No. Why?
Clearly this man is actually innocent of his crimes or else God would not have spared him. :rolleyes: Just how is the “The Bible says an eye for an eye” crowd reacting to this?
-
No. They weren’t able to successfully find a vein at least 18 times during the last go-round. Why do they think this time will be any different?
-
It sure sounds like it. Unless Ohio uses a completely different definition of “pain/painless” than the rest of the world.
-
What else have they got right now? Is lethal injection currently their only legally supported means of killing a person?
Look at the amount of work that is being put into killing this guy. That in and of itself makes this whole thing seem inhumane to me.
Given a very high window, defenestration works first time, every time.
I have to ask why we are screwing around with needles or electric chairs. The most humane method of execution would be to take the prisoner into the chamber, sit him down and put a .38 round into the back of his head, right where the spine goes up into the brain. Like turning off a light switch.
Too Stalin.
So to you the cruelty in Cruel and Unusual is all about the physical pain? You don’t think cruelty can be psychological? Obviously not, if you think in any way shape or form the mental state regarding giving blood, and feeling multiple pin pricks is the same as the mental state regarding feeling those sticks, not knowing if that is going to be th eone that shuffles you off this mortal coil.
To be honest, I don’t think this rises to the level of cruel and unusual (nor do I think the DP as a whole does, though I am persuadable on that). But your comparison here is utterly laughable.
Maybe you can ask a mod to move this thread out of Great Debates and into Please Categorically and Uncritically Agree with My OP?
I dunno, it sounds pretty quick to me.
All right…how bout a restraint chair (maybe they could even reuse an electric chair—Gruesome Gertie seems apt) with a very short barreled, large gauge shotgun (say…6 gauge?), mounted at skull level, and modified to be electrically fired (either from a timer, or some elaborate “two executioners press a button each, the machine randomly chooses which fire button to ignore”).
The question then becomes if you reenforce the execution chamber to safely absorb the shot, or build some kind of armored box to lower over the condemned’s head. The latter would spare the witnesses the sight of the prisoner’s head exploding, which is either a “pro” or “con,” depending on your point of view.
There, that took me about ten seconds to think up; typing it was longer. 
Plus, this actually could re-introduce some language of capital punishment back into the parlance. “You could get The Chair!” “Send 'im to Gruesome Gertie!” We really don’t have that these days. “Get ‘The Needle’”? There’s no visceral connection there; no intimidation, no sense of reality.
Fair point. That was an incomplete argument on my part.
Telling someone that you are going to kill them is going to be psychologically damaging, no doubt, but that doesn’t dissuade me from wanting society to have the death penalty as an option. This guy had a choice; his victim didn’t. The amount of suffering he inflicted makes me less concerned about hurting his feelings than about teaching him (and others who might do the same thing he did) a lesson in the most emphatic way possible.
I don’t think I asked anyone to do this. We’re engaging in debate as a group here… the fact that I posed the question at the start shouldn’t mean that I can’t also form an opinion. The quote you referenced was just my trying to keep this on track a little bit: I’m more worried about the larger questions than the obvious one of whether someone just starting his/her medical training would be the one performing a lethal injection.
In spite of my snarky tone in the quote you referenced, I am glad **Der Trihs **brought that up, though, because it made me look into the involvement of medical professionals in capital punishment, thereby fighting my own ignorance.
Fairly aligned with this. Given the general human instinct to survive, this is as close to maximum agony as one can get under controlled circumstances.
We have a detached, impartial, and dispassionate judicial system for a reason; imperfect humans can still strive for a perfect system. Whereas if it were my loved one’s killer in question, emotionally I’d likely crave something quite in line with cruel and unusual. But with death–state sanctioned death–on the line, as a society we should treat the implementation in accordance with the severity of the penalty (bets with Sicilians notwithstanding).
So despite what the state can do, I think what they ought to do is recognize the inconceivable horror inflicted on a perpetrator of inconceivable horrors, and not compound the error.
(As for method, I always thought that nitrous oxide in sufficient concentrations would knock someone out quickly and effortlessly, with an unaware death following shortly.)
Because in addition to killing the condemned, we also insist on glossing over the reality of the situation. Therefore we want our methods to be not only quick and painless, but also very clean so we can feel better about ourselves. If that weren’t the case, why even mess with the .38? Bring back the guillotine.
If a man has been sentenced to death, the execution should be carried out. Sometimes things will mess up, but that doesn’t mean it qualifies as cruel and unusual. And even if it is cruel and unusual, does he still not deserve the sentence he was given?
I do think this may be a special case since he may not be able to get a lethal injection through the traditional methodology. Can they find an alternate vein? Are there other execution options?
Absolutely not, especially if it’s due to past drug use. I think it MIGHT stand a chance if they poked a guy who had strong veins 18 times, but if they can’t find a viable vein in a guy that probably used drugs, it’s not exactly normal circumstances either.
I think the provision that it is quick and painless doesn’t mean that if it’s not and it fails he shouldn’t be executed. I think that it’s, instead, that he shouldn’t be deliberately killed slowly and painfully, as that would be a violation of his constutional rights, but attempting to do it painlessly I think should fulfill that provision.
Yes, lethal injections are probably considered the most humane form of execution, but as this case demonstrates, when dealing with prior drug use, dehydration, or potentially other medical conditions, there needs to be an alternative.
My prefered solution is to make a list of possible methods of execution, some of which are relatively quick and painless (eg, injection, asphyxiation, electrocution, etc.), and others that may not be (eg, hanging, beheading, firing squad, etc.) and let the inmate choose. To some, “falling asleep” may be less desirable than staring death in the face and, as long as there is a quick and painless option and the inmate chooses otherwise, I wouldn’t think a more painful method should be considered to violate such provisions. And if an inmate refuses to choose, they prioritize a list with the most humane at the top and choose the top one.
Thus, in a case like this, they can simply disallow one method that isn’t viable and let him choose another or, if he refuses, choose the next most humane method.
Besides, if you think about it, if this guy gets off, it sort of defeats the whole damn purpose of execution. One person who may have done the same crime but didn’t do drugs would get executed, while someone else who did drugs gets a lesser sentence for the same crime and potentially others. That is not justice.
I don’t understand why there is even a question that he SHOULD be executed. Fine, they botched the first one and violated OH law.
But nowhere does it say that the “punishment” for OH not complying with the law is that there can’t be another attempt.
Regardless of whatever “suffering” these poor inmates have to go through, they will go through a thousand times less pain than most of us will on our way off this Earth…
It wasn’t incomplete, it was utterly wrong. And you compound it.
If the constitutional standard is cruel and unusual, which it is, then your lack of concern regarding his feelings don’t come in to play as regards whether the punishment is constitutional.
As I said, I don’t think what they did rises to the level of C&U. For me, that implies a degree of either desire or at the minimum wilfull disregard of the obvious. This was a screw up by Ohio. Unless you can show me that they were aware the person putting the needle in was incompetent, and chose them either because of that incompetence, or without concern for it, then I don’t see a constitutional problem here.
I also, even though I unequivocably oppose capital punishment, don’t tend to think it is unconstitutional per se. I think it is unconstitutional as applied, for many grounds, including Equal Protection, Due Process and also the Cruel & unusual aspects of some forms of the death penalty.
But to turn around and say, in effect, it doesn’t matter how cruel a punishment is, because this is a bad person, flies in the face of the constitution.
Not if the state is unable to apply the sentence according to its own rules.
They tried sticking him multiple times, in multiple locations, to no avail. So, they’ve already tried to find an alternate vein.
Ohio law doesn’t appear to care whether “normal circumstances” apply to a situation like this. The measure is “quick and painless”. It was obviously neither, so the state - by its own rules - is unable to carry out this punishment. It needs to consider alternatives (as you describe in the rest of your post).
There are differing opinions on what exactly the “purpose of execution” is. Some may say it’s deterrence, while others may say it’s revenge. It certainly defeats the latter, but I personally don’t see that as a bad thing.
And if we applied life sentences to both criminals, we wouldn’t even have to deal with this problem.
They botched the first one 18 times. Why should anyone think #19 will be any different?
Are you in favor of life sentences in place of the death penalty? Maybe that way, the “poor inmates” will suffer as much as the rest of us.
All it takes is a chair, one psycho, a water hose, and a couple people to drag out the body before the next guy is brought in. I have yet to track down the cite, but the NKVD had a “photo booth” that had the requirements, plus a TT-30 pistol, and with the hose crew implied.