Death penalty: Are you for or against it?

[Saint Frankenstein]

No? does the Catholic Church has a weigthing system when it comes to take lives (today)?

I am not aware of this. Can you give me some pointers so that I can research this further?

Ciao

- viole

Well, of course the Bible does not say anything against the death penalty. There you have the moral Giver in person commanding the annihilation of people, the cutting apart of pregnant women, the slaying of pets and the slashing of little kids against walls. I cannot comment on this. He is your moral role model, not mine.

And if it is true (it is) that the Catholic Church approved the death penalty (together with torture and burning people alive,) then we have a problem. The Catholic Church today condemns the death penalty, without any doubt.

So, either you believe in a system that contradicts itself or... in a system that accepts cultural relativism or... in a system that admits to have been wrong in the past.. or in a system that is lying today about its position.

Your call, really.

Ciao

- viole

This isn't a Religious Debate thread. Go take your religion bashing somewhere else, because I don't care about it.

 

[Curious George]

Something that works with the four accepted justifications for sentencing:

- general deterrence
- specific deterrence
- inculcation
- rehabilitation

I don't know of any punishment that's perfect at all of these, but the death penalty fails at all four.

It fails at specific deterrence? Which person after being subjected to the death penalty committed a crime again?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

The Catholic Church does not teach that you must agree with the personal opinions of the pope where it doesn't address doctrine.



In principle, the Church does not forbid the possibly the the death penalty, even if the actual circumstances where it's justified are rare. If it's the personal opinion of the pope that the death penalty is always wrong he's entitled to that, but such opinion is hardly binding on Catholics when the Church in her authoritative documents says otherwise.

Thank you, brother. I would hope that would be the end of it.

 

[Deidre]

All.

Nothing can undo the crime, though. If someone were to murder one of my loves ones, friends, etc...executing him/her would not bring the person back, or take away my pain. It is designed to frighten the person who is doomed to the death penalty, and little more, if we're honest. And even then, that might not even transpire. But, this is just my belief, everyone is welcome to theirs.

 

[Curious George]

Nothing can undo the crime, though. If someone were to murder one of my loves ones, friends, etc...executing him/her would not bring the person back, or take away my pain. It is designed to frighten the person who is doomed to the death penalty, and little more, if we're honest. And even then, that might not even transpire. But, this is just my belief, everyone is welcome to theirs.

I did not say that it would bring anyone back. I did not say it would take away your pain. Behind my assertion is that society is everyone is better without the existence of some people.

 

[Deidre]

I did not say that it would bring anyone back. I did not say it would take away your pain. Behind my assertion is that society is everyone is better without the existence of some people.

I know, I'm just stating that those are my opinions. But, if someone is sealed away behind bars and that is their punishment for a particular crime or crimes, why isn't that 'enough?'

 

[Curious George]

I know, I'm just stating that those are my opinions. But, if someone is sealed away behind bars and that is their punishment for a particular crime or crimes, why isn't that 'enough?'

For a variety of reasons, that might not be enough.

In most situations, it is enough.

That it is enough in most situations does not mean it is enough in all situations.

I went through this a little earlier.

 

[columbus]

In a letter to the President of the International Commission Against the Death Penalty, Pope Francis expressed the Catholic Church's opposition to the death penalty, calling it "inadmissible, no matter how serious the crime committed." He continued, "It is an offence against the inviolability of life and the dignity of the human person, which contradicts God's plan for man and society, and his merciful justice, and impedes the penalty from fulfilling any just objective. It does not render justice to the victims, but rather fosters vengeance." He acknowledged society's need to protect itself from aggressors, but said, "When the death penalty is applied, it is not for a current act of aggression, but rather for an act committed in the past. It is also applied to persons whose current ability to cause harm is not current, as it has been neutralized -- they are already deprived of their liberty." He also addressed questions of methods of execution, saying, “There is discussion in some quarters about the method of killing, as if it were possible to find ways of 'getting it right'. … But there is no humane way of killing another person.”

I am not inclined to buy any of the Catholic theology, but I do find Pope Francis very good at explaining sophisticated modern morality. I think he sums up much of the issue very well here.
Tom

 

[columbus]

Do you support the death penalty for those who remain a credible threat?

For example an ideological terrorist could radicalise non-lifers in prison who eventually get out and harm society. Sympathisers might also take hostages to force the government to release them. Or maybe in the case of extremely violent prisoners who remain a constant threat to other prisoners and prison staff.

Yes, I don't have many absolutes.
The super violent are one problem. Those people are just nuts. If solitary confinement doesn't provide enough security, it may just be the only option.

The terrorist thing is different. That is war, even if it is different from the old ones. Those people are often attacking the society and getting shot at just comes with the job. That is self defense in a way that executing a murderer is not. It's a different issue to me. Still better if avoidable, but it might not be. I'm not losing any sleep over that, for sure.
Tom

 

[Yerda]

In general I am very much against the death penalty, but with that said I am not so sure that the alternatives in the most extreme cases are very effective. While rehabilitation can work for the mainstream criminal, there are a few special types that have demonstrated quite clearly that they have no place in society.

I'm opposed to the death penalty but I sympathise with this very much.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

I think for those people for whom rehabilitation proves to be impossible, this should be a reserve option.

 

[Saint_of_Me]

It doesn't lessen crimes in society, it doesn't serve as a deterrent. If it doesn't serve as a deterrent, and it doesn't bring justice, what's the point of it? It also diminishes life to not having intrinsic value, but to only having value based on one's actions. Every one has value, even the worst of us all. Self defense, if your life is truly in danger, or a country is in danger and is in need of dire protection...that is somewhat different. In many ways, that is reactive and instinctive. But, the DP is a deliberate, calculated act of punishment.

Actually if the death penalty was used correctly it WOULD serve as a deterrent. Especially if ti were applied to some other crimes like the OP mentioned.
You gonna try and say that if we killed guys in town square a couple weeks after sentencing for rape or financial fraud or animal abuse or drug dealing that those who deal in those sorts of things would not think twice or even desist in their criminal activities?

LOL. They would. Want proof? Check out the crime rate in countries with Draconian punishment, like in the Middle East or China.

Again--the lone problem with Capitol Punishment in this country is that it is not employed nearly expediently or often enough.

Are you a liberal? LOL..one of those who believe in therapy for criminals instead of mere incarceration, death, or hard labor?

You know what the definition of a liberal is?

Somebody who hasn't been mugged yet.

LOL.

Peace.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It fails to be any better at sp

It fails at specific deterrence? Which person after being subjected to the death penalty committed a crime again?

It fails to be any better at specific deterrence than life imprisonment. The extra severity buys you nothing.

 

[Curious George]

It fails to be any better at sp

It fails to be any better at specific deterrence than life imprisonment. The extra severity buys you nothing.

Hmm, could someone serving a life sentence kill another inmate or an officer?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Hmm, could someone serving a life sentence kill another inmate or an officer?

It's possible, but apparently it's a lot more possible with the death penalty than without:

Between 2001 and 2007, states with the death penalty had considerably higher prison murder rates on average (4.25/100,000, with four of 38 states reporting no prison homicides in that time period) than those states without the death penalty (.92/100,000, with 7 of 12 states reporting no prison homicides).

https://death.rdsecure.org/article.php?id=555

 

[Curious George]

It's possible, but apparently it's a lot more possible with the death penalty than without:


https://death.rdsecure.org/article.php?id=555

Except that is the furthest thing from causation and in no way relates to specific deterrence....But it does bring up an interesting cost or at least potential cost. Does allowing government approved killing have a psychological negative cost to general public, to inmates, to officers, etc.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Except that is the furthest thing from causation and in no way relates to specific deterrence....

It does, though. Capital offenders aren't summarily executed; they have years or decades for appeals and whatnot. During that time, they already know that they're getting the harshest penalty that can be given, so any more crime they commit before their execution date basically gets a free pass. This speaks directly to specific deterrence.

... though I agree that this is probably more a matter of correlation than causation. Any state whose sense of justice is so messed up that it thinks that executing people is a good idea probably has other deeper root issues that could be causing this effect.

 

[Curious George]

It does, though. Capital offenders aren't summarily executed; they have years or decades for appeals and whatnot. During that time, they already know that they're getting the harshest penalty that can be given, so any more crime they commit before their execution date basically gets a free pass. This speaks directly to specific deterrence.

... though I agree that this is probably more a matter of correlation than causation. Any state whose sense of justice is so messed up that it thinks that executing people is a good idea probably has other deeper root issues that could be causing this effect.

For correlation you would need a study on death row offenders held in general population. Compared to death row offenders held on death row. But even that wouldn't be correct because such would bias it the other way unfairly, for nothing in the advocating of stopping the DP entails having death row types in general population. My point was that the study is to broad to show even correlation with death row types. So, you don't even have correlation.

It does certainly show an interesting trend. I would suggest that this trend would likely fit with a general trend of dehumanization. The more we treat people like monsters the more they will act as such.

The death penalty needn't entail dehumanization, despite some DP advocates eagerness to dehumanize.

 

[Leftimies]

This is my take on the death penalty:

1: In certain crime scenarios, the death penalty is the morally just punishment; so in theory, there is merit behind the idea.
2: However, the fact remains that death penalty can be manipulated by the government to get rid of someone (happens in China for example).
3: Due to the clause 2 and in spite of clause 1, the risks of the existence of a death penalty outweigh its fairly minimal benefits.

So yeah, I am against death penalty on rational grounds - in moral theory and general imagination, it has its moments though.

 

[MD]

Constitution be damned?

I find threads like this relevant to show how fragile our society is. With so many who think this way, I am often amazed that that piece of paper still exists.

Re: the sense of vigilante justice, I suppose even ISIS believes they are righteous.

This isn't vigilante, this is true justice. What you call as 'compassion' is cowardice and allowing evil which has terrorized people to come back and terrorize again, just so some people can sleep better at night.

What about everyone who is going to pay because of people too weak and scared to do the right thing? What happens when you live in an area where criminals roam free and terrorize people because the justice system is filled with cowards and bleeding hearts who don't know that the right thing would be to remove them from society for good!?

The only reason you would let these people go is because they won't terrorize your neighbourhood. The vilest people should be put down, and if the justice system doesn't other prisoners will. If you grew up in an area where a lax criminal system let evil roam free you'd want capital punishment for those who bring pain to so many.