Botched execution in the US

I have no sympathy for the prisoner, but I would not like to have been one of the staff seeing it!
Why can't we have old sparky back? Much more entertaining to watch.
There is no excuse for a botched execution, but I strongly feel the need for the ultimate punishment is just.

The only way a murdering rapist can no longer murder or rape is when he/she is no longer with us. This is the only 100.00% certain way.
 
OpenToSuggestions said:
I have no sympathy for the prisoner, but I would not like to have been one of the staff seeing it!
Why can't we have old sparky back? Much more entertaining to watch.
There is no excuse for a botched execution, but I strongly feel the need for the ultimate punishment is just.

The only way a murdering rapist can no longer murder or rape is when he/she is no longer with us. This is the only 100.00% certain way.
Click to expand...

The motive behind state execution should be only to remove that person and the danger they pose.

It should not be about "entertainment" - that's a horrid thought. It should not be about "deterrent" or retribution or vengeance.

It does not matter how evil the crime or the person. There is no justification for inflicting pain, for having a lengthy execution process of for turning it into a spectacle.
 
FoxEye said:
The motive behind state execution should be only to remove that person and the danger they pose.

It should not be about "entertainment" - that's a horrid thought. It should not be about "deterrent" or retribution or vengeance.

It does not matter how evil the crime or the person. There is no justification for inflicting pain, for having a lengthy execution process of for turning it into a spectacle.
Click to expand...

I was being sarcastic about entertainment :p.
 
FoxEye said:
It should not be about "deterrent" or retribution or vengeance.

It does not matter how evil the crime or the person. There is no justification for inflicting pain, for having a lengthy execution process of for turning it into a spectacle.
Click to expand...

I'm sure you'd be singing from a different hymn sheet if it was your wife who was brutally shot and buried alive or it was your 11 month old child who was raped and murdered.

Should the execution have been quicker? Yes. Any sympathy for the guy? No
 
"Lockett was sentenced to death for shooting 19-year-old Stephanie Neiman and watching as two accomplices buried her alive in 1999."

I won't lose any sleep.
 
dirtychinchilla said:
There are a few reasons why I called views in this thread archaic. I'm referring to those in favour of capital punishment. There are a whole load of reasons why capital punishment is moronic, hypocritical, and an insufficient punishment. Crimes should not be judged based on emotion, and I consider capital punishment a purely emotion driven punishment, and this is archaic, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Pretty much what I'm thinking but I'm too tired to word it right.
 
phil_c_ said:
I'm sure you'd be singing from a different hymn sheet if it was your wife who was brutally shot and buried alive or it was your 11 month old child who was raped and murdered.

Should the execution have been quicker? Yes. Any sympathy for the guy? No
Click to expand...


Thats the wonderful part about objectivity, a victims feelings (or their families etc) and need for revenge should not be taken into account when deciding punishment..
 
After reading about his crimes I have no issue whatsoever with the way he died.

Accidents happen & the end result was the same, big deal.
 
phil_c_ said:
I'm sure you'd be singing from a different hymn sheet if it was your wife who was brutally shot and buried alive or it was your 11 month old child who was raped and murdered.

Should the execution have been quicker? Yes. Any sympathy for the guy? No
Click to expand...

The child's mother doesn't want him killed.
 
jimferno said:
Accidents happen & the end result was the same, big deal.
Click to expand...

Except it wasn't an accident it was incompetence. And the second part shouldn't really need explaining. Or is it just that this bloke was that bad that it is perfectly fine for the state to resort to premeditated killing at the end of a long torture period directly against the law of the land. Because I've always thought the answer to dealing with crime is not to then all reduce ourselves to the level of the criminal.
 
Apok said:
Thats the wonderful part about objectivity, a victims feelings (or their families etc) and need for revenge should not be taken into account when deciding punishment..
Click to expand...

Yet they do, even the UK courts take into consideration the impact a crime has had on the said victim or their family. And why shouldn't it?

Hyburnate said:
The child's mother doesn't want him killed.
Click to expand...

I wasn't referring to this victims family, I was just arguing the point that its very well being preachy about how wrong executions are no matter 'how evil the crime is' when people haven't had to go through the emotions of a loved one being taken away from you in horrendous circumstances.
 
jimferno said:
Are you suggesting they intentionally ruptured his vein? Where's the proof that this wasn't an accident?
Click to expand...

No,I never said they intentionally ruptured his vein. They should have checked it was in the right position in the first place. You don't get displacement in the time frame they are talking about unless you've messed the cannulation up which in a case like this is inexcusable. Moreover, if you go to the earlier reports today they were quite clear what drugs had been administered and that the dosage of midazolam on this protocol was at a far lower level than would be needed and in the region of 20% of what other protocols use. That is negligence. That they then declared he was sedated when he quite clearly was not is also negligence. That they thought midazolam was sufficient sedation was just stupid.

Of course the easier solutions would be not to kill, use something more humane like nitrogen or if you really wanted to use drugs actually make you own propofol I mean America is the biggest and the best isn't it should it really be beholden to German drugs companies and EU laws to serve its anaethesia needs or rather feel it can't continue running routine operations because of the fear of removal of their anaesthetic agent of choice because they use it to kill people.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom