You said “need.” I am curious what you think great suffering and extreme punishment followed by death accomplishes that mere death does not.
You do realize you just advocated for cruel (“great suffering”) and unusual punishment (“extreme punishment”), right?
It’s an interesting position to take, that the founding fathers had brain damage.
I lurk a lot. There are so many people here and a million different topics discussed. How can anyone keep up with all of them?
Maybe I didn’t choose the best words. Punishment must fit the crime. Cruel is cutting off a dudes hand for stealing a 2 dollar loaf of bread. Unusual to me the death penalty for a speeding ticket. Is common sense ever taken into consideration with controversial subjects? Or does liberal save the world bull crap and religious morally wrong shit rule everything.
Having experienced routine surgery, I can attest I did not suffer greatly, primarily because of the drugs I was given. No one can attest to how much pain a person who has been executed has suffered.
The pain I did suffer was from treatment to which I consented.
I don’t think you’ve made a valid comparison here.
I think it’s apt. I’ve had only very minor surgery myself (so far) but I have had friends, spouses and family members who had more major stuff and they invariably put up with considerable pain and suffering in the name of fixing things. (“Physical therapy” - 'nuf sed.)
The argument that burning sensations from injectables and a period of motor anoxia are “cruel and usual” strikes me as nonsense, a grit argument used when all the others have failed. We are there to KILL the person; what more pain and suffering can possibly matter, as long as we do our best not to amplify or extend it? To wave the old cliche - did they care about their victim’s pain and suffering and likely terror and false hope?
If someone takes me out with a surprise headshot and the world just goes black, I’d expect him to be executed just as quickly. If I’m subjected to hours of threats and torture and pain and terror and fading hope of getting out of the situation before being left to bleed out… why yes, I think he should have a good long chance to shit his pants before dying slowly enough to really realize it’s the end.
In any case, asphyxiation using O2 reduction or CO seems like an optimal solution; I am not sure why they aren’t used. Straight anoxia provokes a terminal reaction, I believe, but CO poisoning does not - lights out, go to sleep, heart races a bit, flatline.
I will not challenge your argument that it is acceptable to cause pain and suffering in an execution - I most definitely do NOT agree, but that is not my point.
We consented to our surgery; the executed usually does not consent; I don’t think the comparison is valid.
Inject it into a rat. Then inject the rat into the inmate. [/solved]
I say just let them smoke in prison.
Watch this. Listen to how he just goes on and on without just answering the questions. Reminds me of a few folks on here.
No, cruel is cutting of a dude’s hand, period. It also qualifies as unusual. Your belief in your own opinion being equal to “common sense” is plainly ridiculous.
In NZ we still refer to going to the chemists shop although they try to be pharmacies these days. The term “drug store” in completely unknown and if you used it, people would think you had a local tinny house - dealer.
Then so is your belief in your own self ritcheousness.
I thought rope or bullets were working fine. I do like the idea of saving electricity though. Have we forgotten what these people have done to get the death penalty? I wonder what Charlie Manson is having for dinner, and how much it costs California? Take a dump or get off the pot, Cali is broke, but Charlie eats.
Yet another non-answer.
It would be if I was a particularly self-righteous person, yes. Which in no way, even if I was the most ridiculously self-righteous person in the world, invalidates the argument against you.
People are also missing an international aspect. Many of the rights to these drugs are held outside the US, particularly in Europe, or they are produced elsewhere than the USA. As the USA and Japan are the only two supposedly civilized western countries that still kill its criminals, the net is closing from outside as well as from life advocates in the USA.
As to the position of doctors and nurses, if they participated directly in the act of judicial killing, their licences would be open to challenge, not for violating the Hippocratic Oath, which few if any take now, but because state and National boards do not approve of judicial killing by medical personnel. They also generally disapprove of torture, but this has not stopped US medical personnel taking part in such procedures in Guantanamo Bay and elsewhere.