Wanting Death Penalty

[otjm]

except you really don’t want to connect punishment for public crimes to a sense or purpose of individual justice.

I have no doubt that some of the jurors would do so at least in part. No one is so unemotionally involved in a case that the thought does not intrude.

No - I don’t want it to devolve to that alone, or in the majority. But I was answering a question asked; and the reality is that there are many individuals who have a very strict sense of justice, and some of them are or have been family members of victims of murder.

 

[IrishRush]

I identify as a conservative, yet I’m absolutely against the death penalty.
I feel that no one but God has the right to take a life, since no one but God can create life.
As far as justice for the family of a murder victim… having first hand experience of a family member killed in a terrorist act, and knowing that not only the perpetrator but also the planners did not survive has not brought me peace. I still miss my father terribly.
Killing the people behind the bombing that killed my father did not stop people from repeating, or try to repeat, that act.
I don’t know what the ultimate answer to the question here is, but my thought is total banishment from society. And I don’t mean prison, as we understand it. I mean complete removal from society - maybe to some remote island or desert area, rotating employees through similarly to the way tours of duty are rotated in the military.
But killing in response to killing is not the answer.

 

[Fairwinds]

I…
But killing in response to killing is not the answer.

except that it can be shown, conclusively, that a small number of killers continue to kill from behind bars, despite the best efforts to stop them.

so what you’re really saying is that the inevitable future innocent victims of drug lords and terrorists (the two examples above) are less important that their killers.

why is that? I’ve never understood why the no DP ever people are so blind to this fact, moreover, it flatly contradicts the CCC.

 

[minkymurph]

I am against the death penalty and I will outline my reasons.

In the first instance I would say I do not think it is morally wrong that if you take a life you should forfeit your own. However, why not apply this rule to all crime? If this is justice then if you steal a car you should forfeit your own. If you steal £100 pounds/dollars from someone, pay it back. If you can’t, work off the debt. I think it is more just to impose penalties such as these than put people in prison. If you are put in prison for stealing a car or money, you are punished but the person you stole from still suffers the loss and the taxpayer foots the bill. This was how the Law of Moses operated. However, in that society such a system of justice could operate. In contemporary society yes, the death penalty would punish, and it can be argued the punishment fits the crime, but just justice and punishment are two different things.

Non-arbitrary justice is not reactionary and not governed by emotion. As such what circumstances should the death penalty be imposed? There is a risk that when society is particularly outraged the death penalty would be imposed which carries the risk of arbitrary justice.

We know for certain there have been people executed for crimes they did not commit. The reason was due to the failings of the judicial system. If we have the death penalty it can happen again. We know for certain DNA evidence is subject to human fallibility and can, and has, been tampered with.

Of course we have the scenario were we are certain, and some argue in this case the death penalty is warranted. I am not saying it is not, and there is many a person I can say I would not shed many tears over. My counter-argument would be why give them the easy way out? Let them live for years in misery with what they have done. I’ll happily pay taxes for this reason. I am not saying this to be vindictive, as justice is not vindictive. I am saying it because I think they should be given the same life sentence they handed to the families of their victims have.

Many people who have committed horrendous crimes want to die - they want out so they don’t have to live with themselves. Rudolf Hess attempted suicide on more than one occasion, they kept him alive for years and I say they were right. Ian Huntley has attempted suicide. Other prisoners have tried to kill Ian Huntley. Let him live with that fear, knowing how society and even other criminals think of him. Ian Brady wants to die and they are force feeding him to keep him alive. Why give him what he wants? In addition, he has yet to disclose were he buried some of his victims. I say when he gives that up and lets the families of his victims lay them to rest, why should society give him what he wants?

In addition, we don’t want to let terrorists become ‘martyrs,’ which they may well do. We could say, ‘let them make martyrs of them, they will still be dead.’ I think it is more hurtful and offensive to let this happen.

 

[padrepio_2012]

The death penalty is wrong and the Church is against it. I have a pamphlet on it right here. No one, not even the government, has the right to take another humans life or decide when they should die. Even if they committed the most haneous of sins it isn’t right to kill them. Remember two wrongs don’t make a right. If we stoop to the level of the murderer and murder him, how is that justice? We just go down to his level and don’t accomplish anything. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. No one should take another persons life. Everyone deserves life and being in prison alone with your conscience is bad enough

 

[Baelor]

even then, the anti-DPers will find a way to hand wave the necessity away.

Necessity is exactly that. Necessity means no other option is available.

strawman argument. criminal punishment brings justice to the public, not to individuals.

Justice is not a sufficient reason for capital punishment.

except that it can be shown, conclusively, that a small number of killers continue to kill from behind bars, despite the best efforts to stop them.

And such persons may be executed according to the Church.

 

[Fairwinds]

…
We know for certain there have been people executed for crimes they did not commit. The reason was due to the failings of the judicial system. If we have the death penalty it can happen again. We know for certain DNA evidence is subject to human fallibility and can, and has, been tampered with…

this DNA dodge is the latest misdirection. not every crime is solved by DNA, so its a false argument to demand this evidence when its not required.

there’s not going to be any DNA evidence in cases where jailed drug lords order hits or continue to run their narco-trafficking using attorneys and family members as messengers, as the FBI report pointed out. 2011 National Gang Threat Assessment – Emerging Trends. if you have any contrary evidence showing this doesn’t happen, please let me know.

there wasn’t any DNA evidence when Omar Abdel-Rahman, jailed for planning the first WTC bombings used his attorney Lynne Stewart to pass messages to the outside, resulting in rioting and deaths. from wikipedia on Stewart: “Stewart was accused in the indictment of passing Rahman’s blessing for a resumption of terrorist operations to Al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya members in Egypt after they inquired whether they should continue to honor a ceasefire agreement with the Egyptian government” see footnotes.

so those drug lords and OAR should have been executed.

you may commence hand wave excuses, explanations and special pleading.

 

[Fairwinds]

Justice is not a sufficient reason for capital punishment…

you have an unusual definition of justice, if you have one at all.

 

[Forkfoot]

However, there are some who have actually considered different aspects of the question and come to their own conclusions, so just because someone has an opinion on the issue does not mean they have only relied on their favorite political pundits to form their opinions, even if the opinion seems very similar to that of one political way of thinking or another.

Okay. There is a very, very heavy overlap between the Fox News Catholics and the pro-death penalty Catholics though; let’s not pretend otherwise.

 

[Fairwinds]

The death penalty is wrong and the Church is against it. I have a pamphlet on it right here. No one, not even the government, has the right to take another humans life or decide when they should die. Even if they committed the most haneous of sins it isn’t right to kill them. Remember two wrongs don’t make a right. If we stoop to the level of the murderer and murder him, how is that justice? We just go down to his level and don’t accomplish anything. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. No one should take another persons life. Everyone deserves life and being in prison alone with your conscience is bad enough

cool. you have a pamphlet. we’ve been using the online version of the CCC as authoritative of what the Church teaches. you might want to look it up.

strawman arguments like yours are tedious.

ProTip: the pro-DP advocates on this forum limit the DP to very specific, narrow instances that conform to the CCC.

 

[Fairwinds]

Okay. There is a very, very heavy overlap between the Fox News Catholics and the pro-death penalty Catholics though; let’s not pretend otherwise.

what’s a “fox news catholic”? is that some artificial label like “raddie trads” or “cafeteria catholics”?

 

[minkymurph]

strawman argument. criminal punishment brings justice to the public, not to individuals.

every murderer and terrorist executed has never committed an act of terror or murdered anyone again. QED

They personally never have. But it has been established their execution inspires others - wrongly of course but ‘wrongness’ doesn’t stop it, to follow in their footsteps who may not have had it not been for their execution.

We also know for a fact that people connected with terrorism or sympathetic to terrorist groups were executed for murders they did not commit - meaning those who did were still at large.

 

[Baelor]

you have an unusual definition of justice, if you have one at all.

The CCC is explicit. Capital punishment is permissible as a means of self-defense if no other recourse is available. That is the only case in which capital punishment is permissible. It is questionable whether the Church consider it a means of justice at all. The CCC suggests that She does not.

 

[otjm]

I am personally against the death penalty, for several reasons.

It has been MHO that sentencing someone to life in prison for life (and I am not talking about 25 years and parole) is a far more difficult sentence for the convicted than execution. There are not too many prisoners who have been executed who would not have taken a life sentence. However, interestingly, Oregon has in the last several years had two prisoners commit suicide by execution - both cut off their appeals, fired their lawyers, and requested execution, and both made very clear that the alternative of living their life out in prison was not something they could deal with. There has been a tremendous amount of talk about how easy prison life is. However, that is talk directed to the general population. a dangerous killer, particularly one who showed no compunction at all about who they killed, is not someone who is going to be kicking it with the general population. hard core, deadly criminals are not left to roam the floors and recreate with the rest of the prisoners.

Oregon now has its third prisoner attempting to end his life short of the appellate process, and our Governor has put a stop to it (and that is now being appealed). So we now have three separate men who have said they would rather die than live out their life in prison - and they have not spoken theoretically.

So one has to seriously question whether death by injection is worse than life in a cell. The evidence is not theoretical; it is real.

The second reason is that I have had far too much experience with the judicial system to think that it is not capable of gross fault. I take very seriously the reality that nation-wide, we have sentenced people to death for crimes they did not commit; some we have executed, and a few have finally, well after their trial, been able to find evidence that proves they did not commit the crime. While I am not so naïve as to believe that someone who gets life will have post conviction thorough search for exculpatory evidence as one who is sentenced to death, at lest at a minimum we have not executed an innocent person.

There is also a serious disconnect between the commission of a crime of murder (or other capital crime) and an execution 10, 15, 20 or more years later. Given our system of justice, that drags out executions almost beyond memory of what occurred, justice surely is not swift.

 

[Fairwinds]

The CCC is explicit. Capital punishment is permissible as a means of self-defense if no other recourse is available. That is the only case in which capital punishment is permissible. It is questionable whether the Church consider it a means of justice at all. The CCC suggests that She does not.

key language:

Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically nonexistent.

“very rare” and “practically nonexistent” do not mean never. if the CCC uses those phrases, they have a meaning, otherwise they’d be superfluous. your suggestion as to what you want the CCC to mean is a direct contradiction of what it says.

rare instances, like that sheikh, or those drug bosses in prison, and others like them.

 

[Fairwinds]

I am personally against the death penalty, for several reasons…

all the usual ones. you could have just said, “all the usual ones” and there’d be no doubt what you meant.

so you’re ok with imprisoned drug gang bosses getting word out to the street gang to murder more innocents?

cuz that’s what happens.

 

[Baelor]

“very rare” and “practically nonexistent” do not mean never.

I agree.

if the CCC uses those phrases, they have a meaning, otherwise they’d be superfluous.

I agree.

your suggestion as to what you want the CCC to mean is a direct contradiction of what it says.

Really? In what way?

 

[Fairwinds]

…Really? In what way?

claim withdrawn.

 

[otjm]

all the usual ones. you could have just said, “all the usual ones” and there’d be no doubt what you meant.

so you’re ok with imprisoned drug gang bosses getting word out to the street gang to murder more innocents?

cuz that’s what happens.

No, they are the exception to any rational policy of life imprisonment.

But either way - life or death, they are a high risk, and the system of justice we have with the extended appeals leaves people on the outside vulnerable. Not sure what the solution is short of no contact with anyone (which would have to include guards) who could be used, corrupted, or benefit by being a conduit.

There is simply too much evidence that the justice system is not blind when it comes to executions. What results in a death penalty in one state doesn’t in another; and the poor and the racially different are disproportionately executed; it is hard to call that justice.

 

[Fairwinds]

No, they are the exception to any rational policy of life imprisonment.

But either way - life or death, they are a high risk, and the system of justice we have with the extended appeals leaves people on the outside vulnerable. Not sure what the solution is short of no contact with anyone (which would have to include guards) who could be used, corrupted, or benefit by being a conduit.

There is simply too much evidence that the justice system is not blind when it comes to executions. What results in a death penalty in one state doesn’t in another; and the poor and the racially different are disproportionately executed; it is hard to call that justice.

and there are situations where guilt is absolutely determined, which is one of the conditions the CCC lays down.

that is not the only condition. and concern that innocent people have been condemned is a valid reason to say the DP shouldn’t apply in most cases. however, where guilt is unquestioned, and the public safety cannot be guaranteed (and I’ll even give them a free killing, but only one), then the DP is proper.