I wonder why they cannot just use a well-known anaesthetic to put a person out, like the ones using in surgery everyday, then keep pumping barbiturates into them until their nervous system shuts down.
A major part of the problem is that all of these proper drugs need to be administered through IV, which generally requires someone with medical training. Folks with medical training avoid being involved in executions, so you have poorly trained people jabbing the convict’s arm, and you get bad results. You also have drug suppliers refusing to be involved.
What is normally routine suddenly becomes difficult because you don’t have trained people administering proper drugs.
Seriously. People die like that accidentally every damned day.
Not that I’m for the death penalty, but that definition can’t stand. It makes anything done, say, 50 years ago barbaric if it’s not done today. Unrestricted smoking in restaurants is “barbaric”?
If you accept the premise that smoking in restaurants is unsophisticated and inhumane, sure.
Cite? I know it’s the pit, but you are making shit up.
Why would Oklahoma not screw up that injection any more than they screwed up the injection Tuesday?
Injection Tuesday? Is that a thing when all the red states perform several executions at once?
Only the injection states. Others wait for Electric Friday.
From what I read Lockett and 2 accomplices broke into a house and were stumbled upon by 19 year old Stephanie Nieman and her friend. All 3 raped Stephanie Nieman’s friend, they kidnapped both girls, shot Stephanie Nieman twice, and buried her alive.
IMO this is definitely a person who deserved to die and the world is now a little better place without him. Figure out a more reliable way to do it, but put this guy out of society’s misery.
See, the problem is that you could read something similar about *everybody *on death row. About 5% of the time, conservatively estimating, it’s not true.
Well, that’s one of the problems. But let’s go with that one.
And how would you, let alone society, have been in “misery” had he stayed in solitary confinement?
I have no cite, but it seems logical to me that knowledge of potential assistance in an escape would make one more likely to make an escape attempt.
My understanding is that Tuesday they were using a new drug for the anaesthetic portion of the execution for the first time. So hopefully, there’s less chance of a screwup with the stuff they use everyday in surgeries. Certainly, they could find ways of screwing that up too, especially since it’s not actual doctors doing that stuff.
We’ll get right on finding a way to score everyone’s actions (in kilonazis, of course) and then decided where to draw the line.
From the reports I’ve read, the problem wasn’t with the drugs, the problem was with the vein collapsing, and the OK prison staff’s incompetence/butchery at finding another vein/artery that would work. If the vein collapses/the IV needle penetrates through the vein into the interstitial space, then whether the cocktail was the old or new one, it wasn’t getting to the areas of the body it needed to go to shut down his brain and heart. It was though getting into enough parts of the body to cause the condemned great amounts of pain. (Aside, can sufficient pain be enough to trigger a myocardial infarction, especially in a patient with poor circulatory health?)
OTOH, I’d also read that the first drug in the new cocktail, a tranquilizer, was for some inexplicable reason, used here at only 1/3 the concentration Florida recommended for lethal injection. Which seems bizarre, but I guess this sort of thing happens when you aren’t allowed to use trained medical personnel to perform the procedure.
More detailsabout the attempted execution. It sounds like this guy really had no usable veins for the procedure because this article says there were no more usable veins after the one in his groin collapsed. You would think they would check such things well before the time the execution was to take place. They were just determined to carry it out no matter what.
I realize it’s inconsistant. I just can’t think of anything else for people like Hitler. I recognize my feelings aren’t rational.
So, then, isn’t its barbarism of fairly recent duration? My grandmother was 58 years older than I am. When she was my age, in 1956, the death penalty was legal and accepted in most places, even places of “advanced civilization”…a few US states had abolished it, 11 European countries, and a few countries elsewhere, like Venezuela, and, just that year, Honduras, but it was legal in most of the world, including countries like Great Britain and France. Was it not barbaric then?
And how do you define what the standards of current advanced civilization are? It seems like there’s a little bit of circularity to the argument there? “The death penalty is barbaric because modern advanced civilizations don’t have it, and we know they’re advanced civilizations because they don’t have the death penalty.”
Don’t get me wrong, I fully understand you don’t like the death penalty, and that you think it’s immoral, and I respect that, even though I don’t agree with it. But it seems like your argument is flawed here.
It’s interesting that people always use Hitler as an example, but if we were trying Hitler in international court for war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, etc., the death penalty wouldn’t even be an option.