The Vatican and the death penalty

[vern_humphrey]

Originally Posted by vern
The death penalty is not necessary a general deterrant to crime, but it surely deters the person who suffers it. Similarly, assigning the death penalty to perple who murder police, or Corrections Officers does have an impact on the safety of people who hold those dangerous jobs – and therefore redounds to make us all safer.

And once again, I ask “How?”

There are no known instances of an executed murderer continuing to commit murders. And therre are people in prison who will kill again and again – Tommy Silverstein, whom I mentioned earlier is a good example. You have to have something more than a third, fourth or fifth “life without parole” to deal with these killers.

Just to clarify, it sounds like your for the death penalty but only for the most violent offenders (like those who continue to be violent in prison). If that’s the case, then would you support a large downsize in our country’s use of the death penalty since you and I both know that not everyone in prison is going to threaten a guards family. I think you have to admit that our country is a little trigger-happy when it comes to assigning the death penalty.

I think many who receive the death penalty can be safely incarcerated. On the other hand, some who should receive the death penalty should receive it swiftly – without the long delays in the present system.

 

[b_justb]

DRIVING BEAR:

I would like to share my views as a former corrections officer at River bend Maximum security Inst. in Nashville home of Tennessee’s death row.
In my opinion capital punishment should only be used on those who kill while in prison because the state has a duty to protect the safety of prison staff and fellow inmates.

I thought this was interesting since you’ve been there up close. I’ve thought similarly (for the US, since I think we have the means to hold people away from society safely) but I add “and also for those that escape prison.”

 

[Brendan]

I don’t think this gets to the real problem in the new Catechism. As I mentioned in an earlier post, 2267 is silent on the requirement of justice. The conditions for the “just” use of executions are set according to the requirement of the tertiary reason for punishment; there is no consideration at all given to the primary (and justifying) reason for punishment: retribution.

Throughout the Catechism and 2000 years of writings one can find appropriate references to justice and punishment so as to understand the Church’s consistent teaching. 2267 however is silent on these considerations - inappropriately so. Until this is addressed this issue will remain unresolved.

Ender

I will grant you that the CCC is regretably silent on that point. I was strictly addressing the point from its legitmacy as a means of defense of innocent life.

 

[Brendan]

I thought this was interesting since you’ve been there up close. I’ve thought similarly (for the US, since I think we have the means to hold people away from society safely) but I add “and also for those that escape prison.”

Both those cases, those who kill in prison and those who escape ( I put put in the caveat of escape and injure again)
are signs that the State failed in it’s initial assessment of the criminal.

The obligation to protect fellow prisoners or guards exists BEFORE they kill in prison. That is where the State must make it’s assement on if to use Captital Punishment: those who the State cannot resonably prevent from killing while in prison.

 

[Al_Masetti]

A prison inmate named George Hyatt aided by his wife Jennifer murdered a prison guard, Cotton Wayne Morgan, in Tennessee, August 9, 2005. They were at the Brushy Mountain Correctional Complex. Hyatt was being transferred between the court and the prison.

So, there’s one to add to the list.

 

[gorman64]

Throughout the Catechism and 2000 years of writings one can find appropriate references to justice and punishment so as to understand the Church’s consistent teaching. 2267 however is silent on these considerations - inappropriately so. Until this is addressed this issue will remain unresolved.

I will grant you that the CCC is regrettably silent on that point.

But how can the Church omit such an important teaching in an official catechism? This is contrary to Her own teaching about Herself. This is what I think is lost on so many here…the Church teaches us who She is and what her attributes are…She cannot neglect such an important truth.

 

[krokal]

A prison inmate named George Hyatt aided by his wife Jennifer murdered a prison guard, Cotton Wayne Morgan, in Tennessee, August 9, 2005. They were at the Brushy Mountain Correctional Complex. Hyatt was being transferred between the court and the prison.

So, there’s one to add to the list.

I’m fairly positive that George Hyatte was in prison for like assault and robbery, not murder. Your point is mute.

 

[Ender]

I was strictly addressing the point from its legitmacy as a means of defense of innocent life.

Even on this point I think it fails. Given the response to Saddam’s execution it should be clear that there will never be a situation where the Church (the Vatican, the USCCB, …) will approve of the use of the death penalty. Therefore it is disingenuous to infer that 2267 is not a total ban on executions.

But why would you restrict the discussion to the question of self defense? That is not the significant issue. It’s like worrying about the condition of your tires and ignoring the sounds coming from your engine that suggest it has seized up.

I do not accept that executions turn on the issue of safety; I believe that 2267 is seriously flawed and will at some point be reworked. That’s going to be difficult to do and it may be a long time coming - which is why it is important to remember that the teaching is prudential, it is one with which we may disagree.

Ender

 

[gorman64]

But why would you restrict the discussion to the question of self defense?

Note also that self-defense is dealt with separately in the Roman Catechism…it has nothing to do with the civil authority executing criminals.

 

[dudleysharp]

My other objection goes much deeper. It is now routine for long term prisoners including death row inmates to be released when DNA or other evidence proves they were not guilty of the crime for which they had been convicted…

5 death row inmates have been release because of DNA exclusion. Possibly, in the US, we have sentneced 25 factually innocent to death row since 1973. They have been released.

Innocents are more at risk, without a death penalty.

PJP II based his writings on defense of society, which is a penological consideration, not a religious one. By doing so he omitted justice. More importantly, he avoided the reality that the death penalty is a greater defense of society than lesser sentences and in by so doing, he has called for the sparing of guilty lives by the sacrifice of more innocents.

We all know that living murderers, in prison, after escape or after our failures to incarcerate them, are much more likely to harm and murder, again, than are executed murderers.

No knowledgeable party questions that the death penalty has the most extensive due process protections in US criminal law. Therefore, it is logically conclusive, that actual innocents are more likely to be sentenced to life imprisonment and more likely to die in prison serving under that sentence, that it is that an actual innocent will be executed.

Thirdly, 10 recent studies find for death penalty deterrence. Some believe that all studies with contrary findings negate those 10 studies. They don’t. Studies which don’t find for deterrence don’t say no one is deterred, but that they cannot measure those deterred, if they are.

Ask yourself: “What prospect of a negative outcome doesn’t deter some?” There isn’t one, although committed anti death penalty folk may say the death penalty is the only one. However, the premier anti death penalty scholar accepts it as a given that the death penalty is a deterrent, but does not believe it to be a greater deterrent than a life sentence. I find the evidence compelling that death is feared more than life - even in prison.

In choosing to end the death penalty, or in choosing not implement it, some have chosen to put more innocents at risk.

Furthermore, possibly we have sentenced 20-25 actually innocent people to death since 1973, or 0.3% of those so sentenced. Those have been released upon post conviction review.