That’s an argument AGAINST the death penalty, actually.
There are numerous cites for the fact that, overall, a death penalty case costs more than one that results in life in prison. The cost-to-incarcerate may be lower overall because it doesn’t last as long - but in a state which maintains a separate, costlier facility for death row inmates, the cost per year is higher. Plus, all the additional legal expenses - both for a lengthier trial, and all the years of appeals.
What about incapacitation?
If you tell me there’s a murderer for whom neither a prison cell nor the grave is a deterrent, I’m not going to rule out either for that reason; I’m going to ask, oh, well, then, how can we stop him from murdering again? And then I might well opt for the grave if someone replies, “A prison cell has a door. A grave does not.”
Because … The Pit.
The last time I looked …
Cost to house the average prisoner in the US: $45,771.
Life, death, whatever … crime and punishment is a ridiculously profound perverse incentive.
We profit from misery in the US, perhaps, more than any other advanced-economy nation.
Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.
–Eric Hoffer
What could that money do if it was geared toward all the social determinants that we know lead to bad outcomes?
[rhetorical]
I’ve mentioned here before that I’m terminally ill. After going through my options – the ones that are and the ones that are not ‘readily’ available to me … it’s nitrogen.
The State taking a life really – IMHO – cannot be done without ‘violence.’ A terminally ill person ending to choose their own life – maybe a bit paradoxically – can.
I stand corrected, and surprised.
I have not read all the accounts of the death itself, just what was posted here. Even so, a couple of thoughts occurred to me -
He knew he was being out to death. That’s the torture, and it’s no wonder he resisted. mental pain is still pain, even if there were no classic physical pain like being stuck with needles and having harsh chemicals pumped in.
If you’ve ever seen a pet euthanized, you will probably have seen what’s called agonal breathing. The brain is essentially dead and there is no consciousness, the heart has stopped beating, but there may be one or more big respiratory gasps, even twitches. All of it is reflexive, there is no pain, no awareness. If you were to try to elicit a pain response by pinching toes or something you would get no response. My guess is that a lot of what was described was at first his conscious panic response to imminent death, and then his unconscious bodily functions.
I think the death penalty is morally abhorrent. The only was to possibly make it a tiny bit better is to give the prisoner a heavy sedative first, and then use whatever is quickest to end life. Nitrogen may be the best solution to a problem we DO NOT need to have.
Cerebral anoxia absolutely does start causing brain damage after as little as five minutes. That’s why it’s so important to act quickly in cases of cardiac arrest or fibrillation.
However, Smith would have been completely insensate long before the five-minute mark.
Oh come now, that’s not entirely fair… to the deceased. Just because the man murdered a woman doesn’t mean he ever actively believed that “[s]ome people don’t deserve humanity,” let alone that he still held such a belief at the time of execution.
The brain is a huge organ. The brain stem continues to function even after the cerebral cortex has stopped functioning. The brain stem will tell the diaphragm to contract, which can cause a “gasp” after the heart and brain have stopped working.
Then the various ion pumps stop working and ions reach equilibrium across cell membranes, causing twitching.
Death is a process that takes time, even when it appears instantaneous.
Seems like a State, with all the legislative powers at their disposal, could very easily carve out a specific exception for those rules. I’m not buying that it’s any sort of hindrance, unless it’s a deliberate one.
I’m appalled that they didn’t give him some sort of anti-anxiety medication beforehand. I mean, stuff like lorazepam is already used in anxious/agitated end-of-life patients. Seems like using it here would be appropriate on humane grounds.
They are killing him as a punishment, not euthanizing him. I’ll bet if some kind hearted jailer slipped him something and he was obviously drugged, they’d have postponed the execution. He needs to be aware to hear and understand when they read to him why he’s being executed.
It’s barbaric.
But that would necessitate the involvement of medical practitioners in executions. Consensus is that this would be an ethical no-go.
The nitrogen method was designed to avoid entanglement with medical ethics.
Like I pointed out upthread, State legislatures have the absolute ability to make that as legal as they want to- they could very easily amend the laws to make a specific exception for executions.
Thousands of animals are euthanized every single day. I’ve watched quite a few. They inject an overdose of sedative in a vein and the animal dies in seconds. Seconds. I have no clue why this is not the method. Anyone competent to find a vein could do it.
Personally, if I were queen, I’d have the sentencing judge and jury be given rifles and have to be the firing squad. No audience. But it would be videotaped without a public viewing option. Victims’ families could petition to see it however.
It’s not illegal for doctors to participate, just as it’s not illegal for pharmaceutical companies to sell the state drugs for executions. The problem the state has is not the legality of such things, it’s that doctors don’t want to participate or are barred from participating by various licensing boards or whatever. And the drug companies don’t want their drugs associated with executions at all, it’s bad for business.
That is basically how lethal injection works.
The trouble is finding somebody competent to find a vein, and also that many death-row inmates are long time drug users, making “finding a vein” difficult. They specifically tried to execute this guy last year using that method and it failed because they couldn’t “find a vein”.
What do you mean? Nearly every form of execution kills, indirectly, by brain damage.
Lethal injection = stops heart = stops blood flow = without blood, brain dies from lack of oxygen and nutrients.
Hanging = indirectly, brain lacks oxygen and nutrients = person dies
Nitrogen is no different. EVERY form of death ultimately involves brain damage, then death, due to the brain being starved of what it needs. (Except for things like getting blown to bits instantly by an explosion, but that’s a different topic.)
Let me be very clear that I’m adamantly against the death penalty and am not arguing for it, but we need to oppose it for the right reasons. The argument about the cost of a death penalty case can be refuted by saying that it’s due to a flawed legal process, which process needs to be overhauled and streamlined. And, indeed, the fact that the case being discussed here dragged on for more than three decades is a good example of that.
The real reason to oppose the death penalty is that, as I said earlier, it’s barbaric, it demeans human life, and that barbarism subtly insinuates itself into our culture and in one way or another tends to define who we are as a society and how we treat each other in other ways. For example, I tend to associate these phenomena with the same life-demeaning culture that supports the death penalty:
When it’s pointed out that in 2021 there were 48,830 firearm deaths in the US (a little less than half of which were homicides, and the rest quick-n-easy successful suicides) the response is: sure, but it’s totally worth it, because … reasons. And I get to have guns!
When it’s pointed out that people are suffering and dying of perfectly curable diseases because they can’t afford the cost of treatment and can’t afford health insurance, the response is: sucks to be them.
A justice system that emphasizes retribution over rehabilitation, and has both the highest incarceration rates and longest sentences anywhere in the civilized world.
Too bad you stopped reading before the third sentence, where I said “So in the most extreme cases the only way to protect society is by removing such an offender from it. The remaining question is how to do it.”
Seriously? The fuckhead didn’t steal from the register at a convenience store.
Prisoners have often been long term IV drug users. A vein large enough to be catheterized can require a surgical cutdown (a minor surgical procedure).
Would the prisoner be required to sign a consent form for that surgery?
I use to have the easiest veins to tap into but the last time I was in the hospital it took 2 levels of specialists above the nurse to find one.
There’s a middle ground solution to the death penalty. Make it optional to the convicted. It would eliminate the expensive appeals process. If life in prison is chosen then any evidence of innocence that comes up in the future prevents an injustice while allowing for some compensation.
That would probably be the same as abolishing it, very very few people are going to opt for death.