:thumsupFunny, I read something yesterday that got me thinking about all the issues surrounding the lethal injections and the thought came to me - why don't they just administer a shot to the head? Quick , easy and painless. Problem solved. So many people are so weak-minded! If you commit a hideous crime and get the death penalty, you should get a month to get right with God, then you're done!
I hear what your saying but, why are they worried about cruel and unusual punishment for people that are animals and have caused MUCH more cruel and unusual punishment for their victims. It makes no senseI still don't get why the states that favor Capital Punishment and lethal injection don't come together and finance their own compounding facility, or contract with a facility on an "on demand" basis... Are there still patents on Sodium Thiopental or Pentobarbital, or the synthetic curare derivatives? Perhaps Texas is doing this, as they seem to find the Pentobarbital when they need it.
It seems clear to me that lethal injection is the most humane method in use today. Look at some of the other countries with capital punishment that have adopted it over firing squads (China, Thailand, even Vietnam)... Look at the level of energy the anti-death penalty forces have put into condemning lethal injection (in an effort to keep it from becoming "mainstream")... They want executions to appear as barbaric as possible, in an effort to get them outlawed.
As another alternative, besides the firing squad, I'd like to see them consider nitrogen gas (as opposed to Cyanide). Still, I would much prefer lethal injection over all other methods. I don't oppose firing squad, but there could be a reasonable argument made that it is "cruel and unusual," as it may take a few seconds before the body goes unconscious and into shock... I just don't want the anti-death penalty folk to have the opportunity to say it is...
Well, it all comes down to that single, fundamental question I always say must be asked and answered by everyone... "Are there crimes and circumstances for which the 'forfeiture of life' is that necessary and sufficient measure of justice?" For most of the anti-death penalty crowd, the answer is "No, there aren't." I guess they believe that all people, regardless of what they've done in life, have a "right to life." That, unless I guess, we're talking about a yet to be born child.... :banghead The "cruel & unusual" part I think is just an "available means" to argue that Capital Punishment should be outlawed, in the first place... an argument backed up by a US Constitutional amendment and one of the original "Bill of rights." Why not use it that way? :bangheadI hear what your saying but, why are they worried about cruel and unusual punishment for people that are animals and have caused MUCH more cruel and unusual punishment for their victims. It makes no sense
I wonder if (around WW2 time) the "International Law" recommendation would be the same if lethal injection had been in place at that time. I would gather that hanging was "recommended" because it had become mainstream in Europe and other WW2 countries, as opposed to other methods. It was either that or the firing squad and I'm thinking that hanging would seem a bit less "barbaric..." assuming they got the drop to weight ratio right.I thought "International Law" so beloved by the Supreme Court of the US of A, recommended or required execution by hanging.
Who notes WW2.
Agreed. If it's truly supposed to be about "justice" and not "vengeance," I think it should be done as humanely as possible.They may be animals, but civilized societies don't need to lower themselves to cruel forms of execution IMO. Hanging isn't all that humane [ people don't necessarily die the instant of drop ].
Did you mean the "real" person's death took 15-20 seconds or did you mean the death as depicted in this clip?This is a from a movie depicting a real hanging. From the last toll of the bell to death was 15-20 seconds with Albert Pierrepoint.