SCOTUS ruling - Death Penalty Drugs

[Moonbeam]

Regret - ha
By the time they go to trial, they realize what they did.
After conviction - do any of them express reget. NO
Only when the final moments come, will they say anything; it is more a feel good for themselves and their side; not the victims.

You were unable to answer the question. Coward!

 

[TheSlamma]

Death penalty should be banned across the nation anyway. Surprised at the so-called conservatives who've no problem granting power to the state to kill citizens who no longer pose a threat to anyone.

Most of them think it's "Cheaper"

I think if they had their way though they would burn em at the stake or boil them in oil.

 

[piasabird]

I watch a lot of Korean Historical videos. They use to use several methods of capital punishment. All the methods were rather quick and fatal.

Hanging common criminal
Beheading Treason
Poison Considered an easy way out often used for royalty
Pulled apart with 4 bulls. (Used for only serious treason)
Commit suicide with a silk rope. (Before capital punishment as an option)(Royalty & high officials Only)
Tortured to death -- Oops.

Anyway they seem to be very good at killing people with poison. They developed a lot of different kinds of poison.

I don't see why they cant use like rattle snake poison or some other poison that kills people quickly. Even just choking a person will kill them rather quickly. Koreans use to also use a white die made from sea shells. American Indians had a way of killing people involved in binding the throat with leather and letting it dry in the sun till the person chocked to death. Of course dynamite is nice also. Nothing like a big boom. Cyanide is suppose to be fast also.

My favorite is beheading. It is definitely a fast death if done right. Families use to pay the executioner to sharpen his sword really sharp.

 

[werepossum]

This is the type of comparative argument we find on this forum.

It should not be the type of argument made in the Supreme Court!!! She's saying because of this ruling, burning at the stake is acceptable *sigh*

Sometimes I hate this world... There you go Moonbeam, analyze the hate!

Hey, at least it was Democrats who hired this particular bag of racism, crazy and stupid.

 

[Darwin333]

There isn't any special death penalty drug. All they are doing is giving an overdose of a regular one. The normal cocktail is a paralytic, a sedative and potassium. The one that took hours to go through was a high dose of dilaudid and midazolam. The problem states are having is that drug companies want nothing to do with it so they are blocking their drug's use for it.

Does a drug company, especially if the drug is generic, have the legal right to say what is done with their product after it is sold? I'm sorry but somehow I don't see "they can stop doing business with the US government altogether" as a legitimate threat from any big pharma company.

 

[Darwin333]

It's called justice for heinous crimes. This kind of justice is reactive.

Revenge and justice are very different things my friend. If my daughter was raped and killed would I want the man who did that put to death, you're damn right I would. However I wouldn't even attempt to hold on to the notion that it's justice I was seeking, it would be revenge pure and simple.

 

[K1052]

I am an advocate of the death penalty for particularly heinous crimes, but the cost associated with it, including the mandatory appeals, leads me to believe it would just be better to have them imprisoned for life, with no parole.

If there was a way to have them put to death within a year or two of conviction it would be far better.

So you want them killed without going through that pesky due process?

 

[Charmonium]

From reading some artcles this seems to be the main culprit, the IVs always infiltrate. Just stick in some IM succinylcholine and ketamine and call it a day. Sure theyll defasiculate for a minute, but theyll be happy.

I had to look that one up - did you mean fasciculate maybe?

I am an advocate of the death penalty for particularly heinous crimes, but the cost associated with it, including the mandatory appeals, leads me to believe it would just be better to have them imprisoned for life, with no parole.

Same here. On principle, I agree with eliminating the worst criminals from ALL society including prison. But given how much it costs to actually follow through with a death sentence and the fact that in some states the standard of proof doesn't seem to be particularly high to get such a sentence, we're probably better off just locking them up forever.

 

[Blackjack200]

This is the type of comparative argument we find on this forum.

It should not be the type of argument made in the Supreme Court!!! She's saying because of this ruling, burning at the stake is acceptable *sigh*

Sometimes I hate this world... There you go Moonbeam, analyze the hate!

Sotomayor is criticizing the standard that the court is applying for determining if the drugs are acceptable, or not "cruel and unusual". The court is saying that for the chemicals to be deemed cruel and unusual, the petitioner needs to offer an alternative that would not be.

It's like if the state said, "well, how would you like us to kill you?" and if they didn't get an answer decided that any method was acceptable.

I actually disagree with Sotomayor here, I think she's positioning herself for future capital punishment cases. I think all four dissenters were.

I suppose it's just a side effect of growing older and realizing more that the Supreme Court really is there to create new law, basically be a second legislative branch when the normal legislative branch doesn't produce the laws your party wants.

I don't really see it that way. The constitution has always forbidden cruel and unusual punishment. But the court has always wrestled with the question of whether captial punishment qualifies.

Hey, at least it was Democrats who hired this particular bag of racism, crazy and stupid.

Sotomayor isn't half as bad as Scalia or Thomas.

 

[Ackmed]

Death penalty should be banned across the nation anyway. Surprised at the so-called conservatives who've no problem granting power to the state to kill citizens who no longer pose a threat to anyone.

Because the two convicted murderers that escaped didn't pose a threat to anyone? Because you want to keep paying millions every year keeping these types of people alive? Because you want over crowding to be worse in the prisons?

Death penalty should be used, and more often. Bullets are a lot cheaper too btw. No need for medicines.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Does a drug company, especially if the drug is generic, have the legal right to say what is done with their product after it is sold? I'm sorry but somehow I don't see "they can stop doing business with the US government altogether" as a legitimate threat from any big pharma company.

Here's a bit of an overview as to why. (i.e some companies stopped production of the drugs, some countries banned the shipment of such drugs.)

http://www.theatlantic.com/internat...rope-end-the-death-penalty-in-america/283790/

http://www.csg.org/pubs/capitolideas/enews/issue65_4.aspx

 

[Blackjack200]

Here's a bit of an overview as to why. (i.e some companies stopped production of the drugs, some countries banned the shipment of such drugs.)

http://www.theatlantic.com/internat...rope-end-the-death-penalty-in-america/283790/

http://www.csg.org/pubs/capitolideas/enews/issue65_4.aspx

This gives you a sense of how incredibly out of step we are with much of the world on the death penalty.

 

[Moonbeam]

This gives you a sense of how incredibly out of step we are with much of the world on the death penalty.

The massive outbreak in the US of the CBD has created a nation of fear and a reactionary police state. Rule #1 for huddled conformists is death to the other.

 

[soulcougher73]

There was a time when people lived in poor societies and had no prisons maintained by the state and could not separate killers from the population. In such cases the death penalty was the only way to insure the safety of other people from the psychologically deranged. We now live in a different world and do not have to kill killers as if that will keep killing people at bay. It just makes us exactly like them, We kill people we deem worthy of death, just like killers do when they kill.

I understand your point, but its still a reactive thing. We are only killing them because they are killers. If they were not killers we would not be killing them. I can separate the 2 myself. One is heinous and possibly premeditated and the other is dealing with said psycho.

 

[Slew Foot]

I had to look that one up - did you mean fasciculate maybe?

Same here. On principle, I agree with eliminating the worst criminals from ALL society including prison. But given how much it costs to actually follow through with a death sentence and the fact that in some states the standard of proof doesn't seem to be particularly high to get such a sentence, we're probably better off just locking them up forever.

DERP, yeah. I rarely use Sux and when I do I give a premed with Rocuronium which blocks the fasiculations (a defasiculating dose).

 

[uclabachelor]

All this hooha about using drugs for executions when all they need is a gas chamber and a nitrogen tank.

 

[Blanky]

Because the two convicted murderers that escaped didn't pose a threat to anyone? Because you want to keep paying millions every year keeping these types of people alive? Because you want over crowding to be worse in the prisons?

Death penalty should be used, and more often. Bullets are a lot cheaper too btw. No need for medicines.

Those two did, there are very rare exceptions.

I know you've been told that the legal system has so many checks that executing people is many times more expensive than keeping them in prison for life, to which you respond "Just kill 'em!" and then you end up with even more innocent people executed by the state.

When the death penalty is finally abolished in the US, as it will certainly be, I'll be quite pleased.

 

[Orignal Earl]

This is the type of comparative argument we find on this forum.

It should not be the type of argument made in the Supreme Court!!! She's saying because of this ruling, burning at the stake is acceptable *sigh*

Sometimes I hate this world... There you go Moonbeam, analyze the hate!

Sheesh..I made the same type of argument just recently. I used beheading and caps "anything then zero" and was called stupid and uneducated and crazy