Supremes review Lethal Injection

[ThomasMore]

WASHINGTON (AFP) - The US Supreme Court will on Monday take up the thorny issue of lethal injections in a bid to determine if this method of executing death-row inmates conforms with the constitution, which forbids cruel and unusual punishment.

The review comes after death penalty opponents have demonstrated that lethal injection can in fact be painful, and amid a rise in questions about whether the death penalty generally has been applied fairly and accurately around the country since it was restored in a 1976 Supreme Court decision.

Conceived without much study in 1977 and used in 98 percent of the most recent 500 executions, lethal injection involves three chemicals: the first one puts the prisoner to sleep, the second paralyzes his muscles and the third stops his heart.

If all goes according to plan, the inmate quickly becomes unconscious and dies within several minutes.

But if the first chemical is not administered properly, the two others become extremely painful.

Several scientific studies and a series of botched executions have shown that that could take place.

In 2004, two prisoners in Kentucky, Ralph Blaze, sentenced to death for the murder of two police officers, and Thomas Bowling, found guilty murdering a couple in the process of stealing their car, argued in court that lethal injection constituted a "cruel and unusual punishment" forbidden by the Eighth Amendment of the US constitution.

More HERE (http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080106/ts_afp/usjusticecourtexecution_080106035033)

---

Sounds like a claim is being made of "anaesthesia awareness (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anesthesia_awareness)," not being fully rendered unconscious by anaesthesia, or waking up mid-surgery. It is a relatively rare phenomenon (in surgery, about 1 in 700 cases), although I have a good friend who experienced it -- they upped his dose, then he stopped breathing.

---

Hmmm.

Does "might hurt a lot, sometimes" = "cruel and unusual punishment"?

What happens if the firing squad doesn't get a headshot, or the condemned survives the first fusillade?

What happens if the noose doesn't break the condemned's neck, and he chokes to death?

What happens in the gas chamber as the condemned's lungs fill with poison?

What happens in the electric chair when the condemned survives the first jolt, or gets burned?

Maybe we should bring back the headsman. http://img.tfd.com/wn/05/690FC-headsman.gif But what if his aim is bad?

In France, even with the Guillotine, the decapitated remained conscious for a moment.

Is there such a thing as a 100% guaranteed, painless execution?

What about the dread the condemned experiences as he goes to the death chamber? Is that "cruel and unusual punishment"?

---

On the other hand, if you wanted to go the other way, there are many brutal forms of execution:

Drawing and Quartering (http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Drawing_and_quartering)

Keelhauling (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keelhauling)

Impalement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impalement)

Crucifixion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucifixion)

Death by 1,000 cuts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slow_slicing)

Staked to an anthill

You could get creative and use Goldfinger's laser:

http://writingcompany.blogs.com/this_isnt_writing_its_typ/images/goldfinger_laser.jpg

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

You hit the point I was thinking of Thomas. How is it that an execution being painful is cruel and unusual punishment? One would have to develop some sort of criteria by which to measure each form of capital punishment. Personally, I think the punishments should be measured against the CRIME committed, not some arbitrary and revisable standard of "pain".

[ThomasMore]

Criminal penalties are intended to achieve several goals: retribution, protection of society, and deterrence are chief among them. Compensation of victims or society, and rehabilitation of the criminal are sometimes also considered.

In order to achieve their purposes, criminal penalties by nature MUST be unpleasant -- there is no way to be "nice" while exacting retribution. There is nothing "nice" (to the convict) about separating him from society. If you want to deter future conduct, you must provide a penalty that people wish to avoid.

The death penalty is explicitly mentioned in the Constitution:

Amendment 5 - Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings. Ratified 12/15/1791.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment 14 - Citizenship Rights. Ratified 7/9/1868.

1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

...

Causing death normally involves inflicting pain. Lethal injection uses anaesthesia to prevent pain -- but that occasionally fails.

Is the pain associated with execution cruel: Is it inflicted unnecessarily? Is it inflicted for the purpose of public amusement or for the sake of the pain itself? Or is the pain a normal and necessary part of causing death?

Is the pain associated with execution unusual: Is it for entertainment value or for intrinsic bizarreness? Or is it appropriate for its intended purpose?

[Timberwolf]

...maybe I could vote for Guiliani.
To the Supreme Court of the United States, concerning Lethal Injection.

It is claimed by those minions who oppose the death penalty (for ANY reason), that under the protections of the Constitution of the United States of America, we are (as citizens) protected against "cruel and unusual punishment". Were we not speaking of execution of convicted felons, which by definition would be painful, they might have a point.

However, execution, by its very nature, is painful. Furthermore, when one commits a felony, by default, one forfeits certain protections of our beloved Constitution. That the United States (and the numerous State Governments) attempt to make said execution as painless as possible, speaks volumes as to how humanely we, as a people, treat even the most wicked in our society.

The death penalty opponents case is without merit and should be summarily dismissed.

Thank you,
A concerned citizen
...or something to that effect.

I am so sick & tired of these mewling, perversion-loving, bleeding heart, pusillanimous, sycophantic, left-wing dickheads, I could spit nails. I'd LOVE to be able to subject THEM to the same pain we've been forced to endure from them...just for 10 minutes.

[Wolfcounsel]

Easy. The scholarly dumbasses who have elevated execution to a form of punishment just need to reconsider, and to call execution what it really is. It is a form of RECKONING!

You murderous assholes out there awaiting execution, and you potential murderers, all of you, prepare to meet the reckoning, painful or otherwise, if you take an innocent life.

[BuckeyeMike]

You hit the point I was thinking of Thomas. How is it that an execution being painful is cruel and unusual punishment? One would have to develop some sort of criteria by which to measure each form of capital punishment. Personally, I think the punishments should be measured against the CRIME committed, not some arbitrary and revisable standard of "pain".


I'm of the opinion that "How they slew another.....so should THEY be slewn!"

[Elgalad]

All this hand wringing over what constitutes 'cruel and unusual punishment' is a pointless distraction.

IMAO, this is the only lethal injection a convicted murderer or rapist should have to look forward to:

http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/8584/556m855ballio7.gif
(5.56mm M855 NATO ball round ~ $0.39)

And he or she should receive it as soon as possible because the prolonged appeals process itself is cruel and unusual. A hard limit of 120 days from sentencing should be more than adequate to give a defendant ample opportunity to appeal their conviction and sentence.

Quite simply, there is no reasonable excuse whatsoever for murderers to languish on death row for 10+ years before receiving their final meal.


-Elgalad

[Rhino]

Why pussyfoot around?

http://www.midwayusa.com/mediasvr.dll/image?saleitemid=261745

[ThomasMore]

Or you could just go all-out:

http://www.ssp25.com/images/usmc/gallery/50cal%20Raufoss%20small.jpg

There won't be a lot left to bury.

[Elgalad]

Because it's the round that I'm most used to. ;)

And anyways, I was just trying to save a little money.

Though it would probably be cheaper to just use a rope, since you can use it more than once.


-Elgalad

[ThomasMore]

You could always bill the family for the bullet, a la USSR.

[DoctorDoom]

IMO, why is it relevant whether or not the executed feel pain while being put down? He'll be dead afterward, and he won't remember it. IAC, how much concern does a cold-blooded murderer have for the suffering of his victims?

Screw 'em.

[Beowulf]

IMO, why is it relevant whether or not the executed feel pain while being put down? He'll be dead afterward, and he won't remember it. IAC, how much concern does a cold-blooded murderer have for the suffering of his victims?

Screw 'em.

Agreed!

[jTj]

This is a means, not to review a specific type of capital punishment, but moreso to review whether or not all of them will be "cruel and unusual." I don't doubt that the Supremes will just stick to this specific version of Lethal Injection, but by them looking at this form, we will no doubt set the precidence that they should look at all forms.

Some crimes are so hainus that they cannot be forgiven.

Do you know what that means? When you take something from someone (ie, their life, their family's lives, rape, molestation, incest, whatever...) that person or their family should reasonably be accepted that they couldn't/can't forgive the person that did it.

When a crime is unforgivable and a life (either physically or mentally) is taken, the only punishment should be the Death Sentence. What is so hard to understand about that? A life has been taken, what other form of punishment should be contemplated?

To heck with lethal injection, the crime should fit the execution. If a man/woman were shot to death. FIRING SQUAD. If a child was suffocated with a pillow. GAS CHAMBER. Rape.. molestation.. incest.. the likes. PUBLIC STONING. And whenever possible, get the rope.

[Timberwolf]

Works for me...welcome to the fray. :thumb:

[EveningStar]

Supremes review Lethal Injection

Huh?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/db/TheSupremes.jpg

[gnome]

For me it's a question of practicing what we preach. If Lethal Injection is legislated and intended by the voting public to be a painless execution, it should perform as advertised. If the public isn't interested in a painless execution, then lethal injection isn't necessary at all.

My understanding is a change in the commonly-used lethal injection method will resolve the matter with very little fuss, except that when the death penalty comes up all manner of irrelevancies come into play because it's a controversial issue.

[ThomasMore]

For me it's a question of practicing what we preach. If Lethal Injection is legislated and intended by the voting public to be a painless execution, it should perform as advertised. If the public isn't interested in a painless execution, then lethal injection isn't necessary at all.

My understanding is a change in the commonly-used lethal injection method will resolve the matter with very little fuss, except that when the death penalty comes up all manner of irrelevancies come into play because it's a controversial issue.

Gnome, you bring up a good point.

Can systems be improved? If so, it is appropriate to look into those improvements.

But at the same time, the Constitution doesn't guarantee an ideal execution, only one which is not cruel and unusual. In the vast majority of cases, the anaesthetic renders the condemned unconscious before the other drugs put him permanently to sleep.

Requests to review the drugs and improve upon them are appropriate. Seeking to have a court prohibit the execution because in a one-in-700 chance of anaesthesia awareness is another matter.

I can anticipate the next objection, that there is no incentive to review the anaesthesia UNLESS you threaten to shut down the execution. Without getting into detail, I disagree.

There are many prison officials who are always considering improvements to the process. The fact that lethal injection is used at all is evidence of that.

[gnome]

The question of whether court action is appropriate is definitely on point, and I can appreciate that argument a lot better than "but they're murderers, who cares if it hurts?"

[hosl]

You hit the point I was thinking of Thomas. How is it that an execution being painful is cruel and unusual punishment? One would have to develop some sort of criteria by which to measure each form of capital punishment. Personally, I think the punishments should be measured against the CRIME committed, not some arbitrary and revisable standard of "pain".

Couldn't the same logic transfer to abortion? Should there be a revisable standard of "pain" for fetuses? Plus, they don't feel pain or develop fingernails (contrary to "Juno", great movie BTW) until mid-2nd trimester-ish

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Couldn't the same logic transfer to abortion? Should there be a revisable standard of "pain" for fetuses? Plus, they don't feel pain or develop fingernails (contrary to "Juno", great movie BTW) until mid-2nd trimester-ish

What ARE you talking about?

This thread is about the Death Penalty ... if you wish to discuss abortion, please take your comments to the appropriate forum (http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/forumdisplay.php?f=61).

[TeenageRepublican]

Couldn't the same logic transfer to abortion? Should there be a revisable standard of "pain" for fetuses? Plus, they don't feel pain or develop fingernails (contrary to "Juno", great movie BTW) until mid-2nd trimester-ish

How do you know getting killed in a mother's womb isn't painful? A heart beat starts on the 21st day, that means that the baby is developing and can feel pain.