Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire What a load of crap. Why are only murderers supposed to get pain free death?

The need to be comfortable

it shows the rest of the world how supposedly civilized we are

No reason that makes any sense with me. They also complain about the cost of the drugs, and the effectiveness.
I find it humorous they call it "lethal injection". Let's just drop them in a pit of vipers from here on out. Televise it, take odds on how long he lasts, how many hits it takes, and how many strikes he can avoid. Feed the remains to pigs. Make bacon.
A win-win all the way around.
Ratings would be very good.

Taking the issue of these "botched", lethal injection, executions at face value, it's rather amazing to me that most of the very drugs used are the ones we in anesthesia administer every day in precise dosages and ways to bring patients through their surgery and anesthesia as smoothly as possible.

These drugs are our tools and we know them intimately. Obviously no health care provider is going to volunteer or otherwise be involved with lethal injection executions but picking my choice of drugs and dosages, death would be swift in 5-10 minutes, without pain, any contorted movements, or any degree of consciousness.

I don't understand why these prison officials can't procure this information and get it right. It takes knowledge and skill to use these drugs eloquently in delivering a good anesthetic; conversely, to execute quickly, it 1). takes the right drugs, 2). The right doses which = 3) quick painless death. It's the simplest of recipes that anybody who can read can follow.
So, rhetorically, why does this incompetency keep occurring?

Considering the chance of excetuting am innocent, ( which has happend several times), the death penalty should be painless.

I disagree, they should die the same way their victims died.

I'm sick and tired of coddling these f u c k e r s, they didn't care about their victims pain why the h e l l should we care about theirs?

Don't worry about painless or not. It's right after they die and they face their maker that their 'entertainment' begins. All will be made right in the end.

I hate the political part of execution anyway. We put down thousands of pets every day painlessly. Really good drugs for the job are available but politics prevents their use.

You must not have read the whole book.




Dave

As I said, all will be made right in the end. It's not for us to see what every man's end is but it WILL be made right in God's eyes.

Read the whole book.




Dave

Being stupid SHOULD hurt.

They are not sitting on death row for writing hot checks...

This is true but that is an indictment of the stupid [bleep] judges that are allowed to exist in this country.

Not the death penalty. Lots and lots of prisoners need to be executed.



Dave

from the article:

"Thirteen minutes into his execution by injection, an Alabama inmate heaved and coughed and appeared to move during tests meant to determine consciousness."

13 minutes? WTF?[b][/b]

Jesus Mary and Joseph on a piggy powered pogo stick!

As reasonable human beings we don't kill ANY animal by torturing it to death and it stains us all every time we participate in such activity,

The argument that we may be executing an innocent person so we need to do a decent job of it just astonishes me for it's lack of insight. You fix a bad job by doing a better job of carrying out the final portion of that bad job? Really?

The medical community refusing to participate in any way steps so far into the unethical practice it gives one pause about wasted education! If the medical community (and I realize it is not monolithic or of unanimous opinion)will not help provide a decent death when that is precisely what is necessary in a specific situation it is shirking a substantial portion of it's responsibility. Doctors routinely participate in humane death of terminal patients, and not infrequently when other ill considered interventions have produced a situation in which they have shortened a patient's life before hand. If humane and efficient execution is necessary to society, and I believe it is, then the medical community need to come up with rational, ethical and most importantly consistent arguments to the contrary or help. As stated above, the means and the skill required for that end are readily available.

The reason for execution is not retribution! If any of you accept retribution as a reason for execution, stand up and make a rational argument against Islamic law which is based on retribution. Execution is for when we have people just too dangerous to ever take a chance on them getting loose. Ever.

In my life I have seen a number of people totally lacking in comprehension of what they are doing to people. Sometimes you can just see that they are so damaged they'll eventually commit a capital crime or be killed in the attempt. Society has a right to protect itself from such people and until we mature enough to shed idiotic ideas about retribution we'll not only continue with executions that demean us all, but we will also continue to see really damaged people commit really horrific crimes.

Many of these doctors will fight against the 'inhumane' executions but then they think nothing about tearing the arms and legs off of an unborn child.

So why not take them out as is done with a beef?

Im pretty sure many who arent members of the medical group could read one of Georges anesthesia books and get the job done. Problem is, lawyers and such would be cut out of the cash cow.

Why don't they just give them suicide pills they use in Oregon that libs claim are so humane?

We need to back to the basics, the tried and true.

ROPE!!

There are lots of mostly painless ways to kill someone. The tried and true guillotine was one of them but our polite society can't stand the sight of blood.

Amen to that Brother!

I've preached the same thing for a long time...

they should die the same way their victim did... and be denied the same rights they denied their victim...

and especially those that have assassinated cops.... they should be knocked to the ground and be wasted exactly where they found them...

As much as I'd like to see murderers and rapists be executed in horrible and painful ways to match what their victims went thru, it won't happen in our society. However I want to see swift means of execution. My solution:
log splitter designed guillotine, quick and effective.

The reason it is not so easy is because the liberals have attacked the pharmaceutical manufacturers for selling medical drugs to prison officials. The pharmaceutical companies in an effort to avoid the publicity have stopped selling the most effective drugs to the government. Not sure which US Supreme Court justice referenced this issue in his opinion but he pointed out that the anti death penalty people have actually made it far more painful and risky because they can't use the normal drugs.

jaguar...

I'm a bit of a different voice in this discussion, because I oppose the death penalty on practical grounds, rather than principle. (I oppose abortion on principle, btw.)

Without getting too deeply into that, I'd like to say that I've done some serious research into execution methods and their relative "humane" levels. As far as I'm concerned, death by lethal injection is far and away the most effective and least discomfort-causing method currently available. It isn't rocket science, and as George_de_Vries has said, the dosages can be easily calculated to produce the desired effect.

There are 2 problems with this. First problem is that doctors won't get involved for ethical reasons, and rightly so, IMHO. Second problem is that drug manufacturers are refusing to sell drugs to states that carry out executions.

There are simple work-arounds for both problems, but since governments are involved, doing so is like getting a herd of cattle to dance The Nutcracker.

First problem is easily solved by hiring a pharmacologist who is not bound by the Hippocratic Oath to calculate your drugs and dosages. Second problem can be solved by any number of means... buying drugs "blind" through an intermediary/wholesaler instead of direct from the manufacturer, or ordering them through the State Hospital system. Etc. Etc. Etc.

Or, if you just want to go to the second-best method and avoid the whole mess, have each prisoner executed by shooting him in the back of the head with a 9mm pistol, the way the Russians executed millions of prisoners between the Bolshevik revolution and the fall of the Berlin Wall. Cheap, fast, and there is no suffering.

But nooooooo... we have to have a big fight about it.

Sure, I get that liberals live in their own perverse universe and always make things worse, but then ditch lethal injection and go back to hanging, or a firing squad, or back to old "sparky". The point is liberals would object to those too. Or maybe we need to go back to the guillotine at which time liberals might see that lethal injection might be the "neatest", most humanitarian way after all.

Even with their limited drug armentarium these prison officials have, there is a way to do it but it's not a job for a "limited" person on an hourly wage.

These puzzies complainin bout sufferin should be made to make a choice:

-1- Die the way you killed your victim, least as close as we can get to it; or

-2- The needle.

Alla them puzzies will pick the needle.

Course, the answer is:

Nitrogen asphyxiation.

Sealed room w/windows.

Any guard can give em the pills to knock em out, then turn on the nitrogen and walk away.

Killers never know what hit em.

There are lots of mostly painless ways to kill someone. The tried and true guillotine was one of them but our polite society can't stand the sight of blood. [/quote]

Another vote for the guillotine from here!
Painless as can be, and sure.

I'm probably with Doc on my position on the death penalty. Against it on practical grounds, not principle.

That said I'm not sure why after the drugs have been administered and taken effect they don't shoot him in the back of the head. Double sure.

The entire criminal justice system can’t figure out how to painlessly put someone down ?
What amazes me is that every day, all over the world, hundreds of junkies kill themselves, with a smile on their faces. What’s the problem ?

How about nitrogen without the sleeping pill. Just put them down for a nap, turn it on, come back next day.

The problem with trying to trying to exact revenge is at some point we become "them".

Inert Gas Asphyxiation seems the way to me.

NITROGEN - Cheap, available, relatively harmless to the masses, no nasty chemicals to clean up, much easier to administer.

The process seems to be 'proven' by all those that have taken the 'forever nap' from being in an enclosed space with the engine running. Doesn't seem there was a 'struggle' or pain involved.

Europe uses CO2 and Helium, to put pigs down.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqaPZR4M22w

The way it used to be done.



L.W.

Why do you oppose the death penalty?





Travis

If a vet can put down a horse without a single kick, one would think a human would be a snap.

Those horizontal dudes look a little dusty...and tired.


mike r

Doc Roc, I certainly can appreciate your reticence toward capital punishment; however, I am still inclined toward a nation or society living within the bounds of laws and the commensurate consequences for braking those laws being impressed on the transgressors. And some acts are so nefarious, so violent, so horrible that those who do them are accordingly required to forfeit their presence among the living. They still have the opportunity for forgiveness from God.

Conversely, the innocents in the womb, I consider murdered no differently than those sacrificed to Moloch by the Cananites thousands of years ago -- sacrificed to the gods of convenience, of economy, sexual promiscuity, of selfishness. (And I realize many young women are "funneled" toward abortion by a culture that promotes it.)

Liberal thinking, Trump will get the proper "dead" drugs supplied again shortly.

It's all politics. We have any number of drugs that will do it fast and painless but the liberals won't allow them to be used. Any vet could execute a man without pain but the drugs he can use on a dog aren't allowed to be used on people. It's nuts.

It's not nuts, it's fighting with obstacles. Learn it.

[quote=kellory]No reason that makes any sense with me. They also complain about the cost of the drugs, and the effectiveness.
I find it humorous they call it "lethal injection". Let's just drop them in a pit of vipers from here on out. Televise it, take odds on how long he lasts, how many hits it takes, and how many strikes he can avoid. Feed the remains to pigs. Make bacon.
A win-win all the way around.
Ratings would be very good. [/

A few feet of rope and few 2 X 4's for a scaffold don't cost much.

As a physician I've made this same argument numerous times.

A few observations:

I believe the Hippocratic Oath binds most of us on this issue, although I'm not against capital punishment.

I'm sure they could find an abortion doc to participate in administering the cocktail of death.

Why not go back to firing squads with random blanks and multiple shooters?

Life in prison is an upgrade to their free lives for some heinous murderers so it needn't be an option.

Fine, start up the electric chair's, gallows and firing squads again to take care of business.. I don't care how they die just as long as they're dead in the end. The more it hurts them the better I feel about it..

How would anyone but the dead themselves know what's painful and what's not?

I dont undertand this practicle vs principal stuff.

The Lord said to see if a man be for or against Him.

I'm for killing killers. Torturers and child killers should get the bad crap until they beg for death carried out by any manner.

Just guessing here but...


I SWEAR by Apollo the physician, and Aesculapius, and Health, and All-heal, and all the gods and goddesses, that, according to my ability and judgment, I will keep this Oath and this stipulation to reckon him who taught me this Art equally dear to me as my parents, to share my substance with him, and relieve his necessities if required; to look upon his offspring in the same footing as my own brothers, and to teach them this art, if they shall wish to learn it, without fee or stipulation; and that by precept, lecture, and every other mode of instruction, I will impart a knowledge of the Art to my own sons, and those of my teachers, and to disciples bound by a stipulation and oath according to the law of medicine, but to none others.

I will follow that system of regimen which, according to my ability and judgment, I consider for the benefit of my patients, and abstain from whatever is deleterious and mischievous. I will give no deadly medicine to any one if asked, nor suggest any such counsel; and in like manner I will not give to a woman a pessary to produce abortion. With purity and with holiness I will pass my life and practice my Art. I will not cut persons laboring under the stone, but will leave this to be done by men who are practitioners of this work. Into whatever houses I enter, I will go into them for the benefit of the sick, and will abstain from every voluntary act of mischief and corruption; and, further from the seduction of females or males, of freemen and slaves. Whatever, in connection with my professional practice or not, in connection with it, I see or hear, in the life of men, which ought not to be spoken of abroad, I will not divulge, as reckoning that all such should be kept secret. While I continue to keep this Oath unviolated, may it be granted to me to enjoy life and the practice of the art, respected by all men, in all times! But should I trespass and violate this Oath, may the reverse be my lot!

Real quick and extremely inarticulate. I think the State has a moral right to capitol punishment, absolutely.

However with our adversarial justice system I don't think it is always carried out in a just manner. Prosecutors are not rewarded for dismissing charges, but for winning. Also the State, in most cases, can afford a better legal case and investigation, than your average defendant. This is true for all cases, not just capitol one. However, we can release those who we discover are later found to be innocent.

Now I'm not naive, most on death row are guilty. However as we've seen with recent DNA testing, a significant few are not. But there needs to be a higher bar than 'reasonable doubt' in capital cases. I don't know what that is, though.

That's what I meant by being against it on practical grounds, not principle.