• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Inmate Dies 2 Hours After Execution in Arizona

Ikari said:
Why is it that so many DP supoorters turn so quickly to emotional arguments? Speeding it up will only exacerbate the problems and lead to more innocents being killed by the State. I'm not so much fueled by revenge to suggest we kill innocent people to get to that one guy over there who we really want to kill. There's no advantage nor purpose to the death penalty any longer.
Click to expand...


Was this man innocent?
 
j-mac said:
Was this man innocent?
Click to expand...

Probably, but I'm not going to endorse a flawed and dangerous system that offers no benefit in order to kill him.
 
US Conservative said:
And yet the fact is that the only way to assure these animals never kill/rape/whatever again is to kill them. Isn't the truth something?
Click to expand...

But that's not the truth. They can be kept in solitary confinement rather than killed. And even if you support the death penalty, surely you can see why an inmate's taking two hours to die is problematic. At least I hope so because, surely, as a society, we're better than that.
 
Ikari said:
Probably, but I'm not going to endorse a flawed and dangerous system that offers no benefit in order to kill him.
Click to expand...

"Debra and Eugene drove together to work at the shop early on Monday morning, August 7, 1989. Defendant phoned the shop three times that morning. Debra hung up on him once, and Eugene hung up on him twice. Defendant called again and asked another employee if Debra and Eugene were at the shop. The employee said that they had temporarily left but would return soon. Debra and Eugene came back at 8:30 a.m. and began working in different areas of the shop. Six other employees were also present that morning.
At 8:50 a.m., a Tucson Police officer saw Defendant driving in a suspicious manner near the shop. The officer slowed her patrol car and made eye contact with Defendant as he left his truck and entered the shop. Eugene was on the telephone in an area where three other employees were working. Defendant waited for Eugene to hang up, drew a revolver, and approached to within four feet of him. The other employees shouted for Defendant to put the gun away. Without saying a word, Defendant fatally shot Eugene once in the chest and then smiled. When the police officer saw this from her patrol car she immediately called for more officers. Defendant left the shop, but quickly returned and again pointed his revolver at
[180 Ariz. 61]
the now supine Eugene. Donald Dietz, an employee and Eugene's seventy-year-old brother, struggled with Defendant, who then ran to the area where Debra had been working.
Debra had apparently heard an employee shout that her father had been shot and was trying to telephone for help when Defendant grabbed her around the neck from behind and placed his revolver directly against her chest. Debra struggled and screamed, "No, Joe, don't!" Another employee heard Defendant say, "I told you I was going to do it, I have to kill you." Defendant then called Debra a "bitch" and shot her twice in the chest.
Several police officers were already on the scene when Defendant left the shop after shooting Debra. Two officers ordered him to put his hands up. Defendant complied and dropped his weapon, but then grabbed it and began raising it toward the officers. After again ordering Defendant to raise his hands, the officers shot Defendant several times."

STATE v. WOOD | Leagle.com

You think this man is innocent....Amazing. The benefit of Wood being put to death is to society.
 
nota bene said:
But that's not the truth. They can be kept in solitary confinement rather than killed. And even if you support the death penalty, surely you can see why an inmate's taking two hours to die is problematic. At least I hope so because, surely, as a society, we're better than that.
Click to expand...

Ah so they can't kill or be a danger in solitary? Is that why prisons are so safe? And when the left tells us that too is cruel what then? Why make them suffer for decades when you can both end their suffering and punish them quickly and permanently?

These executions are botched in many cases because politics has made it difficult so source the drugs needed. Now, I so happen to have a medical background and there are ways around this that would still grant a quick and painless death.

We need to stop letting hand-wringing lefties control the debate-they are anything but disinterested.
 
j-mac said:
"Debra and Eugene drove together to work at the shop early on Monday morning, August 7, 1989. Defendant phoned the shop three times that morning. Debra hung up on him once, and Eugene hung up on him twice. Defendant called again and asked another employee if Debra and Eugene were at the shop. The employee said that they had temporarily left but would return soon. Debra and Eugene came back at 8:30 a.m. and began working in different areas of the shop. Six other employees were also present that morning.
At 8:50 a.m., a Tucson Police officer saw Defendant driving in a suspicious manner near the shop. The officer slowed her patrol car and made eye contact with Defendant as he left his truck and entered the shop. Eugene was on the telephone in an area where three other employees were working. Defendant waited for Eugene to hang up, drew a revolver, and approached to within four feet of him. The other employees shouted for Defendant to put the gun away. Without saying a word, Defendant fatally shot Eugene once in the chest and then smiled. When the police officer saw this from her patrol car she immediately called for more officers. Defendant left the shop, but quickly returned and again pointed his revolver at
[180 Ariz. 61]
the now supine Eugene. Donald Dietz, an employee and Eugene's seventy-year-old brother, struggled with Defendant, who then ran to the area where Debra had been working.
Debra had apparently heard an employee shout that her father had been shot and was trying to telephone for help when Defendant grabbed her around the neck from behind and placed his revolver directly against her chest. Debra struggled and screamed, "No, Joe, don't!" Another employee heard Defendant say, "I told you I was going to do it, I have to kill you." Defendant then called Debra a "bitch" and shot her twice in the chest.
Several police officers were already on the scene when Defendant left the shop after shooting Debra. Two officers ordered him to put his hands up. Defendant complied and dropped his weapon, but then grabbed it and began raising it toward the officers. After again ordering Defendant to raise his hands, the officers shot Defendant several times."

STATE v. WOOD | Leagle.com

You think this man is innocent....Amazing. The benefit of Wood being put to death is to society.
Click to expand...

They dont care about guilt or innocence-they care about doing whatever it takes to end the death penalty, so they interject every bit of spin possible and hope nobody noticed.
 
US Conservative said:
They dont care about guilt or innocence-they care about doing whatever it takes to end the death penalty, so they interject every bit of spin possible and hope nobody noticed.
Click to expand...

I just find it amazing that type of attitude....I asked him if he thought Wood was innocent, and his reply was "probably".... I pray he is never in the situation of having someone like Wood kill members of his family in cold blood like that...I am sure his attitude would be different.
 
j-mac said:
I just find it amazing that type of attitude....I asked him if he thought Wood was innocent, and his reply was "probably".... I pray he is never in the situation of having someone like Wood kill members of his family in cold blood like that...I am sure his attitude would be different.
Click to expand...

These murders were witnessed by several witnesses including police, he was convicted (twice?) to the highest legal standard. Wounded on the scene.

And without batting an eye they will say hes innocent-its a remarkable thought process, really.
 
US Conservative said:
These murders were witnessed by several witnesses including police, he was convicted (twice?) to the highest legal standard. Wounded on the scene.

And without batting an eye they will say hes innocent-its a remarkable thought process, really.
Click to expand...


Yes, much the same type of thinking behind the defense of the worst of the worst like Mumia Abu-Jamal. It is sickening.
 
US Conservative said:
Ah so they can't kill or be a danger in solitary? Is that why prisons are so safe? And when the left tells us that too is cruel what then? Why make them suffer for decades when you can both end their suffering and punish them quickly and permanently?
Click to expand...

Well, you slide right from begging a question down a slippery slope.

Why do you assume that killing someone is necessarily a punishment? Living a long, healthy life behind bars is a punishment while death is a release.


US Conservative said:
These executions are botched in many cases because politics has made it difficult so source the drugs needed. Now, I so happen to have a medical background and there are ways around this that would still grant a quick and painless death.

We need to stop letting hand-wringing lefties control the debate-they are anything but disinterested.
Click to expand...

The "ingredients" necessary for the lethal "cocktail" are increasingly unavailable; hence, all these terrible experiments.

I am not a hand-wringing leftie, but I do oppose the death penalty under all circumstances. If society insists that there must be one, then executions should be quick rather than "cruel and unusual." If the death is cruel or unusual, we're no better than those we put to death.
 
I'm opposed to the death penalty (only because our judicial system is a joke), however situations like this really show how incompetent our idiots in government or in general can be.

They spend thousands of dollars on these "cocktails" and they don't even work.....

Of course when dealing with government - logic goes right out the window, but, if they want to murder a man/woman - just OD them on morphine. That is both cheap, easy and humane.

These attempts at "humane" execution are the least bit humane (as if execution is humane in the first place)....
 
nota bene said:
Well, you slide right from begging a question down a slippery slope.

Why do you assume that killing someone is necessarily a punishment? Living a long, healthy life behind bars is a punishment while death is a release.




The "ingredients" necessary for the lethal "cocktail" are increasingly unavailable; hence, all these terrible experiments.

I am not a hand-wringing leftie, but I do oppose the death penalty under all circumstances. If society insists that there must be one, then executions should be quick rather than "cruel and unusual." If the death is cruel or unusual, we're no better than those we put to death.
Click to expand...

Capital punishment is well, punishment. Taking someones life in response to their actions is sometimes justified-like the worst of the worst after a trial. Living a long healthy life anywhere is to some a travesty of justice (though you give your opinion otherwise). I see execution as a valid means to remove these people from the society they have tragically proven they can't be part of.
 
This is ridiculous. Euthanasia (Greek for "Good death) works in less than one minute. It involves the injection a single drug intravenously. It is usually an extremely high dose of sodium thiopental or pentobarbital. Unconsciousness follows immediately, and within 30 seconds, respiratory and cardiac arrest follows. It is a quick and peaceful death. And it costs about forty bucks at the local vet.
 
Rhiannon said:
This is ridiculous. Euthanasia (Greek for "Good death) works in less than one minute. It involves the injection a single drug intravenously. It is usually an extremely high dose of sodium thiopental or pentobarbital. Unconsciousness follows immediately, and within 30 seconds, respiratory and cardiac arrest follows. It is a quick and peaceful death. And it costs about forty bucks at the local vet.
Click to expand...


Now that I agree with....I don't understand why it is that the same people that fight for the right of Euthanasia for terminal patients, so oppose the worst of humanity...Hell, even the animal world has remedies for those within the pack that just can't get along with others.
 
j-mac said:
Now that I agree with....I don't understand why it is that the same people that fight for the right of Euthanasia for terminal patients, so oppose the worst of humanity...Hell, even the animal world has remedies for those within the pack that just can't get along with others.
Click to expand...

I also believe in the right to die. Imo, it is the fear of death and the importance people place on ego which prevents them from seeing the logic of this. Death is merely the last stage of life. It is just as necessary as birth. And when people are terminal (if they so choose to die in this instance), or when they are a destructive force in society, their death becomes a necessity. It isn't about playing "god."
 
Rhiannon said:
I also believe in the right to die. Imo, it is the fear of death and the importance people place on ego which prevents them from seeing the logic of this. Death is merely the last stage of life. It is just as necessary as birth. And when people are terminal (if they so choose to die in this instance), or when they are a destructive force in society, their death becomes a necessity. It isn't about playing "god."
Click to expand...

Nor should it be. But, in the case where a person kills others with malice, and driven intent to do so needs to pay the ultimate price, because "playing God" is exactly what they are doing no?
 
Ikari said:
And all the people who kill who weren't guilty of the crimes they committed....just stopping possible future murders?

You cannot punish someone for something they might do in the future. There's no such thing as future crime. And society on large is protected just as well by life in prison without parole. And it's cheaper, so we don't have to waste money on some archaic and unnecessary system of death.
Click to expand...
Life in prison (at the taxpayers' expense) is cheaper than execution?
 
NoC_T said:
Life in prison (at the taxpayers' expense) is cheaper than execution?
Click to expand...
Under our system of law, yes. The appeals and judicial process associated with the death penalty is more costly than otherwise. That's not reason enough to abolish the death penalty altogether though, at least in my view.
 
a351 said:
Under our system of law, yes. The appeals and judicial process associated with the death penalty is more costly than otherwise. That's not reason enough to abolish the death penalty altogether though, at least in my view.
Click to expand...
Isn't the same process a given, whatever the punishment? I'd imagine that, even in the US, incarceration probably entails the possibility for appeals. How expensive is a bullet?
 
NoC_T said:
Life in prison (at the taxpayers' expense) is cheaper than execution?
Click to expand...

Yes, currently it is in many cases. However, it doesn't have to be. If the convicted have a limited number of appeals, and the method of execution used only one cheap but effective drug, it would be Much more cost effective and humane.
 
NoC_T said:
Life in prison (at the taxpayers' expense) is cheaper than execution?
Click to expand...

By a lot. Executing a prisoner is excessively expensive.
 
NoC_T said:
Life in prison (at the taxpayers' expense) is cheaper than execution?
Click to expand...

This is interesting. There are other sources, and I think this one may overstate...but there are many comparisons out there.

California

Assessment of Costs by Judge Arthur Alarcon and Prof. Paula Mitchell (2011, updated 2012)

The authors concluded that the cost of the death penalty in California has totaled over $4 billion since 1978:

$1.94 billion--Pre-Trial and Trial Costs
$925 million--Automatic Appeals and State Habeas Corpus Petitions
$775 million--Federal Habeas Corpus Appeals
$1 billion--Costs of Incarceration

The authors calculated that, if the Governor commuted the sentences of those remaining on death row to life without parole, it would result in an immediate savings of $170 million per year, with a savings of $5 billion over the next 20 years.
Click to expand...

Costs of the Death Penalty | Death Penalty Information Center
 
Rhiannon said:
Yes, currently it is in many cases. However, it doesn't have to be. If the convicted have a limited number of appeals, and the method of execution used only one cheap but effective drug, it would be Much more cost effective and humane.
Click to expand...

Not 100% sure how "humane" state sponsored killing ever is.

Shouldn't limit appeals or anything that would encourage more innocents on death row. Given the innate cost of human life, the death penalty being hella-expensive is probably appropriate.
 
Ikari said:
Not 100% sure how "humane" state sponsored killing ever is.
Click to expand...

Humane is the absence on unnecessary suffering.

Ikari said:
Shouldn't limit appeals or anything that would encourage more innocents on death row. Given the innate cost of human life, the death penalty being hella-expensive is probably appropriate.
Click to expand...

Appeals which span entire decades is not necessary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom