Lethal Injection Under Fire Again

[Doc]

The story.

Man up nancy.

It stuns me that people who rape and murder young women bawl like whiny little babies when it's time to pay the price. I wonder if they thought about how much pain it caused their victim while they were raping them and then torturing and killing them?

Sorry, but this whole thing just strikes me as being, well, wrong somehow that somebody could get a stay of execution just because death may cause a little discomfort.

IF YOU DON'T WANT TO DIE, THEN DON'T GO AROUND RAPING AND KILLING PEOPLE. Sheesh, why is that such a difficult concept for people?

Yeah, I am back. Would have been back sooner, but I was busy. And still am. So with that, I gotta go. Much love, and I missed you all. Tootles!

[Munkay]

Why are we beating a dead horse again?

Death Penalty has been brought up numerous times in your recent posts Doc. This exact topic was already mentioned before in this thread.

Now, your title shows that you recognize this ("under fire again"). But what I don't see anything new being said by you, nor do I see any indication of trying to take the topic in a new direction.

I suppose it just boils down to this: why is there a new thread dedicated to this and not just a new post in the old thread?

Cheers,

Munk

PS. I don't mean this post as trying to be some kind of forum moderator. But I do mean this as a genuine question. Where is the new direction? What makes this different than the other thread? When is beating a dead horse enough?

[Doc]

First off, this is taking place in California, not NC or Florida.

Second, it is an example of the slippery slope mentality.

Third. This is an attempt to generate sympathy for folks that have a date with the needle... Bringing them to victim status, which I just can't for the life of me understand. How on earth are they the victim? I would really like somebody to explain that to me if somebody doesn't mind.

I guess it was the wording that bothered me. People being poked "writhing in pain" and experiencing discomfort. I wonder if the young woman being raped spent any time "writhing in pain" or experienced any discomfort as she was murdered? Where is her sympathy? Where is the outrage for her "writhing in pain" and the discomfort she experienced? Why the hell does anybody give a rat's ass what this guy feels in the first place after what he did? And why doesn't anybody seem worked up about the REAL victim in this, and other cases like this? The real victim is the woman raped and killed... Not some guy worried about a little discomfort in his death. People seem to forget that somehow. People seem to forget what brought this guy to this point, and how he could have avoided it altogether. It's really easy. People do monsterous things now, and know that there is a good chance of getting off the hook for doing it if they can play the boohoo card and generate enough sympathy to get themselves victim status. They know some fool, some idiot, some pantywaisted leftist will take pity on them and save them from a fate they so richly deserve.

The genie is out of the bottle. Pandora's box is opened. Now we will be hearing some terrible sob story every time somebody has a date with death and these monsters will only further achieve their own coveted victim status. And that's just wrong.

[Premezilla]

"I'm a genie in a bottle....you gotta rub me the right way!"

Ahem.

I know there's always two sides to every issue, but in this instance, I can see only one.

And it looks like Doc is right on.

I can see no justification in forestalling punishment for someone who has been found guilty of a heinous crime for the sake of comfort for the perpetrator. The way I see it, "comfort" was pretty much thrown out of the door when the perpetrator started bashing their victim's head in with whatever. (Just using some random generalization here). There's a fine line between living under the freedoms of Democracy and sneaking in the shadows of "Killing People and Getting Away With It"-ocracy, and for those that like to paint the line a blood-red color I have no sympathy.

Make 'em suffer those few extra minutes. FUH-CRYing out loud! They deserve it!

[jahcs]

This corned beef has already been hashed. Why not add this related info to your other thread? Of course then some folks would be complaining about forum necromancy. :P

And... It's a needle! Get over it. Would they prefer a small canister of gas, a sword, a rope, 79 cents worth of lead, a few dollars in electricity? These are felons convicted of a heinous crime by a jury and sentenced by a judge. Get on with it.

And for those cultures (including ours) that have, and use, the death penalty: stop being pansies and get on with it. As long as the method does not give prolonged suffering (a gutshot, draw and quartering, stoning, etc.) then stand by your decision to carry out the sentence agreed upon.

I am trying to sidestep the actual capital punishment debate because that's a whole other can of worms and I feel Doc's threads are more about the method than the madness. If you're willing to threaten it you better be willing to carry it out.

[Doc]

This corned beef has already been hashed.  Why not add this related info to your other thread?  Of course then some folks would be complaining about forum necromancy. :P

And...  It's a needle!  Get over it.  Would they prefer a small canister of gas, a sword, a rope, 79 cents worth of lead, a few dollars in electricity?  These are felons convicted of a heinous crime by a jury and sentenced by a judge.  Get on with it.

And for those cultures (including ours) that have, and use, the death penalty: stop being pansies and get on with it.  As long as the method does not give prolonged suffering (a gutshot, draw and quartering, stoning, etc.) then stand by your decision to carry out the sentence agreed upon.

I am trying to sidestep the actual capital punishment debate because that's a whole other can of worms and I feel Doc's threads are more about the method than the madness.  If you're willing to threaten it you better be willing to carry it out.
[right][snapback]107061[/snapback][/right]

Yeah. That is my point exactly. It's not so much about the death penalty as it is about the big stink raised to generate sympathy of all things for these convicted criminals to be put to death. That is the rub here. They want to rape and murder and commit mayhem or molest little kids, but when it comes time to pay for the dance... They wuss out. These guys... They are man enough to rape a defenseless woman and carve her #$%& off with a hunting knife, torturing her and prolonging her suffering before she mercifully passes, but it when it comes down to them being poked with a tiny little needle, it's all sniffles and snots and big tears.

And I just can not believe how many people fail to see this in these cases. I mean, there are people actually taking up for these monsters and trying to generate sympathy and pity for them. Where is the outrage for the real victim? Who is looking out for them? Especially the ones that aint white and pretty enough for the media to notice?

That is what gets me here. It's madness I tell you, madness, that a society could feel one iota of remorse for giving these bastards exactly what they deserve.

What the hell is wrong with people that these guys getting put to death get more sympathy and pity than the people that they have killed?

That is what makes this such an issue for me. It drives me bananas and keeps me awake late at night.

[Occhidiangela]

That is what makes this such an issue for me. It drives me bananas and keeps me awake late at night.
[right][snapback]107071[/snapback][/right]

Have you tried Hari Krishna?

Valium?

Warm milk?

:whistling:

Occhi

[Roland]

"I'm a genie in a bottle....you gotta rub me the right way!"

Ahem.

I know there's always two sides to every issue, but in this instance, I can see only one. 

And it looks like Doc is right on.

I can see no justification in forestalling punishment for someone who has been found guilty of a heinous crime for the sake of comfort for the perpetrator.  The way I see it, "comfort" was pretty much thrown out of the door when the perpetrator started bashing their victim's head in with whatever.  (Just using some random generalization here).  There's a fine line between living under the freedoms of Democracy and sneaking in the shadows of "Killing People and Getting Away With It"-ocracy, and for those that like to paint the line a blood-red color I have no sympathy.

Make 'em suffer those few extra minutes. FUH-CRYing out loud! They deserve it!
[right][snapback]107025[/snapback][/right]

And yet I see it the other way.

The Constitution, among other international laws (thinking of the Geneva Convention here), ban the use of "cruel and unusal punishment". As much as I feel NO sympathy for any convicts on death row, there is a greater principle here: that of the law. Our Constitution forms the basis of our freedoms in this country. Failure to abide by any part of it opens the door to trampling right over it, ignoring all of it. That, my friends, is a far more slippery slope, which I think we all can agree on.

My point is this: let not our distaste for unethical actions lead us to rash decisions inducing further unethical actions. Fair is fair, after all, and if we don't uphold our laws, we will soon find ourselves lawless.

[jahcs]

And yet I see it the other way.

The Constitution, among other international laws (thinking of the Geneva Convention here), ban the use of "cruel and unusal punishment". As much as I feel NO sympathy for any convicts on death row, there is a greater principle here: that of the law. Our Constitution forms the basis of our freedoms in this country. Failure to abide by any part of it opens the door to trampling right over it, ignoring all of it. That, my friends, is a far more slippery slope, which I think we all can agree on.

My point is this: let not our distaste for unethical actions lead us to rash decisions inducing further unethical actions. Fair is fair, after all, and if we don't uphold our laws, we will soon find ourselves lawless.
[right][snapback]107113[/snapback][/right]

If a needle is cruel and unusual punishment then every nurse, doctor, bloodbank worker, insulin supplies-supplier, and needlesharing program worker is guilty. They don't use horse sized needles for the injection. A needle is an accepted form of administering chemicals to the body. They are used on infants, teenagers, adults, and the elderly.

If they don't like it we can always provide the airguns the Army uses to immunize recruits. The device uses high pressure air to force the vaccine through the skin. Just don't flinch or you will end up with a nasty gash.

[Chesspiece_face]

If a needle is cruel and unusual punishment then every nurse, doctor, bloodbank worker, and needlesharing program worker is guilty.  They don't use horse sized needles for the injection.  A needle is an accepted form of administering chemicals to the body.  They are used on infants, teenagers, adults, and the elderly.

If they don't like it we can always provide the airguns the Army uses to immunize recruits.  The device uses high pressure air to force the vaccine through the skin.  Just don't flinch or you will end up with a nasty gash.
[right][snapback]107118[/snapback][/right]

I dont think the question here is whether the needle itself is Cruel and Unusual. Although there have been cases where inmates have claimed so based on the fact that they have phobias regarding needles. The issue here is that in the case mentioned the inmate was not unconcious when the lethal drugs were administered. When giving a lethal injection there are a combination of drugs administered to complete the execution. First the individual is given tranquilizer to put them unconcious then they are given the drugs that will stop thier heart. If this proceedure is not followed and they are not unconcous when the fatal drugs are given the individual will essentially be artificially given a lethal heart attack.

We have moved from Hanging, Gas Chamber, and Electric Chair because those have been deemed too Cruel. The reason that lethal injection is a less-cruel form of execution is because the person is knocked out while the actual physical damage is caused that kills them.

I've read the report given in the link, and i see no place where the judge says this individual shouldn't be executed. All they said is "if you are gonna do it, you are gonna do it by the book." If the people getting the lethal injections aren't unconcious when the fatal drugs are admitted than the injections are not being given properly and that needs to be addressed.

[GriffonSpade]

And yet I see it the other way.

The Constitution, among other international laws (thinking of the Geneva Convention here), ban the use of "cruel and unusal punishment". [right][snapback]107113[/snapback][/right]

The ban on cruel and unusual punishment should be ignored as far as I'm concerned. We should instead be focusing on what is deserved and affective. Permanent incarceration isn't enough of a deterrent for these people, who probably think that they can get away with it anyway, and know that even if they can't, they'll probably live despite being caught and convicted.
They went out with the intent to irrevocably harm or kill someone, which is about as severe crime one can commit, and deserves a punishment every bit as severe. You don't get any more incapacitated than being dead, so no more worrying about them escaping and doing this to anyone else.
If someone is going to spend their entire life in prison, there's really no point in rehabilitating them, and placing someone in a closed off society where raping and killing isn't just acceptable, but a favored solution is NOT a very good method of doing this. So just WHY, oh WHY aren't we killing these people, and then being cute and fluffy to lesser offenders, people who aren't known to be guilty beyond any reasonable doubt, and like the homeless or something?

PS if you execute people on a regular basis, it is no longer unusual is it? and youre not really torturing them or anything, so its not cruel, just efficient and usual punishment right there ;)

Edit: We should kill them with laughing gas, that way they'd die happy, and thats about as uncruel as you can get! :w00t:

[--Pete]

Hi,

The Constitution . . . ban the use of "cruel and unusal punishment". [right][snapback]107113[/snapback][/right]

Yes, and it is another example of the problem with the extreme terseness of parts of the US Constitution and Amendments. There are two issues that must be considered. One is the mores of the times that statement was written. At that time, hanging was not a drop that broke the neck, it was slow strangulation. And it was an accepted, as was ridicule at the pillory. The 'cruel' punishments were things like drawing, pressing, quartering, etc. Basically means to torture someone to death. The framers of the Constitution would not have batted an eyelash at something as humane as lethal injection, except possibly to observe that it was more mercy than the recipient deserved.

The second point, of course, is that the whole ". . . nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." is a load of nonsense. Punishment is cruel or it is not punishment. It is not in it's being cruel that it needs to be judged but in how much of that cruelty is necessary. When inmates have a better life than they had on the street, with more free time, better health services, even better meals, then is this actually punishment for them? Wouldn't making little rocks from big ones, or working on a chain gang be more appropriate? If they are paying a debt to society, shouldn't there actually be some payment? Even if it is only symbolic?

And as to 'unusual', too many people now seem to use the normal life of a non incarcerated member of society as the model for usual. Once again, if an inmate is living at the standard of his 'usual' out of prison life, and sometimes better, is there any punishment really going on? Seems to me that there isn't. If going to prison is little more than an inconvenience, if there's no mental or physical pain involved, then it becomes meaningless. And judging from what is happening in the USA, our attitude to 'cruel and unusual punishments' has destroyed the concept of correction in our correction facilities and has left only a means to briefly protect society from predators.

As for the whole death penalty debate, Jimmy is glue.

--Pete

[Doc]

Hi,
Yes, and it is another example of the problem with the extreme terseness of parts of the US Constitution and Amendments.  There are two issues that must be considered.  One is the mores of the times that statement was written.  At that time, hanging was not a drop that broke the neck, it was slow strangulation.  And it was an accepted, as was ridicule at the pillory.  The 'cruel' punishments were things like drawing, pressing, quartering, etc.  Basically means to torture someone to death.  The framers of the Constitution would not have batted an eyelash at something as humane as lethal injection, except possibly to observe that it was more mercy than the recipient deserved.

The second point, of course, is that the whole ". . . nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."  is a load of nonsense.  Punishment is cruel or it is not punishment. It is not in it's being cruel that it needs to be judged but in how much of that cruelty is necessary.  When inmates have a better life than they had on the street, with more free time, better health services, even better meals, then is this actually punishment for them?  Wouldn't making little rocks from big ones, or working on a chain gang be more appropriate?  If they are paying a debt to society, shouldn't there actually be some payment?  Even if it is only symbolic?

And as to 'unusual', too many people now seem to use the normal life of a non incarcerated member of society as the model for usual.  Once again, if an inmate is living at the standard of his 'usual' out of prison life, and sometimes better, is there any punishment really going on?  Seems to me that there isn't.  If going to prison is little more than an inconvenience, if there's no mental or physical pain involved, then it becomes meaningless.  And judging from what is happening in the USA, our attitude to 'cruel and unusual punishments' has destroyed the concept of correction in our correction facilities and has left only a means to briefly protect society from predators.

As for the whole death penalty debate, Jimmy is glue.

--Pete
[right][snapback]107130[/snapback][/right]

Yeah. What he said. It's hard to punish some one when they sit in an air conditioned room all day playing some Playstation to keep them "pacified" and content. Add to that libraries, movies, and all manner of comforts. Just laze around all day and not do a damn thing. They need to be pacified because they have to much friggin free time sitting around all the damn day on their lazy ass.

I'd be willing give up the death penalty in exchange for an actual lifetime of hard backbreaking labour. Work them to death. Sun up to sun down. Busting rocks. Chain gangs. Hell, solve the agro labour problem by having chain gangs go out there and pick fruit all the damn day instead of illegal aliens.

And when the day is done, no hot showers, no comfort foods, no comfortable bed in an air conditioned cell. Give em some beans, some greens, and a all the lukewarm water they can drink or shower with. No books. Of any kind, except for religious books. Nothing to distract them during those long nights. Nothing. Let them lay awake at night bored as hell after each horrible day and think about what brought them to this point.

There is no real punishment now. People look forward to going to prison, or going back to prison, because they can have a better life on the inside than they could on the outside. Prison, and the death penalty, should scare the bloody bejesus out of people.

[Chesspiece_face]

No books. Of any kind, except for religious books. Nothing to distract them during those long nights. Nothing. Let them lay awake at night bored as hell after each horrible day and think about what brought them to this point.
[right][snapback]107137[/snapback][/right]

And if what brought them to that point just happened to be religion?

I'm sure that abortion clinic bombers would be perfectly happy to sit in their cell and bask in thier self righteous fanaticism.

[Chesspiece_face]

There is no real punishment now. People look forward to going to prison, or going back to prison, because they can have a better life on the inside than they could on the outside. Prison, and the death penalty, should scare the bloody bejesus out of people.
[right][snapback]107137[/snapback][/right]

I'm not sure if that says more about prison or if that says more about the state of affairs outside of prison.

[Occhidiangela]

The Constitution, among other international laws (thinking of the Geneva Convention here), ban the use of "cruel and unusal punishment". As much as I feel NO sympathy for any convicts on death row, there is a greater principle here: that of the law. Our Constitution forms the basis of our freedoms in this country. Failure to abide by any part of it opens the door to trampling right over it, ignoring all of it. That, my friends, is a far more slippery slope, which I think we all can agree on.

[right][snapback]107113[/snapback][/right]

Won't comment on your slippery slope other than to disagree that such a slope is any threat within this context. The sky is not falling.

The international law bogey is irrelevant. If the US ever signed, and Congress approved via Constitutional process, a treaty agreeing to prohibit the death penalty, then international law would be a relevant concern.

Constitutionally, the language is very clear in the Fifth Amendment:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

That means, using basic reasoning, that a person may be deprived of life under due process of law. (Nowhere have I heard of mandatory death sentencing.) QED, your sally is shown to be false. The death penalty is consistent with explicit Constitutional language.

The 1972 ruling was, IMO, misguided, and has since been overcome by events and successful challenges.

Poor Jimmy. I am now party to the desecration of his adhesive corpse. For shame. :unsure:

Occhi

[Occhidiangela]

And if what brought them to that point just happened to be religion? 

I'm sure that abortion clinic bombers would be perfectly happy to sit in their cell and bask in thier self righteous fanaticism.
[right][snapback]107144[/snapback][/right]

Wasn't one such terrorist recently executed? Progress in the War of Terror. :shuriken:

Occhi

[Taem]

The second point, of course, is that the whole ". . . nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."  is a load of nonsense.  Punishment is cruel or it is not punishment. It is not in it's being cruel that it needs to be judged but in how much of that cruelty is necessary.  When inmates have a better life than they had on the street, with more free time, better health services, even better meals, then is this actually punishment for them?

--Pete
[right][snapback]107130[/snapback][/right]

I was under the impression that our prisons were actually "institutions" created for the purpose of "reform." If there is no possibility of reform, then why bother having prisons at all? Why not skip all the 'time-served' crap and just chop of the arm of the thief, castrate the rapist, and execute the murderer? It seems our own justice system is confused on rather to "punish" someone or to "reform" them. Me personally? I say if the evidence is there (i.e. video tape or DNA) then eye-for-an-eye, however is the evidence is insubstantial, then the defendant can only serve prison time if found guilty.

[Taem]

The story.

Man up nancy.

It stuns me that people who rape and murder young women bawl like whiny little babies when it's time to pay the price. I wonder if they thought about how much pain it caused their victim while they were raping them and then torturing and killing them?

Sorry, but this whole thing just strikes me as being, well, wrong somehow that somebody could get a stay of execution just because death may cause a little discomfort.

IF YOU DON'T WANT TO DIE, THEN DON'T GO AROUND RAPING AND KILLING PEOPLE. Sheesh, why is that such a difficult concept for people?

Yeah, I am back. Would have been back sooner, but I was busy. And still am. So with that, I gotta go. Much love, and I missed you all. Tootles!
[right][snapback]107005[/snapback][/right]

I wanted to comment on your last post about child rapists but held my tongue. Now I guess I'll speak my mind.

I have worked with and talked to quite a number of teachers and therapists and the percentage of children who are molested that end up committing crimes or committing suicide, from what they've told me, is extremely high. These children often grow up suffering from anxiety, panic attacks, and a wide array of mental ailments stemming from their encounter(s), which often last for the rest of their lives. If molestation on a child has such a profound effect on the child for most, if not the rest of their lives, and has a very high chance of turning them into the criminals we wish to prevent, then why is it a child molester will typically get a sentence under 15 years - even with DNA proof - whereas a man who rapes an adult woman can receive up to life in prison? Why do I say this? Because I have talked to the parents of (4)-victims whose child's molester got under 10-years in every case, while the man who raped my cousion got 30 years. Sometimes I just don't understand our Justice system at all. IMHO, anyone sick enough to "get-it-on" with a child (under the age of 13) should in-fact die. There is NO excuse for crap like that. It's just sick and wrong and I don't think anyone who commits a crime like that can ever be rehabilitated. Being put on a sex-offender list after having served 5-years is not justice for ruining another persons life, not to mention whoever’s lives they end up ruining because of the mental trauma they suffered from the incident.

Just my 2-cents.

[Occhidiangela]

IMHO, anyone sick enough to "get-it-on" with a child (under the age of 13) should in-fact die. There is NO excuse for crap like that. It's just sick and wrong and I don't think anyone who commits a crime like that can ever be rehabilitated. Being put on a sex-offender list after having served 5-years is not justice for ruining another persons life, not to mention whoever’s lives they end up ruining because of the mental trauma they suffered from the incident.

Just my 2-cents.
[right][snapback]107266[/snapback][/right]

ANyone? Even another 12 or 13 year old? You want them dead?

Come on down here to South Texas, and bring a lot of bullets. We are a national leader in teen pregnancies, and it is rampant in the junior highs. Of course, not all impregnation is done with peers, some of it is with older relatives. :blink:

Occhi