How Young Is Too Young For The Death Penalty?

[VoTeckam]

[quote name='Winchester' post='1772164' date='Feb 4 2009, 06:08 PM']So the rainbow brought all the people the flood killed back to life, or is that just a way of not retracting your unsupportable claim?[/quote]

I believe you to be smart enough to re read genesis and understand what my statement meant.

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='VoTeckam' post='1772159' date='Feb 4 2009, 05:05 PM']Again I understand your arguement. It isn't an illogical conclusion. But the Holy Father and the American Bishops have read the same paragraphs and concluded that the death penalty is not necessary today.[/quote]

Their opinions do not change Church teaching.

[Veridicus]

[quote name='Winchester' post='1772164' date='Feb 4 2009, 05:08 PM']So the rainbow brought all the people the flood killed back to life, or is that just a way of not retracting your unsupportable claim?[/quote]

Rainbows aside, God as the author and creater of each individual life has the perogative to end life as he wills. It is not our place to attempt to critique the 'justice' of such decision because what God determines is just is just. You and I are NOT the authors of life and therefore it is not within our power to assume the perogative of who should be killed; life exists because God wills so and to take a life (even of a sadistic homocidal maniac) is contrary to respecing the authority of God. The Church recognizes that when sufficient incarceration capacity is lacking, it may become necessary for the protection of innocents to end the life of a sadistic homocidal maniac, but only because innocent death is imminent if this person cannot be contained. As I said in a previous post, we HAVE the capacity to effectively incarcerate killers in the US...it's just a measure of how humane we are with our excessive wealth.

Edited February 4, 2009 by Veridicus

[VoTeckam]

[quote name='HisChildForever' post='1772171' date='Feb 4 2009, 06:16 PM']Their opinions do not change Church teaching.[/quote]

Understood. But it has to make you wonder what you know that they do not that would lead you to a different conclusion than an extraordinarily learned and wise man.

[VoTeckam]

[quote name='Veridicus' post='1772173' date='Feb 4 2009, 06:16 PM']Rainbows aside, God as the author and creater of each individual life has the perogative to end life as he wills. It is not our place to attempt to critique the 'justice' of such decision because what God determines is just is just. You and I are NOT the authors of life and therefore it is not within our power to assume the perogative of who should be killed; life exists because God wills so and to take a life (even of a sadistic homocidal maniac) is contrary to respecing the authority of God. The Church recognizes that when sufficient incarceration capacity is lacking, it may become necessary for the protection of innocents to end the life of a sadistic homocidal maniac, but only because innocent death is imminent if this person cannot be contained. As I said in a previous post, we HAVE the capacity to effectively incarcerate killers in the US...it's just a measure of how humane we are with our excessive wealth.[/quote]

Woo Hoo!

We are NOT the authors of life... so let us enact justice to the limits that God has placed upon us. Justice in the human schope should be limited to protecting one other through imprisonment... let's let God decide when HE deems the proper time to call these criminals back to himself.

[HisChildForever]

Murderers, particularly serial killers, are dangers to our society.


[b]Evaluating a Psychological Profile of a Serial Killer[/b]

[excerpts]

[quote]Detailed, ongoing research by the F.B.I shows that many convicted serial killers enact their crimes because of the incredibly rich, detailed and elaborate violent fantasies (including the act of murder) that have developed in their minds as early as the age of seven and eight. What distinguishes killers from ‘normal’ civilians is that the aggressive day dreams that have been developed as children, continue to develop and expand through their adolescence right into manhood, where they are finally released into the real world (Wilson & Seamen, 1992). Through the use of murder and mayhem, the serial killer literally chases his dream. With each successive victim, he attempts to fine tune the act, striving to make his real life experiences as perfect as his fantasy (Apsche, 1993).

David Berkowitz, known as "The son of Sam", is a typical example of an average serial killer, and quiet normal in comparison to his other counterparts who have been known to eat their victims. From the years of 1976 through to 1977, he set out his reign of terror in New York City, by shooting over ten lovers who were parked in secluded areas. Upon being interviewed by John Douglas (a member of the F.B.I) at Attica State Prison, it was discovered that Berkowitz came from an adopted home, and upon discovering his real mother, was told by her that he wasn’t wanted. Originally being shy, insecure, and angry, he blossomed into a potential killer. He procured a large and powerful weapon, which in turn made him feel bigger and more powerful, and set about unknowingly to obtain revenge for what his mother had done to him.

In most cases, there is an event known as the "Pre-crime stresser", as discussed by Ressler, Burgess, and Douglas (1990). The pre-crime stresser can be looked at as the reason for why the person turns to killing as a form of release, even if the criminal does not realise the full extent of his motivations or fails to see the reasons behind the stress he feels. A clear example of this can be seen upon the questioning of Berkowitz who denied he had anything against women, nor did he have reason as to why he killed so many. In actually fact, his mother’s rejection was the stresser that ultimately turned him violent. He did not attack his mother directly (few serial killers ever attack the source of their resentment), but the majority of his killings where based on women who had a likeness to his mother.[/quote]

[quote]It is not so much the celebrity statues that they so enjoy, but instead the ability to control the lives of thousands of area residents, who are held in their grip of terror. "Psychologically the thrill-motivated killer tends to be a sociopath, someone with a disorder of character rather than the mind. He lacks a conscience, feels no remorse, and cares exclusively for his own pleasures in life…It has been estimated that 3% of all males in our society could be considered sociopathic" (Fox & Levin, 1994, p.18).[/quote]

Source: [url="http://www.uplink.com.au/lawlibrary/Documents/Docs/Doc5.html"]http://www.uplink.com.au/lawlibrary/Documents/Docs/Doc5.html[/url]

[Winchester]

[quote name='VoTeckam' post='1772170' date='Feb 4 2009, 05:16 PM']I believe you to be smart enough to re read genesis and understand what my statement meant.[/quote]
So you can't support your argument that God does not prioritize according to the innocent and the guilty. He has a long history of actually killing the guilty. There's also the issue of Hell. Refute. Don't put the work of supporting your claim on me--your assertion, your job to support it. Not mine.

[Winchester]

[quote name='Veridicus' post='1772173' date='Feb 4 2009, 05:16 PM']Rainbows aside, God as the author and creater of each individual life has the perogative to end life as he wills. It is not our place to attempt to critique the 'justice' of such decision because what God determines is just is just. You and I are NOT the authors of life and therefore it is not within our power to assume the perogative of who should be killed; life exists because God wills so and to take a life (even of a sadistic homocidal maniac) is contrary to respecing the authority of God. The Church recognizes that when sufficient incarceration capacity is lacking, it may become necessary for the protection of innocents to end the life of a sadistic homocidal maniac, but only because innocent death is imminent if this person cannot be contained. As I said in a previous post, we HAVE the capacity to effectively incarcerate killers in the US...it's just a measure of how humane we are with our excessive wealth.[/quote]
So you're a fan of the oubliette, then. Fine.

[Veridicus]

[quote name='Winchester' post='1772191' date='Feb 4 2009, 05:30 PM']So you're a fan of the oubliette, then. Fine.[/quote]

I never said I was a fan of solitary, nor did I insinuate that in any way. I am a fan of life and of letting God decide when a life is through and in doing what I can to promote life until God is ready to call it back to himself. I would direct you to address the heart of what I said in the preceding posts. I feel it was a significant enought point worth typing; you are free to disagree of course.

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='Veridicus' post='1772195' date='Feb 4 2009, 05:34 PM']I never said I was a fan of solitary, nor did I insinuate that in any way. I am a fan of life and of letting God decide when a life is through and in doing what I can to promote life until God is ready to call it back to himself. I would direct you to address the heart of what I said in the preceding posts. I feel it was a significant enought point worth typing; you are free to disagree of course.[/quote]

Then what do you feel would be the appropriate way to handle murderers?

Edited February 4, 2009 by HisChildForever

[Winchester]

[quote name='Veridicus' post='1772195' date='Feb 4 2009, 05:34 PM']I never said I was a fan of solitary, nor did I insinuate that in any way. I am a fan of life and of letting God decide when a life is through and in doing what I can to promote life until God is ready to call it back to himself. I would direct you to address the heart of what I said in the preceding posts. I feel it was a significant enought point worth typing; you are free to disagree of course.[/quote]
So you have no problem exposing guards to the dangers of violent prisoners.

Edited February 4, 2009 by Winchester

[Veridicus]

[quote name='Winchester' post='1772198' date='Feb 4 2009, 05:37 PM']So you have no problem exposing guards to the dangers of violent prisoners.[/quote]

In a word? No.

Guards, like our armed servicemen abroad, get money and benefits knowing they place their lives on the line. It is an honorable job, more honorable than most. But the danger to self is a known, accepted aspect of the job. These guards deserve adequate training and expertise to enable them to fully handle a beligerant (but unarmed of course) prisoner. This is where our money comes in. We have to care enough about life, of the innocent and the criminal, to be willing to let money leave our pockets and go into security, training, and protocol for the guards to keep them safe and then to the prisoner to attempt rehabilitation.

And again, I must note that not a single one of those responding to my posts has demonstrated adequately how the US penal system qualifies as "an existing case where capital punishment is necessary."

Edited February 4, 2009 by Veridicus

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='VoTeckam' post='1772150' date='Feb 4 2009, 05:48 PM']I must admit that I am very confused by the response this issue gets on Phatmass. For a group who will defned bishops on just about anything why on earth would you not trust their guidance on matters life?

I understand that the death penalty seems just. The Bishops and the Holy Father disagree (for offenders in the west at least). So while professors and knee jerk reactions might lead us in one direction the Holy Father and the successors of the Apostles are leading us in another.[/quote]

I know what the Catechism says:
2267:
Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church [color="#4169E1"]does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.[/color]
If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity with the dignity of the human person.
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 definitively taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself—the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "[color="#4169E1"]are very rare, if not practically non-existent."68[/color]



It has nothing to do with professors and knee-jerk reactions, it has to do with justice.

These are the kind of criminals I am referring to:
Melvin and Linda Lorenz, and their son Richard were killed by Roger Stafford. Melvin stopped on a highway near Purcell, Okla., to help what he thought was a woman whose car had broken down, but instead was ambushed by Stafford and his brother, using Stafford's wife as bait. Less than a month after these horrific murders, the trio killed six employees of a steak house in Oklahoma City.

In 1985, 13-year-old Karen Patterson was shot to death in her bed in North Charleston, S.C. Her killer was a neighbor who had already served 10 years of a life sentence for murdering his half-brother Charles in 1970. Joe Atkins cut the Pattersons' phone lines, then entered bearing a machete, a sawed-off shotgun, and a pistol. Karen's parents were chased out of their home by Atkins. Karen's mom ran to the Atkins home nearby, where Joe then murdered his adopted father, Benjamin Atkins, 75, who had worked to persuade parole authorities to release Joe from the life sentence.

When Katy Davis observed three strangers outside her Austin, Texas, apartment, she walked away. Returning later, she was attacked and forced to open the door by Charles Rector, on parole for a previous murder. The men ransacked her apartment, abducted her and took her to a lake where she was beaten, gang-raped, shot in the head and repeatedly forced underwater until she drowned.


It also depends on what you consider rare.
There were 2,293,157 prisoners in the US on Dec 1, 2007.
There are 3,300 people on death row.


We are not capable of defending human lives against unjust agressors even in prison.

" During the two-year period from 2001 through 2002, three states reported 43 percent of all prison murders -- California, 21; Texas, 10 and six in Maryland. " [Justice Dept]

The non-governmental organization Human Rights Watch raised concerns with prisoner rape and medical care for inmates.[19] In a survey of 1,788 male inmates in Midwestern prisons by Prison Journal, about 21% claimed they had been coerced or pressured into sexual activity during their incarceration, and 7% claimed that they had been raped in their current facility.[20][Wiki]

[Veridicus]

[quote name='HisChildForever' post='1772196' date='Feb 4 2009, 05:35 PM']What are you a fan of?[/quote]

Please return to post #69 or to post #70 where you quoted of what I am a fan. Please read it again.

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='Veridicus' post='1772208' date='Feb 4 2009, 05:46 PM']Please return to post #69 or to post #70 where you quoted of what I am a fan. Please read it again.[/quote]

Please go back to the post you are quoting and see the edit I made.

[Veridicus]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1772204' date='Feb 4 2009, 05:43 PM']It has nothing to do with professors and knee-jerk reactions, it has to do with justice.

These are the kind of criminals I am referring to:
........


It also depends on what you consider rare.
There were 2,293,157 prisoners in the US on Dec 1, 2007.
There are 3,300 people on death row.


We are not capable of defending human lives against unjust agressors even in prison.

" During the two-year period from 2001 through 2002, three states reported 43 percent of all prison murders -- California, 21; Texas, 10 and six in Maryland. " [Justice Dept]

The non-governmental organization Human Rights Watch raised concerns with prisoner rape and medical care for inmates.[19] In a survey of 1,788 male inmates in Midwestern prisons by Prison Journal, about 21% claimed they had been coerced or pressured into sexual activity during their incarceration, and 7% claimed that they had been raped in their current facility.[20][Wiki][/quote]


We ARE capable of defending human lives against unjust aggressors in prison. Your statistics are more easily explained away by inadequate funding than by the unredeemable recidivism of criminals. I chose not to beleive that anyone is irredeemable and thus do not see the necessity of capital punishment in a country where individual people spend thousands and thousands of dollars each year on dog food and cable tv and fast food. Human life is more valuable than the croutons we waste our money on. Even the life of a sick and twisted serial rapist chainsaw murderer.

[Veridicus]

[quote name='HisChildForever' post='1772196' date='Feb 4 2009, 05:35 PM']Then what do you feel would be the appropriate way to handle murderers?[/quote]

Murderers is too vague of a term. Different types of murderers would necessitate different modalities of incarceration and rehabilitation I would think. My point is that I feel it is contrary to God's law to take the positive act of ending another person's life when you haven't exhausted EVERY alternative. And as I have stated, in this land of wealth there are innumerable alternative possiblities to try.

Edited February 4, 2009 by Veridicus

[KnightofChrist]

One may be personally opposed to capital punishment, but they can not say it is objectively wrong. Or teach that the Church is actually against it's just use. Two thousand years of Catholic Tradition supports capital punishment as an act of justice. And this teaching is universal in time and location.

Capital punishment is a punishment which is proportionate for certain heinous acts, justice must be proportionate to the crime. Therefor Traditional and Universal Catholic teaching supports the use capital punishment, in all nations of all times.

Capital Punishment is a right given to the state by God Himself, no one not even the Church can over ride or take away that right. A person can be personally against it but that is it, [u]personally[/u] against it. The Church has for 2,000 years supports it's just use.

--------

St. Thomas Aquinas: "The fact that the evil, as long as they live, can be corrected from their errors does not prohibit the fact that they may be justly executed, for the danger which threatens from their way of life is greater and more certain than the good which may be expected from their improvement. They also have at that critical point of death the opportunity to be converted to God through repentance. And if they are so stubborn that even at the point of death their heart does not draw back from evil, it is possible to make a highly probable judgement that they would never come away from evil to the right use of their powers." Summa Contra Gentiles, Book III, 146.


Saints Thomas Aquinas and Augustine. In addition to the required punishment for murder and the deterrence standards, both Saints find that executing murderers is also an act of charity and mercy. Saint Augustine confirms that " . . . inflicting capital punishment . . . protects those who are undergoing capital punishment from the harm they may suffer . . . through increased sinning which might continue if their life went on." (On the Lord's Sermon, 1.20.63-64.) Saint Thomas Aquinas finds that " . . . the death inflicted by the judge profits the sinner, if he be converted, unto the expiation of his crime; and, if he be not converted, it profits so as to put an end to the sin, because the sinner is thus deprived of the power to sin anymore." (Summa Theologica, II-II, 25, 6 ad 2.)


Pope Pius XII: "When it is a question of the execution of a man condemned to death it is then reserved to the public power to deprive the condemned of the benefit of life, in expiation of his fault, when already, by his fault, he has dispossessed himself of the right to live." 9/14/52.

[url="http://www.homicidesurvivors.com/2006/10/12/catholic-and-other-christian-references-support-for-the-death-penalty.aspx"]Source[/url]

---------------

Cardinal Avery Dulles, SJ, 10/7/2000, "At no point, however, does Jesus deny that the State has authority to exact capital punishment. In his debates with the Pharisees, Jesus cites with approval the apparently harsh commandment, He who speaks evil of father or mother, let him surely die (Mt 15:4; Mk 7:10, referring to Ex 21:17; cf. Lev 20:9). When Pilate calls attention to his authority to crucify him, Jesus points out that Pilate's power comes to him from above-that is to say, from God (Jn 19:1 l).Jesus commends the good thief on the cross next to him, who has admitted that he and his fellow thief are receiving the due reward of their deeds (Lk 23:41). "

"Paul repeatedly refers to the connection between sin and death. He writes to the Romans with an apparent reference to the death penalty, that the magistrate who holds authority does not bear the sword in vain; for he is the servant of God to execute his wrath on the wrongdoer (Rom 13:4). No passage in the New Testament disapproves of the death penalty."

"Turning to Christian tradition, we may note that [u]the Fathers and Doctors of the Church are virtually unanimous in their support for capital punishment[/u], even though some of them such as St. Ambrose exhort members of the clergy not to pronounce capital sentences or serve as executioners."

"The Roman Catechism, issued in 1566, three years after the end of the Council of Trent, taught that the power of life and death had been entrusted by God to civil authorities and that the use of this power, far from involving the crime of murder, [u]is an act of paramount obedience to the fifth commandment[/u]. "

"Summarizing the verdict of Scripture and tradition, we can glean some settled points of doctrine. It is agreed that crime deserves punishment in this life and not only in the next. In addition, it is agreed that the State has authority to administer appropriate punishment to those judged guilty of crimes and that this punishment may, in serious cases, include the sentence of death."

"The Catholic magisterium does not, and never has, advocated unqualified abolition of the death penalty. I know of no official statement from popes or bishops, whether in the past or in the present, that denies[u] the right[/u] of the State to execute offenders at least in certain extreme cases. The United States bishops, in their majority statement on capital punishment, conceded that Catholic teaching has accepted the principle that the state has the right to take the life of a person guilty of an extremely serious crime. Cardinal Bernardin, in his famous speech on the Consistent Ethic of Life here at Fordham in 1983, stated his concurrence with the classical position that the State has the right to inflict capital punishment.

[url="http://www.homicidesurvivors.com/2006/10/12/catholic-and-other-christian-references-support-for-the-death-penalty.aspx"]Source[/url]

Edited February 4, 2009 by KnightofChrist

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='Veridicus' post='1772203' date='Feb 4 2009, 05:43 PM']But the danger to self is a known, accepted aspect of the job.[/quote]

This is probably the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. We can actually use this argument against your other argument by saying this: As citizens of the United States of America, we are fully aware that committing certain crimes put us "in the running" for the death penalty. The individual who commits such a crime - just as the man or woman applying for a position in a prison - must have accepted this potential consequence - just as the new corrections officer knows that injury or death is a potential consequence for taking the position. So according to you, we should then say to the murderer "you knew the risk of being sentenced to the death penalty and you accepted this aspect of the crime."

[quote]These guards deserve adequate training and expertise to enable them to fully handle a beligerant (but unarmed of course) prisoner. This is where our money comes in. We have to care enough about life, of the innocent and the criminal, to be willing to let money leave our pockets and go into security, training, and protocol for the guards to keep them safe and then to the prisoner to attempt rehabilitation.[/quote]

Do you have any idea how creative some inmates are? Like the inmate who fashioned his plastic toothbrush into a sharp tool and stabbed it into the neck of the officer doing a roll call/announcements? And the guard who never saw it coming because it was routine for inmates to approach the podium and ask questions? (Story of the day from that awesome professor of mine.) Despite the training they get, there are always unfortunate "surprises."

[quote]And again, I must note that not a single one of those responding to my posts has demonstrated adequately how the US penal system qualifies as "an existing case where capital punishment is necessary."[/quote]

By [b]case[/b] the Catechism is talking about [b]the individual[/b], not the overall system.

[Veridicus]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1772204' date='Feb 4 2009, 05:43 PM']" During the two-year period from 2001 through 2002, three states reported 43 percent of all prison murders -- California, 21; Texas, 10 and six in Maryland. " [Justice Dept][/quote]

Your quote of the Justice Dept. does not necessary demonstrate that people in prison for MURDER commited the murders in question. For all we know those murders reported could be more highly correlated with rapists or arsonists or people who cheat on their taxes. And it is worth mentioning that the death penalty ironically attempts to use "murder in a prison' as an attempt to end "murders in prison."


[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1772204' date='Feb 4 2009, 05:43 PM']The non-governmental organization Human Rights Watch raised concerns with prisoner rape and medical care for inmates.[19] In a survey of 1,788 male inmates in Midwestern prisons by Prison Journal, about 21% claimed they had been coerced or pressured into sexual activity during their incarceration, and 7% claimed that they had been raped in their current facility.[20][Wiki][/quote]

As I mentioned in my previous post, these seem like funding issues more than "convicted murder" issues. Unless you can prove that MURDERERS are more likely to have worse health or commit rape. Regardless, having less americans watching comedy central and paying a cable bill each month and spending more money on rehabilitation and the prison system would undoubtedly decrease these statistics.