Death Penalty-Can Someone Explain This?

[sillysally]

I know that the death penalty is controversial, but I came across this story on yahoo news and am left with questions: http://news.yahoo.com/arizona-inmate-dies-2-hours-execution-began-230855668.html

First of all, why don't they use the same drug they euthanize animals with? I've seen several cats and horses PTS, and all went quickly without any sort of complications. If a drug can literally drop a 1000 lb horse within seconds of being administered, surely the same thing could be used for a person?

Also, why not just shoot a prisoner to carry out a death sentence? If the executioner knew what hey were doing I would thnk death would be almost instant, and I would think a bullet is cheaper than drugs?

Not trying to be morbid here, just genuinely wondering?

 

[Xandra]

I've heard (on forums) of it going very wrong with animals as well. I don't understand it either, unless they run out of the drug. Surely if the first dose isn't working you just give another huge one?

As far as not shooting, probably because it's more unsavory to point-blank shoot a helpless person than it is to inject something into an IV or w/e.

 

[RBark]

Shooting someone in the head/heart has a surprisingly mediocre fatality rate. Sure they'll die, eventually. But it's not instant a lot of the time.

And the people doing the executions are not monsters. Yes, the guy who got executed is a mass murderer who doesn't care and probably (not even going to get started on that, this doesn't represent my personal belief) deserved to die.

But the people involved in the execution are presumably good people who don't want to be traumatized by the process.

I mean a lot of people have difficulty killing animals to eat. A human being, no matter how horrid a person they are? That's severely rough on a normal human. Soldiers in war, no matter how justified the war, frequently come back scarred, traumatized, broken on the inside, with a wide variety of disorders from what they had to do there.

It's easy to say "just kill him". But could you watch someone helplessly die, over hours, in agony? And not be bothered? I know I couldn't. The vast majority of good people couldn't handle something like that.

So a quick death isn't always about the prisoner. It's about the executors.

 

[elegy]

I am left utterly mystified, I must say. Having performed or assisted in dozens upon dozens of cat/dog euthanasias over the years, some on dogs that weigh as much as humans. It very very rarely "goes wrong" in the hands of someone who knows what they're doing and can hit a vein.

I just absolutely do not understand why the same cannot be done with people. This seems to happen repeatedly. Yes, I get he was a Bad Guy, but if we cannot kill people humanely, I do not think we have any business killing them in the first place.

 

[lastkid]

A lot of the companies that produce the drug/combo of drugs that were used successfully for years (and are still used on animals) are based in Europe, and they won't sell it for executions anymore. Hence all of these recent executions with drug combinations that are in theory supposed to work quickly and humanely...but no one really knows for sure, until the night of, when the guy takes hours to die. [/delurking]

 

[Dogdragoness]

I know that the death penalty is controversial, but I came across this story on yahoo news and am left with questions: http://news.yahoo.com/arizona-inmate-dies-2-hours-execution-began-230855668.html

First of all, why don't they use the same drug they euthanize animals with? I've seen several cats and horses PTS, and all went quickly without any sort of complications. If a drug can literally drop a 1000 lb horse within seconds of being administered, surely the same thing could be used for a person?

Also, why not just shoot a prisoner to carry out a death sentence? If the executioner knew what hey were doing I would thnk death would be almost instant, and I would think a bullet is cheaper than drugs?

Not trying to be morbid here, just genuinely wondering?

I'm sorry but I think the punishment should fit the crime in come cases, like murderers should have to endure the same death they bestowed on their victims. I also think molesting a child should Carey the death penalty, as should aggravated animal cruelty.

 

[Dekka]

I'm sorry but I think the punishment should fit the crime in come cases, like murderers should have to endure the same death they bestowed on their victims. I also think molesting a child should Carey the death penalty, as should aggravated animal cruelty.

But that is horrific! Who do you want to do these things to these people? Anyone ok with it is likely no better off than the person being killed. Regardless of how I feel about the DP, I do feel these people are sick. If they are going to be euthanized it should be humane. Not just for them, but for us.

If we are going to say that as a society we are better, then we have to act it.

 

[Dogdragoness]

But that is horrific! Who do you want to do these things to these people? Anyone ok with it is likely no better off than the person being killed. Regardless of how I feel about the DP, I do feel these people are sick. If they are going to be euthanized it should be humane. Not just for them, but for us.

If we are going to say that as a society we are better, then we have to act it.

I am sorry but I do not see it that way, I think of the families of the victims and how much pain before the feelings of the person who killed their loved one. I stand by my opinion that the punishment should fit the crime.

 

[Romy]

The family of the guy's victims sure didn't look upset after witnessing it when they were interviewed.

Some times when it gets botched, I feel like maybe it's kharma. I do think we should strive for quick and painless if the death penalty is to be used, for our own humanity. If the pros can't figure it out though, not sure that I could offer any useful input on the subject.

 

[sillysally]

But if we killed everyone in the manner they killd their victims can you imagine where it would lead? We'd have to hire psychopaths to carry out the executions, plus I'm pretty sure that would under "cruel and unusual," and you think we spend tax dollars on DP related court cases now, just wait until the execution involves days of torture.

Honestly, if someone brutally murdered one of my loved ones I'm pretty sure I'd want them to die horribly for their crime. I cannot imagine the agony of having a loved ripped away from you like that and I pray to God that I never have to experience it. However, inhumane treatment and torture if the guilty party isn't going to bring that person back, not is it going to take the pain of loss away.

I do think there are people that do things so horrible that they forfeit their right to be alive. But if we are going to kill someone, it needs to be as quickly as possible--not gagging and gasping for air for over an hour.

 

[Psyfalcon]

I'm sorry but I think the punishment should fit the crime in come cases, like murderers should have to endure the same death they bestowed on their victims. I also think molesting a child should Carey the death penalty, as should aggravated animal cruelty.

Because our false conviction rate is 0.

Not only will you wrongfully kill you, but we'll torture you too.

 

[Paviche]

Because our false conviction rate is 0.

Not only will you wrongfully kill you, but we'll torture you too.

:hail:

 

[ruffiangirl]

I am ok with the death penalty, but torture...not ok. And death penalty should be reserved for those who are without a doubt guilty, like the person in this story, or Dalmer, you find people's body parts in his freezer he should get the death penalty. Charles Manson should have had the death penalty, some people are just not right in the head. But an eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth literally, just no.

As for the original questions, I just don't know, short of beheading I'm not sure of a better way that is fully efficient. Not that beheading is better, just efficient and effective...but who would you hire to do that.

 

[release the hounds]

Lots of ways to kill people. Bullets are cheap and effective. Not sure I want to be chosen to be on the firing squad and i'm not so sure long term effects to those doing the killing are going to be very beneficial to the individual or society.

a noose works rather well, so does a guillotine. But society says we must be "humane" in our killing. Because chemistry and drugs are always more humane Society is strange that way. Maybe because drugs are mostly associated with medicine these days that "help" people, by having a DR. administer them thru an IV we feel better about it? and chopping off heads is barbaric? I'd rather have my head chopped off I think.

anyway, I like the death penalty in theory, i think in reality it's a gigantic waste of time, money, and resources. We've killed innocent people on more than one occasion and that's reason enough for me to be happy with just life without parole. If I had more faith in our system that it was 100% only about the truly guilty i'd be much more for it.

At this point, I don't feel too badly for this guy, but I wouldn't be upset if they did away with executions entirely either.

 

[skittledoo]

I have some mixed feelings on this subject personally.

My uncle is in prison for murder with a life sentence. He has been in prison for a while now and still to this day maintains that he is innocent. We keep in contact still and not once has he ever changed his story. Is he actually innocent? I don't know honestly. I'd like to believe he is, but I can't know for sure.

Anyways, they discussed the death penalty when they were sentencing him. His case was in Texas so I was almost sure they would give him the death penalty, but they decided on a life sentence. If they had given him the death penalty I would have wanted it to be something quick. Maybe I feel that way because he is family, but I don't know.

Sometimes I feel like the penalty should fit the crime, but other times I feel like that doesn't make the those punishing the crime any better... so.... here I sit riding on the fence unsure of which side I really lean towards.

 

[Laurelin]

A lot of the companies that produce the drug/combo of drugs that were used successfully for years (and are still used on animals) are based in Europe, and they won't sell it for executions anymore. Hence all of these recent executions with drug combinations that are in theory supposed to work quickly and humanely...but no one really knows for sure, until the night of, when the guy takes hours to die. [/delurking]

This is my understanding as well.

 

[Jules]

"Getting" criminals back with the same crime they committed is just a horrendous thought. I personally don't agree with the death penalty, at least not in this system. If you could guarantee a flawless just justice system, I might change my feelings.

To continue executions that are continuously botched (like the most recent one in AZ, where the guy was gasping for 2 hours) is absolutely appalling to me. We, as a society, are supposed to be better than that. We want everyone to live within the rules of society, with all that comes with it. So when a society, as an authority, starts to show that it's okay to do these things to its citizens, it makes us nothing but awful hypocrites.

 

[Dogdragoness]

But if we killed everyone in the manner they killd their victims can you imagine where it would lead? We'd have to hire psychopaths to carry out the executions, plus I'm pretty sure that would under "cruel and unusual," and you think we spend tax dollars on DP related court cases now, just wait until the execution involves days of torture.

Honestly, if someone brutally murdered one of my loved ones I'm pretty sure I'd want them to die horribly for their crime. I cannot imagine the agony of having a loved ripped away from you like that and I pray to God that I never have to experience it. However, inhumane treatment and torture if the guilty party isn't going to bring that person back, not is it going to take the pain of loss away.

I do think there are people that do things so horrible that they forfeit their right to be alive. But if we are going to kill someone, it needs to be as quickly as possible--not gagging and gasping for air for over an hour.

No, because karma.

I have lost a dog at the hands of someone, I know he did it, but I didn't have the evidence to press charges. I am not ashamed to say that if I could give that asshat a botched lethal injection for it, I wouldn't even hesitate. He took my girl from me.

and that is with a DOG, I can't imagine how it would be if it was a human loved one.

 

[Dogdragoness]

I am ok with the death penalty, but torture...not ok. And death penalty should be reserved for those who are without a doubt guilty, like the person in this story, or Dalmer, you find people's body parts in his freezer he should get the death penalty. Charles Manson should have had the death penalty, some people are just not right in the head. But an eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth literally, just no.

As for the original questions, I just don't know, short of beheading I'm not sure of a better way that is fully efficient. Not that beheading is better, just efficient and effective...but who would you hire to do that.

Guillotine.

 

[sillysally]

No, because karma.

I have lost a dog at the hands of someone, I know he did it, but I didn't have the evidence to press charges. I am not ashamed to say that if I could give that asshat a botched lethal injection for it, I wouldn't even hesitate. He took my girl from me.

and that is with a DOG, I can't imagine how it would be if it was a human loved one.

But wouldn't the karma be, you know, dying?

ETA that the victims appear to have been murdered more quickly than the prisoner was killed. If they did to him what he did to his victims it wouldn't have taken 2 hours to do it...