If you are going to start by accusing me of disobedience I see no reason to tell you anything. It is not only insulting, it is an offense against charity, love, and the Church
I have already explained that if you read the whole thing you will see the argument relies on this:
2267. Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.
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 “are very rare, if not practically non-existent.”
All of those are prudential judgements that can be easily refuted just by observation
It is a case by case situation. please do not take one paragraph and use it to bash other people for disobedience when they use the whole statement