Deserving Of Death Penalty?

[King's Rook's Pawn]

[quote name='Norseman82' date='21 November 2009 - 12:28 PM' timestamp='1258820910' post='2006874']However, if it has been proven beyond a shaow of a doubt that th edangerous person is indeed the guilty party, what happens if the prisoner escapes? What about Charles Manson who has a parole hearing every 2 years? There are some incompetent judges and rulings out there, and it only takes one to release a killer back into society.
[/quote]

Frankly, I think those risks are very slim, and they are just risks we have to take in a civilized society. I fear a government with the power over live and death much more than a handful of criminals in maximum security prisons.

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='King's Rook's Pawn' date='21 November 2009 - 11:37 AM' timestamp='1258821459' post='2006878']
You're talking about people who would be unarmed in the presence of armed guards and surveillance. I think you're being too fearful.[/quote]

Do you have any idea how clever and resourceful most inmates are? They make weapons out of paper clips and plastic utensils. Just go to YouTube and type in "prison weapons."

[quote] Under your standards we would have far more prisoners in solitary confinement or on death row then we do now.
[/quote]

Under what standards? Not many inmates fall under the "extremely dangerous to society" category. And I don't support solitary confinement, so not sure why you added that.

[HisChildForever]

Prison weapons: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rOwzwnXGXg

[Mr.Cat]

Life in solitary confinement is preferable to death, the key word being [b]LIFE[/b], even if for the rest of their natural lives.

No amount of killing will change the past and undo the damage that has been done to individuals or society by a serious criminal offence. No one “deserves” die and the government is not infallible, neither are we when it comes to a case by case examination, we are ultimately limited in our ability to perceive and judge the events.

[KnightofChrist]

Catholics can be personally against Capital Punishment. But the teaching of the Catholic Church fully supports it so long as it is justly applied. Catholics who are personally against Capital Punishment, who make that personal option anything more than that go against the traditional 2000 year old teaching on Capital Punishment.

Edited November 21, 2009 by KnightofChrist

[King's Rook's Pawn]

[quote name='HisChildForever' date='21 November 2009 - 01:41 PM' timestamp='1258825267' post='2006899']
Do you have any idea how clever and resourceful most inmates are? They make weapons out of paper clips and plastic utensils. Just go to YouTube and type in "prison weapons."[/quote]

The prison system as it currently exists is a horrible, hellish thing, and I think it's entirely predictable that these sort of things arise in these totalitarian institutions. If we were following my ideal of voluntaryism, there would be no penalties for victimless crimes whatsoever (e.g. pot smoking and insider trading) and even penalties for actual crimes with victims would be focused on compensating the victim (e.g. an embezzler who pilfered $1000 from his company would be required to pay back the $1000). Thus, confinement of any sort would only be limited to people who are so dangerous that there is reason to keep them under surveillance. Prisons, thus, would be much emptier, insofar as they existed, and they wouldn't be interested in "punishment," just in confinement for security purposes. Perhaps, house arrest would become more common.

The fact is, a powerful state, with a vast prison system and presumed power of life and death, is more of a threat than even the most dangerous individual, as an individual. He can make weapons out of sporks. States already have millions of cops with guns and "pain compliance devices," military and paramilitary with assault weapons, missiles, tanks, nukes, etc. I think you're straining at gnats and swallowing camels.

[quote]Under what standards? Not many inmates fall under the "extremely dangerous to society" category.[/quote]

Who decides what constitutes "extremely dangerous to society," as opposed to, you know, just "very dangerous to society"?

[quote]And I don't support solitary confinement, so not sure why you added that.[/quote]

You stated the only options of keeping people safe from "extremely dangerous people" are the death penalty or solitary confinement. I suppose you prefer the death penalty, but solitary confinement is seemingly your Plan B.

[Nihil Obstat]

Personally, I believe life in solitary confinement to be borderline inhumane. I listened to a priest, the National Director of Priests for Life Canada, and one of the many things he's done is worked as a prison chaplain. He said the single worst thing you can do to a prisoner is isolate him, that it breaks everyone, no matter how tough they are. I'm not saying that the death penalty is better or worse, but life in solitary sounds very very bad.

[King's Rook's Pawn]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' date='21 November 2009 - 02:26 PM' timestamp='1258827973' post='2006917']
Catholics can be personally against Capital Punishment. But the teaching of the Catholic Church fully supports it so long as it is justly applied. Catholics who are personally against Capital Punishment, who make that personal option anything more than that go against the traditional 2000 year old teaching on Capital Punishment.
[/quote]

In [url="http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_25031995_evangelium-vitae_en.html"]Evangelium Vitae[/url], Pope John Paul II states, "It is clear that, for these purposes to be achieved, the nature and extent of the punishment must be carefully evaluated and decided upon, and ought not go to the extreme of executing the offender except in cases of absolute necessity: in other words, when it would not be possible otherwise to defend society. Today however, as a result of steady improvements in the organization of the penal system, such cases are very rare, if not practically non-existent." I agree with this. I can think of scenarios in which killing someone is necessary for defensive purposes, but I cannot think of an instance where this would be necessary in the context of a functioning, modern justice system.

Edited November 21, 2009 by King's Rook's Pawn

[KnightofChrist]

Pope John Paul II's beliefs on Capital Punishment were his pastoral opinion, not binding on the faithful.

[King's Rook's Pawn]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' date='21 November 2009 - 02:44 PM' timestamp='1258829045' post='2006931']
Pope John Paul II's beliefs on Capital Punishment were his pastoral opinion, not binding on the faithful.
[/quote]

Perhaps, but this was an encyclical and therefore pretty authoritative. Do you disagree? In any case, surely you agree that this pastoral opinion is an acceptable opinion for a Catholic to hold.

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='King's Rook's Pawn' date='21 November 2009 - 01:32 PM' timestamp='1258828323' post='2006921']
If we were following my ideal of voluntaryism, there would be no penalties for victimless crimes whatsoever (e.g. pot smoking and insider trading) and even penalties for actual crimes with victims would be focused on compensating the victim (e.g. an embezzler who pilfered $1000 from his company would be required to pay back the $1000).[/quote]

Are you serious? By your "ideal" there would be no penalties for drug dealing or prostitution.

[quote] Thus, confinement of any sort would only be limited to people who are so dangerous that there is reason to keep them under surveillance. Prisons, thus, would be much emptier, insofar as they existed, and they wouldn't be interested in "punishment," just in confinement for security purposes. Perhaps, house arrest would become more common. [/quote]

One of the main components of incarceration is justice.

[quote] The fact is, a powerful state, with a vast prison system and presumed power of life and death, is more of a threat than even the most dangerous individual, as an individual. He can make weapons out of sporks. States already have millions of cops with guns and "pain compliance devices," military and paramilitary with assault weapons, missiles, tanks, nukes, etc. I think you're straining at gnats and swallowing camels. [/quote]

You clearly neglected to watch the video I provided.

[quote] Who decides what constitutes "extremely dangerous to society," as opposed to, you know, just "very dangerous to society"? [/quote]

Now you are just playing semantics.

[quote] You stated the only options of keeping people safe from "extremely dangerous people" are the death penalty or solitary confinement. I suppose you prefer the death penalty, but solitary confinement is seemingly your Plan B.
[/quote]

Solitary confinement is not my "Plan B."

[King's Rook's Pawn]

[quote name='HisChildForever' date='21 November 2009 - 03:05 PM' timestamp='1258830306' post='2006942']By your "ideal" there would be no penalties for drug dealing or prostitution.[/quote]

Immorality does not equal illegality. Should people be locked up for skipping Mass on Sundays?

[quote]One of the main components of incarceration is justice.[/quote]

Justice based on what? Vengeance? An eye for an eye? Why not just give them forty lashes instead?

[quote]You clearly neglected to watch the video I provided.[/quote]

Lots of knives. What more? Who do you think carries such weapons in prison? The bare handful of Tim McVeighs and Charles Mansons? No, those are the guys most likely to be killed by fellow prisoners--e.g. Jeffrey Dahmer. it's most likely those hundreds of thousands of drug pushers and gang bangers. Should they all be put to death to protect them from each other?

[quote]Now you are just playing semantics.[/quote]

Come one, HisChildForever. It's a totally arbitrary standard.

[quote]Solitary confinement is not my "Plan B."[/quote]

Then what's your point? I oppose the death penalty; I thinks it's unnecessary and therefore unjust, and I fear that power in the hands of the state more than any of those guys. Now what?

[Norseman82]

[quote name='King's Rook's Pawn' date='21 November 2009 - 11:39 AM' timestamp='1258821597' post='2006879']
Frankly, I think those risks are very slim, and they are just risks we have to take in a civilized society. I fear a government with the power over live and death much more than a handful of criminals in maximum security prisons.
[/quote]

If YOU want to take that risk you can do it on your own, but do not drag down the rest of innocent society down with you.

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='King's Rook's Pawn' date='21 November 2009 - 02:18 PM' timestamp='1258831115' post='2006948']
Immorality does not equal illegality. Should people be locked up for skipping Mass on Sundays? [/quote]

Secular society has its sense of morality, whether or not you can believe it. Buying sex from a woman or from a man is degrading to the human person. It also promotes violence towards women, as many prostitutes are women and are viewed to be mere objects of pleasure by many men. Arresting such buyers and sellers is sending a message to society that there has to be some level of propriety. It is also very damaging to the human psyche, especially when young women and children are involved. It is downright abusive. Many times, prostitution and drug dealing go hand-in-hand (this is without even mentioning gangs, murder, and violence). Drug addiction wounds the human person and strips them of their dignity. Drug addiction leads to suicide, theft, murder, broken homes, and broken relationships. I knew a drug addict and can say firsthand that all of this is true.

[quote] Justice based on what? Vengeance? An eye for an eye? Why not just give them forty lashes instead? [/quote]

There is a difference between justice and vengeance. Justice is objective, vengeance is subjective.

We are not a brutal and inhumane society, which is why we do not believe in "forty lashes."

[quote] Lots of knives. What more? Who do you think carries such weapons in prison? The bare handful of Tim McVeighs and Charles Mansons? No, those are the guys most likely to be killed by fellow prisoners--e.g. Jeffrey Dahmer. it's most likely those hundreds of thousands of drug pushers and gang bangers. Should they all be put to death to protect them from each other? [/quote]

The reason why a McVeigh would not stab a fellow inmate but a gang member would is because a McVeigh gets sentenced to death row.

[quote] Come one, HisChildForever. It's a totally arbitrary standard. [/quote]

Serial killers, murderers, and rapists are in a whole different category than thieves and drug addicts.

[quote] Then what's your point? I oppose the death penalty; I thinks it's unnecessary and therefore unjust, and I fear that power in the hands of the state more than any of those guys. Now what?
[/quote]

Now you have realized that you are your own person capable of formulating your own opinion. The only problem is that it conflicts with the Church's opinion. As Knight said, you are not obligated to agree with the Church on this matter, but you are going against over 2,000 years of what the Church has taught on this matter.

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='Norseman82' date='21 November 2009 - 02:23 PM' timestamp='1258831391' post='2006951']
If YOU want to take that risk you can do it on your own, but do not drag down the rest of innocent society down with you.
[/quote]

Amen.