The problem with execution drugs lately, over shadowed by an even bigger problem

[smackababy]

Only a tiny fraction of the "cost to execute" is contributed by the actual execution. It's the appeals process leading up to the execution that burns money. And if you think we should just execute people within a few weeks of the date they're sentenced, you really need to consider the hundreds (thousands?) of people who have had their death sentences commuted or nullified as a consequence of the appeals process.

I don't think so at all. The problem isn't the costs for performing the execution, it is the increasingly absurd methods we must administer to appease the bleeding hearts.

The appeals process is automatic and needed. I am not suggesting at all we find them guilty and then take 'em about to hang. However, once they have exhausted their appeals process, hang 'em.

 

[smackababy]

FTFY. After missing once, maybe twice they will find the vein... they would never inject an IV into soft tissue which is the difference between what you stated and what actually happened here. Have you ever heard of a private nurse or doctor injecting intravenous medicine into soft tissue? Such incompetence would have them fired or targeted by a malpractice lawsuit. I think my point is pretty clear.

It is highly unlikely injecting intravenous medicine would go unnoticed or cause harm. They aren't injecting poison, after all. Pumping some saline solution into your arm isn't going to kill you.

 

[2timer]

It is highly unlikely injecting intravenous medicine would go unnoticed or cause harm. They aren't injecting poison, after all. Pumping some saline solution into your arm isn't going to kill you.

I never said "saline solution," I said "medicine." If a patient has a potentially life-threatening illness and they need, say, 100cc of a MEDICINE injected intravenously to save their life, and the nurse or doctor misses the vein and injects it into the soft tissue - exactly as occurred here - is that not categorically incompetent, dangerous, and grounds for malpractice? Isn't such a thing avoided by trained and competent medical professionals?

Go ahead and deflect my questions even more if you want, it won't change the facts. 🙄

 

[Atomic Playboy]

I looked it up, and you can decapitate someone if you incorrectly calculate the drop length (too far of a drop). But, it is based on height and weight, so a simple chart could be made up and a rope printed with the length markers on it used.

If we're talking about execution, decapitation doesn't seem like it would be that problematic of an outcome.

 

[shira]

I don't think so at all. The problem isn't the costs for performing the execution, it is the increasingly absurd methods we must administer to appease the bleeding hearts.

The appeals process is automatic and needed. I am not suggesting at all we find them guilty and then take 'em about to hang. However, once they have exhausted their appeals process, hang 'em.

Clearly, the anti-death-penalty camp (in which I include myself) will use any legal strategy possible to stop/delay executions. In the same way, the right will avail themselves of any strategy possible to make it more difficult for women to obtain abortions and to reduce voting by minorities.

Do you really think either side is going to stop their legal games simply because they know they're being intellectually dishonest about their ultimate motives?

 

[smackababy]

I never said "saline solution," I said "medicine." If a patient has a potentially life-threatening illness and they need, say, 100cc of a MEDICINE injected intravenously to save their life, and the nurse or doctor misses the vein and injects it into the soft tissue - exactly as occurred here - is that not categorically incompetent, dangerous, and grounds for malpractice? Isn't such a thing avoided by trained and competent medical professionals?

Go ahead and deflect my questions even more if you want, it won't change the facts. 🙄

No, it isn't grounds for malpractice. This isn't House or ER where a patient requires medicine immediately and then their life is saved. And, medicine is injected into the IV, which is the drop of saline solution. The administering of the IV would happen a long time before the injection of medicine, or the medicine would be injected via a needle. Missing the vein in either procedure is not a significant deal, as they are not injecting something that would cause the patient to be "writhing in pain...eventually die of a heart attack".

This is a common medical procedure and nurses, doctors, whoever, miss the vein sometimes.

The fact that administering the execution requires someone to have medical training is asinine. Especially, when it is only administered like that because of the bleeding heart brigade crying about the rights of someone convicted, whom have at the very least one chance at appeal, being killed with the slight feeling of pain.

 

[TROLLERCAUST]

Well at least until to the same people who object to the death penalty instead start working to eliminate life in prison

The top human rights court in Europe ruled Tuesday that a prison sentence of life without parole is inhuman and degrading treatment, and violates the European Convention of Human Rights. The 16-1 ruling calls into question the life sentences of three men convicted of murder in the United Kingdom, holding that inmates must have some opportunity for their sentences to be reviewed and some prospect for release.

Life without parole is a common sentence in the United States, particularly as an alternative to the death penalty as states abolish or limit its use. But as the human rights panel points out, the punishment is significantly less common Europe, with nine countries having no life terms at all, and the majority of others having “a dedicated mechanism for reviewing the sentence after the prisoner has served a certain minimum period fixed by law.” Spain, Germany, and France have already deemed life without parole unconstitutional. No European Union member country has the death penalty, and abolition of the death penalty is a precondition for becoming a member of the European Union.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/20...-prison-without-parole-inhuman-and-degrading/

You know what? There's nothing wrong with that. Western Europe has 6 to 7 times less prisoners per capita than the US, there's no death penalty and prison sentences are shorter. Is crime rampant in Europe? No, we're doing just fine. Finland has 12 times less prisoners per capita than the US, murderers sometimes go free after 10+ years. Are we a crime ridden hellhole. Nope.

Enough with the ideology "must punish the evildoer" and concentrate on doing what works and provides decent results. What are the benefits of the death penalty and locking so many people up? The point of prisons is to keep people out of them. America has gone on a completely different course of action than the rest of Western countries. Does it work? I don't think so. Does it cost a lot of tax dollars? For sure.

Imprisonement rate in the US from 1979 to 2012:
http://i.imgur.com/sNJ7TVI.gif

Incarceration around the world:
http://i.imgur.com/00AKlNw.png

 

[BoberFett]

We live in a society, where people want others to suffer and feel pain.

That would certainly explain your continued posting...

 

[Oldgamer]

This is something that someone said that I totally agree with when it comes to the death penalty, and so many crying that these people should suffer, and shouldn't be afforded a painless death:

Quote: "If we are actively executing people in one of the more painful ways possible it's inhumane and a sign of a sick culture. It's just too vindictive.

I would much rather live in a society based around understanding and forgiveness than a one which is overly hostile, malicious and revenge laden. It's not healthy for anyone.
Like most situations, if not all, love, understanding and forgiveness are the only answers. Everything else is unproductive.

note: I'm not saying we should let murderers out of jail, just that forgiving them and moving on with our lives would be more productive than holding on to the hostility and pain they have brought to our lives."

 

[alzan]

You are proposing a solution to a problem that doesn't exist in this country, making you part of the simple-minded, idiot masses. 😱

How so? It is established fact that executing someone for a capital crime does not stop other people from committing the same crime; it only stops the criminal being executed.

Keeping a criminal on death row until they exhaust the appeals process is a bigger drain on our respective taxes (local, state, federal) then keeping a criminal imprisoned for life.

Personal attacks, nice.

 

[Texashiker]

Not a problem - you can find plenty of countries that are OK with torture.

Let us know when you move to North Korea, Iran or Eygpt. We'll take care of your chickens for you (we'll BBQ them while celebrating your departure).

Tell me something, which is more humane, keeping someone in a cage for the rest of their life, or cutting their life short? Keeping a dog on a chain is not humane, but keeping a person in a cage is?

Secondly, the person should know the punishment. Do not want to receive the punishment, do not do the crime.

 

[smackababy]

How so? It is established fact that executing someone for a capital crime does not stop other people from committing the same crime; it only stops the criminal being executed.

Keeping a criminal on death row until they exhaust the appeals process is a bigger drain on our respective taxes (local, state, federal) then keeping a criminal imprisoned for life.

Personal attacks, nice.

It is only more of a drain because more time is spent during the case and more time is spent during appeals. There is, due to the amount of time spent, far likely to be more innocent people sentenced to life in prison than innocent people executed.

While the death penalty doesn't deter violent crimes like murder, neither do prison sentences. Murders either don't care or don't expect to get caught.

And we have to take into account our justice system is not about rehabilitation. It is about repaying a debt to society: punishment. The harshest, humane punishment would be putting someone to death. Do we change the system? Good luck. Do we abolish the death penalty because it "doesn't work", might as abolish most laws then.

 

[2timer]

No, it isn't grounds for malpractice. This isn't House or ER where a patient requires medicine immediately and then their life is saved. And, medicine is injected into the IV, which is the drop of saline solution. The administering of the IV would happen a long time before the injection of medicine, or the medicine would be injected via a needle. Missing the vein in either procedure is not a significant deal, as they are not injecting something that would cause the patient to be "writhing in pain...eventually die of a heart attack".

This is a common medical procedure and nurses, doctors, whoever, miss the vein sometimes.

The fact that administering the execution requires someone to have medical training is asinine. Especially, when it is only administered like that because of the bleeding heart brigade crying about the rights of someone convicted, whom have at the very least one chance at appeal, being killed with the slight feeling of pain.

The more you talk the stupider I'm convinced you are. And failing to admit your error from the get-go (I understand, you are proud) the conversation has long since abandoned the original point around which the thread stands, making this a useless debate on semantics and opinion. Which is why I won't bother engaging anymore about it.

 

[AdamantC]

Humans are fine with demanding things of others as long as they don't have to do or witness them. Typical human attitude, all about swagger and bravado so long as the blood doesn't get on our hands.

FTFY

It always boggles my mind how overly complicated execution methods have gotten over the years. Just sedate them and toss 'em off a cliff.

 

[smackababy]

The more you talk the stupider I'm convinced you are. And failing to admit your error from the get-go (I understand, you are proud) the conversation has long since abandoned the original point around which the thread stands, making this a useless debate on semantics and opinion. Which is why I won't bother engaging anymore about it.

You are saying "the executioner was an incompetent idiot who botched the execution by missing the vein and injecting into the soft tissue." And missing the vein is common. The problem is that in missing the vein, a poison that would have killed the person instead killed the person much more painfully. In real life medical practice, this doesn't happen. You are far more likely to crush a vein or put in a solution that has zero detriment to the patient. There is no grounds for malpractice suits, as you try to say.

Saying I am wrong because my opinion is that the solution to this moronic outcry of being humane and requiring someone with medical training to solve a problem we've been doing far longer than intravenous drugs have been around is asinine and the actual problem with this article.

And furthermore, the suggestions that the very few "botched" (as if the guy survived...) executions AND the fact the death penalty doesn't deter crime a reason to abolish it is completely stupid. If you really believe that, I hope you're for abolishing a lot more punishments as well, as they don't deter crime either.

 

[shira]

Tell me something, which is more humane, keeping someone in a cage for the rest of their life, or cutting their life short? Keeping a dog on a chain is not humane, but keeping a person in a cage is?

Well, those on the receiving end certainly seem to strongly prefer being in a cage for the rest of their lives over having their lives cut short. Furthermore, if being in a cage for the rest of their lives is so horrible, then can being in a cage for even 20 years be much better? So by your reasoning, we should kill pretty much everyone who is given an extended sentence.

In other words, your point is utterly stupid.

Secondly, the person should know the punishment. Do not want to receive the punishment, do not do the crime.

What do you mean by "know the punishment?" For what purpose? So that they can take that knowledge with them to the grave? This makes sense to you?

Or are you arguing that "knowing the punishment" is a significant deterrent to capital crimes? You should know that pretty much every study that has investigated the question has concluded that when the severity of the punishment is beyond a certain point, any further increase in severity has no additional deterrent effect. Furthermore, if your first point is correct and being in a cage for the rest of one's life is so much worse than being killed, then "knowing the punishment" of a long jail sentence is obviously a bigger deterrent to would-be murderers than being killed.

I highly recommend that you find a very fertile woman who you can have another 5 kids with, after which she divorces you. Then you'll be so occupied spending your life's blood supporting your 9 children you won't have any spare time to torture us with more of your posts.

You see, the CORRECT answer is that sentencing someone to reading your posts for the rest of their life is the real ultimate punishment.

 

[2timer]

You are saying "the executioner was an incompetent idiot who botched the execution by missing the vein and injecting into the soft tissue." And missing the vein is common. The problem is that in missing the vein, a poison that would have killed the person instead killed the person much more painfully. In real life medical practice, this doesn't happen. You are far more likely to crush a vein or put in a solution that has zero detriment to the patient. There is no grounds for malpractice suits, as you try to say.

OK I see your point. I went for my afternoon jog, and realized I was overly harsh to imply that you were stupid for your comments, and I apologize.

Saying I am wrong because my opinion is that the solution to this moronic outcry of being humane and requiring someone with medical training to solve a problem we've been doing far longer than intravenous drugs have been around is asinine and the actual problem with this article.

And furthermore, the suggestions that the very few "botched" (as if the guy survived...) executions AND the fact the death penalty doesn't deter crime a reason to abolish it is completely stupid. If you really believe that, I hope you're for abolishing a lot more punishments as well, as they don't deter crime either.

I see nothing wrong with execution by lethal injection in theory, it was simply botched in execution. That conclusion is based on the expert opinion quoted in the article. I have nothing against lethal injection but I think there need to be more regulations and oversights, as this case plainly illustrates.

 

[alzan]

It is only more of a drain because more time is spent during the case and more time is spent during appeals. There is, due to the amount of time spent, far likely to be more innocent people sentenced to life in prison than innocent people executed.

While the death penalty doesn't deter violent crimes like murder, neither do prison sentences. Murders either don't care or don't expect to get caught.

And we have to take into account our justice system is not about rehabilitation. It is about repaying a debt to society: punishment. The harshest, humane punishment would be putting someone to death. Do we change the system? Good luck. Do we abolish the death penalty because it "doesn't work", might as abolish most laws then.

If I were sentenced for a capital crime I didn't commit, I'd sure as hell want our appeal process. (pretty sure you and everyone else would as well)

Most criminals don't expect to get caught. Our legal system is replete with crimes and their proscribed punishment. There is a significant percentage of criminals for whom prison time was rehabilitative; that fact alone is evidence that the legal system is, at least in that respect, worth our tax money.

No reason why we cannot spend money for rehabilitation while prisoners are being punished. Turning a tax-draining person to a tax-paying citizen is a good thing.

Your last sentence seems to be teetering on a slippery slope (argument).

 

[uclabachelor]

If the states wanted to execute someone quickly, they can just build a modern gas chamber and pump it full of CO2 and/or nitrogen, which is readily available anywhere. The offender goes unconscious and dies painlessly. No toxic chemicals, no toxic gases. No debate about where the drugs are source or about its effectiveness. No need for skilled personnel. Just turn on the tank and vent to atmosphere after you're done.

 

[BoberFett]

If the states wanted to execute someone quickly, they can just build a modern gas chamber and pump it full of CO2 and/or nitrogen, which is readily available anywhere. The offender goes unconscious and dies painlessly. No toxic chemicals, no toxic gases. No debate about where the drugs are source or about its effectiveness. No need for skilled personnel. Just turn on the tank and vent to atmosphere after you're done.

Or if they wait long enough the climate will change in the execution chamber and kill the prisoner humanely.

 

[DrPizza]

No, it isn't grounds for malpractice. This isn't House or ER where a patient requires medicine immediately and then their life is saved. And, medicine is injected into the IV, which is the drop of saline solution. The administering of the IV would happen a long time before the injection of medicine, or the medicine would be injected via a needle. Missing the vein in either procedure is not a significant deal, as they are not injecting something that would cause the patient to be "writhing in pain...eventually die of a heart attack".

This is a common medical procedure and nurses, doctors, whoever, miss the vein sometimes.

The fact that administering the execution requires someone to have medical training is asinine. Especially, when it is only administered like that because of the bleeding heart brigade crying about the rights of someone convicted, whom have at the very least one chance at appeal, being killed with the slight feeling of pain.

As stated by others, yes, they miss the vein. But, they get the vein before they administer drugs that have to be given intravenously. And yes, it's malpractice if they do otherwise - it's incompetence. AND, yes, there are plenty of drugs that cause major problems if not injected into the bloodstream. In fact, some drugs have to be injected into major veins, else they will destroy the smaller veins.

I'm surprised they don't use cardiac catheterization - a catheter is run through the vein, up to the heart. And, the placement is verified before giving the medications. It's a relatively simple procedure; my wife has done it for numerous patients who are being sent home with drugs that have some pretty nasty effects if given in smaller veins.

 

[werepossum]

The compromise that has been pushed to make an execution painless to satisfy the squeamish has created this problem.

There are multiple ways to execute a person that are swift and require no extensive medical training.

But doing so will not appease those that feel sorry for one that had no remorse for another.

Well said.

And, if we didn't have people crying about executions, we wouldn't need medical professionals to give an injection of some ridiculous cocktail of chemicals. The long drop is literally idiot proof. They stand on a platform and get a rope around their neck. Any moron can pull a lever.

And, missing the vein is something nurses, doctors, blood donor center workers, etc do ALL the time. The only reason people cry about it here is because someone who took the life of another suffered a little bit. Cry me a river, please.

I am okay with the higher costs in defending and appeal process for death penalty cases (because, it helps insure we put to death those which are guilty with the smallest amount of error possible in our system).

We already have a system set up to punish, not rehabilitate. The most effective punishment is to remove these scumbags from society.

Also well said.

If we're talking about execution, decapitation doesn't seem like it would be that problematic of an outcome.

Well, it would certainly end the arguments about how the poor dear suffered.

 

[werepossum]

or if they wait long enough the climate will change in the execution chamber and kill the prisoner humanely.

lol +1

Execution by rising sea level. Any minute now . . . Wait for it . . .

 

[zanejohnson]

wait a second........femoral artery???

you guys understand what that is right........ that IS sick if it's real........ people use that.... when they are completely gone. like, hookers who have no veins, they use a big needle to hit that... it's completely sick.... they really inject these execution drugs this way??

 

[Burning Bush]

I'm sad to say my good friend Andy got a new job and now I have to look elsewhere to discuss the things we often discussed.

As a former corrections officer, I have been in discussions about what we should be doing to punish criminals for many years. It's interesting how little people know about what goes on in our prisons.

First, I support the death penalty. I was reading an article last week about a hospital in the State of Washington that was trying to save on energy costs by burning waste in some sort of environmentally friendly way to create electricity. The waste included aborted fetuses from Canada. You can guess where I'm going with this. I'm just saying, maybe those sentenced to death do a little something to reduce energy costs. Are they considered fossil fuel?

Seriously, how's this idea? We bus a larger portion of our prison population to the Mexican border, where the Mexican government then buses them to prisons built south of the border. Mexico builds the prisons to meet standards approved by human rights groups. They pay their correctional officers well, but a mere fraction of what U.S. prison guards make. Cities along the Mexican border thrive and less people try to enter the U.S. illegally. States can reduce the cost of incarcerating felons by as much as 2/3rds. Additionally, there would be a dramatic drop in workman comp claims by U.S. prison guards. You might not believe how many receive early retirement resulting from a workplace incidents. Maybe these new Mexican prisons wouldn't feel pressured to offer game rooms, swimming pools, weight rooms, HBO and Showtime movies, computer terminals, and other amenities that seem to increase recidivism.