“I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on what’s being proposed here, he’d agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute.” - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.
If they're going to execute people they may as well just save the taxpayers the money and give these guys a lethal does of high grade heroin - that will do it - no suffering - they nod off and die. They wouldn't even need to strap them down - they'd be out in 10 seconds flat.
Hell, at least give the condemned the option of going out that way.
That's what they basically do in countries where self-assisted suicides are legal - they give them mass qualities of synthetic heroin... There is no struggle or no fighting for life..
What they do in these state sanctioned executions is paralyze the condemned and start pumping them with the "right dosages" of chemicals no one takes for recreational use - so how the hell do these quacks know if they suffer or not?
I suppose the philosophical question is if some people want them to suffer or die without suffering - I have an opinion on that but that doesn't matter. I am merely speaking here about what is effective and what is not as far as "killing" someone quick (I don't want to sound morbid either).
It's not exactly like anyone who has ever been given those drugs have ever lived to tell about it, as a matter of fact on the contrary. The same drugs used to knock the guys out are typical drugs they uses for anesthesia when they're knocking patience out for surgery..... My dad had to have surgery when he was younger and in the military and he felt the entire operation while being paralyzed..... He said it was the most painful experience he as ever felt...
You want to kill these guys? overdose them on narcotics instead of $10,000 worth of drugs these quacks have no idea other than theory what they will do. Or at the very minimum give them 10x the suggested lethal dose to insure they're dead instead of calculating how much they may or may not need.
I mean back in the day when they used to hang people they would calculate how much rope they would need to hang someone - yet sometimes they would screw up and when they dropped the condemned their heads would pop off, which led to the so called "long drop."
So what is the point, really? Why use an archaic and flawed system that is no longer necessary? Life in prison without parole is just as good as death, with the added benefit that one falsely imprisoned can stay alive long enough to perhaps see their conviction overturned.
You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo
Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
The drug companies, in keeping with their anti-death penalty stance, have made it virtually impossible for the prisons to get the required dosages of the tested, effective drugs used in execution.
Their plan, apparently, is to torture the hapless criminals by forcing us to use substandard, ineffective and untested drugs on those poor who are sentenced to death..until the outrage is so severe we just stop the death penalty.
So not going to happen.
No TV, no books, nothing.
They will.absolutely go barking mad.
Which is probably a better deterrent than a clean ending.
Maybe make a week on that block mandatory for first timers. Include it in the scared straight program.
"Yes. If you commit crimes heinous enough we will put you in a cell and leave you there forever. With high pressure sprayers keep you and the cell clean and crappy food thrown through a little door. So you can spend the rest of your sanity thinking about what you did."
Anyone wondering what I'm talking about start here:
The Psychology of Persuasion
I oppose the death penalty in most cases, and I oppose abortion, in most cases. I am practical and pragmatic person. I try to see the whole issue and the unintended ramifications of being hardheaded on issues that involve areas of grey. I am not an emotional decision maker. I think abortion laws and the death penalty should be applied to society practically and in a utilitarianism manner.
I prefer pro death penalty arguments like, "the death penalty should applied to protect society from truly sociopathic individuals who cannot be rehabilitated, and will most likely cause society danger by influencing others from within the prison system."
I prefer an argument like that as opposed to the emotional, erratic arguments revolving around the victim's family and their emotional state and knee jerk reactions.
If they stay out of it and the state still finds drugs to kill people with the drug companies are not in any sort of way responsible.
Last edited by Henrin; 07-26-14 at 06:51 PM.