The Death Penalty from a different angle

[snowguru]

Starshiptrooper, most people who commit murder are normal, ordinary people. Teachers have committed murder, cops have committed murder, etc. Here’s 1 case. The 1979 Twinkie Defense case. In this case Dan (DJ) White shot and killed Harvey B. Milk and then SF Mayor Moscone. Now Daniel James (DJ) White before he was a killer (jury convicted him of Manslaughter) was a Vietnam War Sergeant, a SF police/fireman who once saved the life of a woman and baby from a burning building. Harvey Milk (Harvey Bernard Milk) on the other hand in 1964 committed homosexual statutory rape on a 16 year old boy for which he wasn’t prosecuted for and that boy committed suicide in 1980 when he was 33 years old. Harvey B. Milk also bragged of having sex in parks and not being caught by the cops. Incidentally, Harvey B. Milk has been honored in California public schools especially by gay/lesbian groups though he was a statutory rapist. Mayor George Moscone used to be a public defender-yes people accused of crimes innocent or guilty have a right to a lawyer but Mayor Moscone defended child molesters,etc.

I’d be against Dan (DJ) White getting the death penalty because he had good character before the killing and 1 of his victims Harvey B. Milk was a bad person. If the California legal system had punished Harvey B. Milk for homosexual statutory rape in 1964 and got him convicted by a jury, Harvey B. Milk would’ve been a convicted felon and not been able to be in SF office in 1978. DJ White was Catholic. Columnist Patrick Joseph Buchanan who is Catholic believes that in most cases the death penalty should not be given and that it should be for the worst murderers. Incidentally, I could hire a convicted murderer depending on the circumstances and if he or she has changed their ways. If a person did their prison time for murder, then the law says the debt’s been paid. In Arizona there was a case where a convicted murderer James J. Hamm got accpeted into ASU Law School after being paroled in 1992 for killing a man in a drug related robbery. James Hamm paid his debt to society and IMO he should be allowed to be a criminal defense lawyer as that involves defending criminals but not a judge or prosecuting lawyer. But since you talk about character, Dan (DJ) White is proof that convicted murderers can sometimes be nice people when you regard DJ White’s service as a Vietnam War Sergeant and what he did as a SF cop and later fireman and Harvey B. Milk is proof that sometimes murder victims are bad people.

 

[snowguru]

Also Starshiptrooper, war in and of itself is murder and a bad thing because those who don’t want part of this often end up being the killed. War itself is a bad choice and case which was wrote by me on another topic is Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Thousands of innocents including children were killed in atom bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But their deaths ended the war and most survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki have said that they don’t blame President Harry S. Truman because President Harry S. Truman did what he believed would end the war and he only had bad choices. If it went to a ground war with Japan, more lives both American and Japanese including children would’ve been killed and wounded. If Germany and Japan had the atom bombs they would’ve used them.

My view always has and will be that the atom bombs should’ve been dropped elsewhere in Japan with few thousand killed and wounded rather than 180,000 + killed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki but they did end the war. How this relates to the death penalty is that in wars, innocents end up getting killed in the wars and war is a bad thing just by itself. With Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the small kids killed got the death penalty though they were innocent but it ended the war. It’s complex and complicated.

 

[snowguru]

Here’s a case found by me Julie Elizabeth Harper or Julie Harper here ktla.com/news/landing/kswb-carlsbad-wife-charged-with-killing-teacher-with-gun-20120810,0,527171.story Don’t know the facts of her case but even if she is guilty, she should not get the death penalty. It’ll be a weak answer but she looks so sad in the video and for that reason I could not give her the death penalty even if she’s guilty.

 

[Swiss_Guy]

There are several issues, here, the first of which is that alll sanctions are based upon that which is deserved, not upon the protection of society.

Justice is primary, protection, secondary.

No jusification has been given to replacing 2000 years of teaching based upon justice, with a weaker, secondary issue, protection.

How can the eternal teachings of justice become secondary to the day to day workings of the prison system?

One is a teaching based in principle, the other in utilitarianism.

That is the most important issue/question.

I recommend Evangelium Vitae, even though you probably disagree with it (unfortunately). I don’t think anyone is denying the importance of justice, but that justice doesn’t have to be served by using the death penalty.

Secondarily, execution is an enhanced protector of society, over incarceration. So why would the Church and Pope insist that we spare murderers lives, at the cost of more innocent deaths, based upon a human and changing incarceration system?

Then this:

How can this be true:

“If bloodless means are sufficient to defend human lives against an aggressor and to protect public order and the safety of persons, public authority must limit itself to such means, because they better correspond to the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person”.

When we have this?

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.”

What you mentioned first in this chunk is your own prudential judgment.

So your premise is that the Catechism is contradictory? Interesting. but anyway, that isn’t an absolute. Even the first murder by Cain God had mercy on him; he made sure that no one would be able to murder Cain.

 

[Bill_7154]

Murder is murder whether it is done for money or revenge, it ought to be punished in the same way every time.

I don’t agree with this at all. I can’t immagine hearing the facts of 1,000 different random cases where one person killed another person (even when excluding accidental killings) and thinking that each and every person should receive the same punnishment. Some murders are very heinous, including multiple murders or murders of children. Then there are cases such as the example of a kid who was in my high school. At the age of 22 he put an ax through his father’s scull. Turns out his father had been beating him and his mom for years and years. One day he came home and saw his dad beating his mom and snapped and killed him. He got a light sentence, I think in a mental institution. Cases such as this, IMO the kid didn’t even have the chance to develop properly. I know what it’s like to suffer abuse as a child. I didn’t kill anyone, but have great simpathy for anyone who suffers serious abuse from their family of origin while growing up as children. I think the above example is very different from someone who rapes and then murders a child, especially if they murder them with a knife by butchering them.

God Bless,
Bill

 

[Bill_7154]

It’s fine for Johnny’s parents to pay for his murderer’s three hot meals, his bed, and cable tv, instead of Johnny’s college education?How do you think the parents of murder victims feel after their innocent children are slaughtered by some monster?

Do you have any idea how long people sentenced to die spend in prison before actually being killed? Do you have any idea how much it costs society for all of their appeals during this time over and above housing and feeding them?

And even though I am against the death penalty I will point out that people who abuse or murder children are not looked upon favorably by other prisoners. Dalmer was murdered by other prisoners wasn’t he? I think this is the fate that many people who kill children face when sentenced to life in prison, but am only guessing. I do know that child molesters are pretty much universally despised by prisoners. Unless segregated they suffer the death penalty dealt out by other prisoners and it’s a lot more painful way to go than the electric chair or being put to sleep and killed by IV drugs. And they go quicker than people sentenced to death row as well. I don’t have statistics but do know a guy who ran one of the sections of our state prison. He told me he used to make anyone who abused kids button their shirts all the way up to the top, forced them to do so, as a sign to the prisoners that they were child molesters. Not sure about child murderers but am guessing he did the same thing with them. Plus prisoners read and watch the news so become aware of people’s crimes that way before they come to any prison. It seems to me that a lot of lifers in prison enjoy and see it as a badge of honor to kill someone who harms children. It’s talked about all the time on those prison TV shows, plus I have been made aware of some info from my friend who was a prison guard at a max security prison.

And as a parent I am sure that parents of murdered children feel terrible. Before my return to the church I had the mindset of doleing out street justice to child molesters so am pretty certain I would have the same mindset towards anyone who killed my baby. But I am still against the death penalty and am now against street justice as well, even for heinous criminals.

God Bless,
Bill

 

[Bill_7154]

I, personally, don’t understand how Catholics can be pro death penalty. Aside from that I think a life sentence, without the possibility of parole, to be a worse punnishment than death.

God Bless,
Bill

 

[Ender]

I, personally, don’t understand how Catholics can be pro death penalty.

In order to understand you need to read more about the Catholic teaching on punishment. Unless you recognize the relation between sin and punishment the Church’s position on capital punishment might make no sense. Since the Church has always recognized the right of a state to employ capital punishment, though, you should assume that there are valid reasons behind her position.

Ender

 

[starshiptrooper]

Starshiptrooper, most people who commit murder are normal, ordinary people. …I’d be against Dan (DJ) White getting the death penalty because he had good character before the killing and 1 of his victims Harvey B. Milk was a bad person. If the California legal system had punished Harvey B. Milk for homosexual statutory rape in 1964 and got him convicted by a jury, Harvey B. Milk would’ve been a convicted felon and not been able to be in SF office in 1978. DJ White was Catholic.

The circumstances make DJ White’s crime more serious. He was a police officer, a man who is responsible for upholding the law. By taking it into his own hands, he undermines the basis of civil society, in which people surrender their power to punish crimes to the state.

Columnist Patrick Joseph Buchanan who is Catholic believes that in most cases the death penalty should not be given and that it should be for the worst murderers.

An appeal to authority is not a valid argument.

But since you talk about character, Dan (DJ) White is proof that convicted murderers can sometimes be nice people whsen you regard DJ White’s service as a Vietnam War Sergeant and what he did as a SF cop and later fireman and Harvey B. Milk is proof that sometimes murder victims are bad people.

The law is the law, even if the Pope breaks the law, he still needs to pay the penalty.

Also Starshiptrooper, war in and of itself is murder and a bad thing because those who don’t want part of this often end up being the killed. War itself is a bad choice and case which was wrote by me on another topic is Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Sometimes, war is the only answer to a problem. The Church realizes this and that is why she gave us criteria to determine whether or not a war was just.

Thousands of innocents including children were killed in atom bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Those kids were training to kill US Marines.

My view always has and will be that the atom bombs should’ve been dropped elsewhere in Japan with few thousand killed and wounded rather than 180,000 + killed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki but they did end the war.

You do realize that Nagasaki and Hiroshima were valid military targets? As you can see, I strongly disagree with your opinions on the Atomic Bombs, however this thread is not the time or the place to discuss the morality of that issue. If you are interested in continuing this discussion, please start a new thread or pm me and I will respond.

How this relates to the death penalty is that in wars, innocents end up getting killed in the wars and war is a bad thing just by itself. With Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the small kids killed got the death penalty though they were innocent but it ended the war. It’s complex and complicated.

Those children in Hiroshima and Nagasaki did not recieve the death penalty. The object of bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki was to win the war and protect the American people from future aggression by the Japanese. Criminals are executed for past offenses, so that justice might be restored.

 

[Bill_7154]

In order to understand you need to read more about the Catholic teaching on punishment. Unless you recognize the relation between sin and punishment the Church’s position on capital punishment might make no sense. Since the Church has always recognized the right of a state to employ capital punishment, though, you should assume that there are valid reasons behind her position.

Ender

You make great points, points that I can not disagree with. And I appreciate the way that you make your points Ender. You do so clearly, but also with grace. I think that this is a great quality that you have. IMO it’s much easier to influence the opinions or positions of others if you have the capacity to make points this way. I have a lot to learn about Catholic teaching. I am an absolute novice when it comes to the teachings of the Catholic Church.

God Bless,
Bill

 

[snowguru]

Starshiptrooper agree with you 75% about Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Yes, the Japanese would’ve used women and children in combat as kids were used in kamikaze airforce and kids also fought in Iwo Jima against U.S. Marines-women and children committed suicide in Iwo Jima. While Hiroshima did have ship industries and military base, main reason both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed is because both cities were untouched by war and in Nagasaki many victims were Chinese and Korean. But yes, the atom bomb’s intent was to end the war which it did on August 12, 1945-3 days after Nagasaki. My view isn’t to differ with President Harry S. Truman’s intent but to write that people born in August 1945 who were killed in both cities were innocent victims. Incidentally I support nuclear powerplant technology as nuclear is better than coal. My point is also to say that IMO the atom bombs should’ve been dropped elsewhere in Japan with fewer civilian deaths but what’s done is done. President Harry S. Truman was troubled by the decision. But as you said, this isn’t the place to discuss Hiroshima and Nagasaki so to your other points.

Not all murders are the same and not all murders should get the same punishment. Adultery is punishable by death in the Bible but I’m against executing a man or woman for having an affair. If a man comes home and finds his wife having sex with another man after which the man in a passion crime were to take out a gun and kill both his wife and her lover, he should go to prison for many years for this. But it must not be a death penalty offense as it was in reaction to adultery. Murder has different degrees-1st, 2nd and Manslaughter. Murdering some1 is serious but executing some1 is also serious because you have to live with that. A man who kills his wife after he finds her having sex with another man will have to live with that for the rest of his life and he will be traumatized by what he did which is why prison but not the death penalty must be the punishment. Good character of the convicted murderer should also be considered such as Dan (DJ) White’s good character as a Vietnam War Sergeant, SF policeman and his deed of saving a woman and her baby from a burning building when he was a fireman while his victim Harvey B. Milk’s bad character must be regarded as Harvey B. Milk won’t be committing homosexual statutory rape on any more boys.

Also if the victim was abusing the killer, then that must be considered. In February 2011 there was a case where a 19 year old mentally handicapped boy Michael Andersen shot and killed 36 year old Stephen Starr in North Carolina and then axed his body and wrote joker. What happened here was that Stephen Starr was a 36 year old gay who had taken in a 19 year old boy he knew was mentally handicapped. Stephen Starr sexually abused this 19 year old retarded boy, including giving the kid drugs such as Ecstasy and drugging the kid’s medicine Mucinex and in Feb. 2011, the kid killed him. Gay groups including Judy Shepard of the Laramie Project expressed sympathy for Stephen Starr-Judy Shepard saw nothing wrong with Stephen Starr sexually abusing a 19 year old retarded kid. The case has since been pleabargained to Murder 2 and the Michael Anderson got 16 to 20 years-had the kid rejected the pleabargain and it went to trial the defense lawyer would’ve raised Stephen Starr’s abuse of a mentally retarded kid. IMO, that was manslaughter. The fact that homosexual Stephen Starr was sexually abusing a 19 year old kid he knew was mentally handicapped, telling others that the kid was his adopted son when his intent was to sexually abuse him was bad. That 19 year old retarded kid reacted to abuse that Stephen Starr did by shooting Stephen Starr as he slept and then axing his body. Yes, his victim should’ve called the police, but there are mitigating circumstances and while no guarantee, the fact that homosexual Stephen Starr sexually abused a 19 year old retarded kid should be regarded in deciding the kid’s punishment as again, the kid did his killing because of crime Stephen Starr did. Finally innocent people sometimes are accused such as the 2006 Duke rape hoax (no rape isn’t punished by death penalty in U.S.) where a Black woman falsely accused several White men of rape but it was proven she made it up.

 

[Ender]

I have a lot to learn about Catholic teaching. I am an absolute novice when it comes to the teachings of the Catholic Church.

Thank you for your comments but when it comes to this subject you might be surprised to discover you’re far from alone in being unfamiliar with the Church’s position. Capital punishment generates some of the strongest opinions from the poorest understanding. Very few have read much about what the Church has said over the centuries and it is not enough to know just section 2267 of the catechism. That doesn’t begin to cover it. I will say though that if you want to understand any topic it’s best to research it on your own. With the internet that’s easier than you might think.

Ender

 

[snowguru]

Ender, taking a life even when justified is something you have to live with. As said President Harry S. Truman believed he was justified in dropping the atom bombs as they ended the war, but Mr. President Harry S. Truman for the rest of his life was traumatized by this, because he thought of the 3 year olds killed and wounded. War veterans who fought in 2 World Wars, Korean War and Vietnam War sometimes will cry (war is blood, sweat and tears) when they talk of seeing their friends or buddies losing their arms, limbs and lives in Normandy, Iwo Jima, near DMZ in Korea, Khe Sanh, etc. But they also cry when they talk of how while they were justified in killing enemies such as German and Japanese soldiers who were shooting @ them, they still understand that the enemy soldier was fighting for his nation though the enemies were fighting for the wrong cause. They say that they don’t hate the enemy soldiers because the enemy soldiers also had wives, children and families of their own.

With death penalty again, taking a life is a serious matter. When a Dr. or correction officer has to take part in killing a death row inmate, they have to live with killing for rest of their lives and some of them get traumatized by this. That’s why it’s my view again that the death penalty must not be used for most murders and it’s not. Death penalty must be for worst type of murderers and a **jury ** of 12 citizens is who must decide this with long appeals. They must not allow the death penalty for those who committed murder before they were 18 years old and they must not allow the death penalty for those who are retarded. If a 14 year old kid commits murder 1, then yes, they must go to murder 1 for perhaps the rest of his or her life. But it’s sad that the 14 year old kid turned out that way-executing them is just wrong. Death penalty must not be the required punishment for Murder 1-it must be optional after a jury decided this and most murders-2nd Degree Murder and Manslaughter must be punished with prison sentences but not the death penalty.

 

[AdamP88]

Despite the fact that the catechism claims that modern prisons can adequately protect society that is a prudential opinion with which we are free to disagree.
Ender

We are not “free to disagree” with the contents of the catechism. The teachings of the Church are there and if we disagree with certain vital things that makes us dissenters.

It is a fact that the death penalty is an intrinsic moral evil. Under all normal circumstances. The catechism makes provision for a very few situations in which the death penalty may be used. However these are rare and probably non-existent in modern times.

 

[Swiss_Guy]

We are not “free to disagree” with the contents of the catechism. The teachings of the Church are there and if we disagree with certain vital things that makes us dissenters.

It is a fact that the death penalty is an intrinsic moral evil. Under all normal circumstances. The catechism makes provision for a very few situations in which the death penalty may be used. However these are rare and probably non-existent in modern times.

It’s not intrinsically evil, but can only be used in rare → nonexistent circumstances.

 

[AdamP88]

It’s not intrinsically evil, but can only be used in rare → nonexistent circumstances.

You are correct in that it isn’t an intrinsic evil.

However it should be avoided if possible. We obviously don’t live in an ideal world but we should avoid putting people to death if we have alternative means for their incarceration at our disposal.

Also as catholics I believe visiting those in prison, along with the poor, the sick and the homeless is an obligation we often fail to remember.

 

[Ender]

You have illustrated the point I was making to Bill.

We are not “free to disagree” with the contents of the catechism. The teachings of the Church are there and if we disagree with certain vital things that makes us dissenters.

**The Pope and the bishops, using their prudential judgment, have concluded that in contemporary society, at least in countries like our own, the death penalty ought not to be invoked, because, on balance, it does more harm than good. *(Cardinal Dulles, 2001)
Their prudential judgment, while it is to be respected, is not a matter of binding Catholic doctrine. To differ from such a judgment, therefore, is not to dissent from Church teaching. (Dulles)

It is a fact that the death penalty is an intrinsic moral evil.

*The death penalty is not intrinsically evil. Both Scripture and long Christian tradition acknowledge the legitimacy of capital punishment under certain circumstances. The Church cannot repudiate that without repudiating her own identity. *(Archbishop Chaput, 2005)
Ender

 

[Swiss_Guy]

You are correct in that it isn’t an intrinsic evil.

However it should be avoided if possible. We obviously don’t live in an ideal world but we should avoid putting people to death if we have alternative means for their incarceration at our disposal.

Also as catholics I believe visiting those in prison, along with the poor, the sick and the homeless is an obligation we often fail to remember.

Ok then we agree.

 

[Richard320]

Many death row inmates oppose bid to halt executions

I can’t find it now, but someone I know posted an article on facebook that shows how much it costs to execute one inmate in California. It’s cheaper to lock’em up and throw away the key.

 

[Swiss_Guy]

Not so unrelated.