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.
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.
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.
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.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.
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.
Well at least until to the same people who object to the death penalty instead start working to eliminate life in prison
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/20...-prison-without-parole-inhuman-and-degrading/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.
We live in a society, where people want others to suffer and feel pain.
You are proposing a solution to a problem that doesn't exist in this country, making you part of the simple-minded, idiot masses.
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).
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.
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.
FTFYHumans 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.
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.
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.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?
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?Secondly, the person should know the punishment. Do not want to receive the punishment, do not do the crime.
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.
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 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.
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.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.
Well said.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.
Also 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.
Well, it would certainly end the arguments about how the poor dear suffered.If we're talking about execution, decapitation doesn't seem like it would be that problematic of an outcome.
lol +1or if they wait long enough the climate will change in the execution chamber and kill the prisoner humanely.