When is the death penalty justified?

[LJN21]

Just remember today’s mass reading…we will all be judged the way we judge others…

How about the whole verse:

“Judge not, that you be judged. For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you. And why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me remove the speck from your eye’; and look, a plank is in your own eye? Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye” -Matthew 7:1-5

We’re not calling people hypocrites. This doesn’t even apply to the the state protecting the innocent.

The protestants get in trouble when the take the bible out of context lets not fall in that trap.

 

[LJN21]

This I think is the most telling part on how Jesus veiws capital punishment. When Jesus faces Pontius Pilate, Pilate says to Jesus: “Do You not know that I have power to crucify You…?” Jesus replies: “You could have no power at all against Me unless it had been given you from above.” (John 19:10-11) Jesus reminds Pilate that the use of the death penalty is a divinely entrusted responsibility that is to be justly implemented. In Jesus Christ’s crucifixion, one of the criminals crucified next to Jesus said: “…we receive the due reward of our deeds…Lord, remember me when You come into Your kingdom.” Jesus replied: “Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise.” (Luke 23:42-43) That pardon did not extend to eliminating the consequences of his crime.

 

[estesbob]

What do u think about it, estesbob?

I dont believe in the death penatly under any circumstances.

 

[whatevergirl]

How about the whole verse:

“Judge not, that you be judged. For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you. And why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me remove the speck from your eye’; and look, a plank is in your own eye? Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye” -Matthew 7:1-5

We’re not calling people hypocrites. This doesn’t even apply to the the state protecting the innocent.

The protestants get in trouble when the take the bible out of context lets not fall in that trap.

I don’t want to be insulted anymore. Have a good night, LJ.

 

[whatevergirl]

I dont believe in the death penatly under any circumstances.

Good luck in this thread

 

[LJN21]

I don’t want to be insulted anymore. Have a good night, LJ.

I’m sorry, I have no intention of coming off as insulting. I’m just trying to point out the historical, biblical teaching on capital punishment.

 

[whatevergirl]

I’m sorry, I have no intention of coming off as insulting. I’m just trying to point out the historical, biblical teaching on capital punishment.

It’s ok…I just think I’ll bow out of this…God’s blessings to you, LJ.

 

[Peregrino]

The death penalty is never justified.

 

[LJN21]

The death penalty is never justified.

So Aquinas and Augustine are wrong?

 

[Charlie_Zeaiter]

The death penalty is never justified.

Actually, our Archbishop reminded us that death penalty can be justified if “there is no other way of defending the community.”

I guess the argument in this thread is whether or not a criminal in prison poses a threat to the community. Obviously, the prison in question needs to be considered in this debate.

It’s a shame that a super-power like America can’t be safe from people in prisons.

 

[Sheeniac]

No…I’m against it…I do know though that the CCC does make some ‘disclaimers’ for extreme cases…lack of a better word. But, I don’t mean to appear wishy washy whatsoever…I don’t believe in it, personally…thanks for your note.

Ok.

I don’t think there’s a single person on this thread who is anti-mercy in general or against rehabilitating people, etc. I do think some of us are attempting to make the point that some criminals are beyond that point and are a serious threat to others as long as they are alive.

No one is saying that every person who is convicted of murder should be fried.

As I read the arguments of posters who are anti-DP, I get the distinct impression that they think that those who are in favor of it being on the table are anti-mercy, anti-rehab, kill-em-all-and-let-God-sort-them-out.

We all want justice, we all want some measure of being secure against deadly threats.

 

[Sheeniac]

I still don’t like the whole idea behind the DP…as I have always thought revenge is the Lord’s…but, your explanation makes a valid point, and is a different way of looking at the whole argument.

Revenge? I think there are those who want revenge, but it plays no part in my opinions.

 

[Ender]

The death penalty is never justified.

There are a lot of people who feel this way - despite the fact that the Church has always taught differently. The more I investigate this issue the less impressed I am with the arguments against it but unfortunately the discussion bounces around so much it seems impossible to follow any one point for long. Have we gotten anywhere? Can anyone list the arguments against the death penalty they think are still unanswered? I posted something this afternoon … and it turns out that was five pages ago. I enjoy discussing this topic but - can anyone summarize where we are?

Ender

 

[Sheeniac]

I guess I look at all this a bit differently. As much as I saw your earlier point, I don’t think that the death penalty is needed if people can remain in prison for life. The problem lies more within our judicial system…letting child rapists out after 5 years…then, for them to kill the next time. The sentences are more of the problem, in my eyes.

This has been addressed already. Life in prison doesn’t mean they will not kill again. Vern has made that point repeatedly.

I come at it from a different angle - that other imprisoned people will be maimed or killed. We can’t even protect those that are put in jail. Yes, they’re criminals too, and many are very bad people. But if the State didn’t give them the death penalty (even if I think someone in a given case deserved it), then their fellow criminals who include the most depraved among us shouldn’t be given the opportunity to kill.

 

[Sheeniac]

It’s ok…I just think I’ll bow out of this…God’s blessings to you, LJ.

I thought you left before!



FWIW, I totally agree with your husband. He’s probably not registering here because he doesn’t want to inadvertently debate with you more!

Amish - personal forgiveness is a good thing. But I view the DP at a societal level, not a personal/individual level. The State is the actor in a criminal trial, not the victim and family.

osama bin laden? I’m up in the air about him. Honestly, I hope a soldier takes him out. Saddam - I had hoped the same for him, but thought the DP was appropriate. And yes, I prayed for his soul.

 

[Charlie_Zeaiter]

… can anyone summarize where we are?

Ender

We had a similar discusson regarding gun control.

The conclusion; Kill, or be killed.

And don’t forget to say your prayers; We’re christians!

 

[LJN21]

We had a similar discusson regarding gun control.

The conclusion; Kill, or be killed.

And don’t forget to say your prayers; We’re christians!

So its not okay for a christian to protect them self?

What if I chose to take marshal arts, carry pepper spray, have a big dog or just choose to lock my doors at night? Is it a shame I live in the American super power and I feel the need to protect me self in those ways? It doesn’t require a gun to kill someone in self defence.

Actully I think I’m problably much safer than you anyway.

worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=21902

weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/001/266umtwb.asp

 

[LJN21]

More statitics:

. Fact: The murder rates in many nations (such as England) were ALREADY LOW BEFORE enacting gun control. Thus, their restrictive laws cannot be credited with lowering their crime rates.1
2. Fact: Gun control has done nothing to keep crime rates from rising in many of the nations that have imposed severe firearms restrictions.

• Australia: Readers of the USA Today newspaper discovered in 2002 that, "Since Australia’s 1996 laws banning most guns and making it a crime to use a gun defensively, armed robberies rose by 51%, unarmed robberies by 37%, assaults by 24% and kidnappings by 43%. While murders fell by 3%, manslaughter rose by 16%."2
• Canada: After enacting stringent gun control laws in 1991 and 1995, Canada has not made its citizens any safer. “The contrast between the criminal violence rates in the United States and in Canada is dramatic,” says Canadian criminologist Gary Mauser in 2003. “Over the past decade, the rate of violent crime in Canada has increased while in the United States the violent crime rate has plummeted.” 3
• England: According to the BBC News, handgun crime in the United Kingdom rose by 40% in the two years after it passed its draconian gun ban in 1997.4
• Japan: One newspaper headline says it all: Police say "Crime rising in Japan, while arrests at record low."5

1. Fact: British citizens are now more likely to become a victim of crime than are people in the United States:

• In 1998, a study conducted jointly by statisticians from the U.S. Department of Justice and the University of Cambridge in England found that most crime is now worse in England than in the United States.
• “You are more likely to be mugged in England than in the United States,” stated the Reuters news agency in summarizing the study. "The rate of robbery is now 1.4 times higher in England and Wales than in the United States, and the British burglary rate is nearly double America’s."6 The murder rate in the United States is reportedly higher than in England, but according to the DOJ study, "the difference between the [murder rates in the] two countries has narrowed over the past 16 years."7
• The United Nations confirmed these results in 2000 when it reported that the crime rate in England is higher than the crime rates of 16 other industrialized nations, including the United States.8

1. Fact: British authorities routinely underreport crime statistics. Comparing statistics between different nations can be quite difficult since foreign officials frequently use different standards in compiling crime statistics.

• The British media has remained quite critical of authorities there for “fiddling” with crime data. Consider some of the headlines in their papers: "Crime figures a sham, say police,"9 "Police are accused of fiddling crime data,"10 and "Police figures under-record offences by 20 percent."11
• British police have also criticized the system because of the “widespread manipulation” of crime data:

a. "Officers said that pressure to convince the public that police were winning the fight against crime had resulted in a long list of ruses to ‘massage’ statistics."12

b. Sgt. Mike Bennett says officers have become increasingly frustrated with the practice of manipulating statistics. “The crime figures are meaningless,” he said. "Police everywhere know exactly what is going on."13

c. According to The Electronic Telegraph, "Officers said the recorded level of crime bore no resemblance to the actual amount of crime being committed."14

• Underreporting crime data: "One former Scotland Yard officer told The Telegraph of a series of tricks that rendered crime figures ‘a complete sham.’ A classic example, he said, was where a series of homes in a block flats were burgled and were regularly recorded as one crime. Another involved pickpocketing, which was not recorded as a crime unless the victim had actually seen the item being stolen."15
• Underreporting murder data: British crime reporting tactics keep murder rates artificially low. "Suppose that three men kill a woman during an argument outside a bar. They are arrested for murder, but because of problems with identification (the main witness is dead), charges are eventually dropped. In American crime statistics, the event counts as a three-person homicide, but in British statistics it counts as nothing at all. ‘With such differences in reporting criteria, comparisons of U.S. homicide rates with British homicide rates is a sham,’ [a 2000 report from the Inspectorate of Constabulary] concludes."16

cont…

 

[LJN21]

Referance for the above post

1Kleck, Point Blank, at 393, 394; Colin Greenwood, Chief Inspector of West Yorkshire Constabulary, Firearms Control: A Study of Armed Crime and Firearms Control in England and Wales (1972):31; David Kopel, The Samurai, the Mountie, and the Cowboy: Should America Adopt the Gun Controls of Other Democracies (1992):91, 154.
2Dr. John R. Lott, Jr., “Gun laws don’t reduce crime,” USA Today (May 9, 2002). See also Rhett Watson and Matthew Bayley, “Gun crime up 40pc since Port Arthur,” The Daily Telegraph (April 28, 2002).
3 Gary A. Mauser, “The Failed Experiment: Gun Control and Public Safety in Canada, Australia, England and Wales,” Public Policy Sources (The Fraser Institute, November 2003), no. 71:4. This study can be accessed at fraserinstitute.org/shared/readmore.asp?sNav=pb&id=604.
4"Handgun crime ‘up’ despite ban," BBC News Online (July 16, 2001) at news.bbc.co.uk/low/english/uk/newsid_1440000/1440764.stm. England is a prime example of how crime has increased after implementing gun control. For example, the original Pistols Act of 1903 did not stop murders from increasing on the island. The number of murders in England was 68 percent higher the year after the ban’s enactment (1904) as opposed to the year before (1902). (Greenwood, supra note 1.) This was not an aberration, as almost seven decades later, firearms crimes in the U.K. were still on the rise: the number of cases where firearms were used or carried in a crime skyrocketed almost 1,000 percent from 1946 through 1969. (Greenwood, supra note 1 at 158.) And by 1996, the murder rate in England was 132 percent higher than it had been before the original gun ban of 1903 was enacted. (Compare Greenwood, supra note 1, with Bureau of Justice Statistics, Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96, Bureau of Justice Statistics, October 1998).
5"Crime rising in Japan, while arrests at record low: police," AFP News (August 3, 2001); “A crime wave alarms Japan, once gun-free,” The Philadelphia Inquirer, 11 July 1992.
6"Most Crime Worse in England Than US, Study Says," Reuters (October 11, 1998). See also Bureau of Justice Statistics, Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96 (October 1998).
7See BJS study, supra note 6 at iii.
8John van Kesteren, Pat Mayhew and Paul Nieuwbeerta, “Criminal Victimisation in Seventeen Industrialised Courtries: Key findings from the 2000 International Crime Victims Survey,” (2000). This study can be read at unicri.it/icvs/publications/index_pub.htm. The link is to the ICVS homepage; study data are available for download as Acrobat pdf files.
9Ian Henry and Tim Reid, “Crime figures a sham, say police,” The Electronic Telegraph (April 1, 1996).
10Tim Reid, “Police are accused of fiddling crime data,” The Electronic Telegraph (May 4, 1997).
11John Steele, “Police figures under-record offences by 20 percent,” The Electronic Telegraph (July 13, 2000).
12See supra note (Crime figures a sham…)
13Ibid.
14Ibid.
15See supra note (fiddling).
16Dave Kopel, Dr. Paul Gallant and Dr. Joanne Eisen, “Britain: From Bad to Worse,” NewsMax.com (March 22, 2001).

 

[vern_humphrey]

“Girl.” But, whatever.

Or, just let you in there with your gun, to pick out all which ones need the death penalty. (Oh, the heck with it. Why not just kill them all, and then let God sort them out? )

You’ve lost your temper, and you’re saying things you know you shouldn’t say. Why not sit back and compose yourself before making another post?