers will be disgustingly high.