|
Associated Press – 2-9-08:
|
|
|
1
Support the Blog — Buy This Book!
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Put this ad on your blog!
Syndicate
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Junk Email Filter
I tend to agree even though my “opinion” is probably more based on movies showing executions not working more than anything else.
I would assume that the death penalty itself is still valid and may be imposed. Time for Nebraska Legislature to earn their corn cobs, review the litature, and select a secure humane way to execute their prisoners.
Looks like death by injection is out but that some choice is looked on with favor by the court? That leaves:
Hanging
Shooting
Guillotine
Sounds good to me.
I wonder…
Why cant we use a defibrillator, and Make the heart STOP insted of go.
It works.
Just STOP the heart, and you die.
It takes ALOT less power, and lasts a life time.
after the heart stops, inject them, with Neurotoxin and they WILL NEVER wake up again.
About damn time!
However with Texas murdering more than all of the other states that still kill people COMBINED its not really much of a victory is it.
Honestly, it feels the old fashion way of HANGING was the most humane and allowed the violent death victim’s family to see the outcome in a satisfying way.
Lethal injection and other “behind closed doors” way of execution is good for a more dignified death – like government/public figures. A little water boarding just prior is optional.
Seems the lethal injection used now is under debate as the prisoner may be paralyzed but still able to feel pain.
So why not do what many people have done by accident?
Lethal injection of heroin / morphine. They get high pass out and die and quick enough to where the needle is still in their arm.
Or…
Injection of morphine and drop a 16 tonne weight on their head – ok…maybe they don’t need the morphine…
Cheers
Or being chased off a cliff by topless hotties!
[Why is that guy running? – ed.]
#6 Ooooo that’s better!!
Cheers
How about a firing squad, only the shooters are pulled from the public just like a jury.
It’s about time. What part of “cruel and unusual punishment” don’t you understand?
Fuck ’em. Sideways.
Them as done what merits permanent removal from this Earth are deserving of no concern whatsoever as regards their so-called “suffering.”
Worrying about whether some subhuman slaughterer feels pain when receiving his just deserts is ludicrous. And it diminishes deterrence. It makes a difference even to the most callous life-taker whether, should they be caught, they get to go painlessly and peacefully – or experiencing something similar to what they have already inflicted on some innocent(s).
Don’t try telling me that you wouldn’t be even a little more wary of doing something that might get you executed if you knew up front that you’re not just gonna be put to sleep one morning, that you’re going to truly suffer big-time agony. That’s what deterrence means to a sane person – and we don’t execute the other kind.
#10–There is “a lot of justice” in giving the condemned the SAME mode of death that the criminal got convicted of using? Could have some negative effects on the executioners–maybe volunteers from lifers behind bars could be found with the reward of staying on the executioners list?
Yes, I think the concern is a tad unbalanced given the length of pain that “might be” experienced. It is supposed to be a measure of our own/societies humanity rather than what the convicted “deserves, ” but Fuck ‘em. Sideways sounds close enough to fair.
At the time the Constitution was written both hanging and the firing squad were not considered “cruel and unusual,” and those were much worse than the electric chair.
I am, here and now, forever and always, 101%, solidly, foursquare behind, in both theory and practice, humane treatment – of human beings, thereby disincluding those who have voluntarily waived their membership in the human race. By their acts, they have reduced themselves to nonhuman things of zero – actually, negative – value. Like nuclear waste, or any other totally useless, lethally dangerous thing.
Ridding existence of their contaminating and endangering presence is more the sign of a rationally-driven society rather than an emotionally-driven one.
• • • •
As a rhetorical side note to the “the DP doesn’t deter” bunch, it’s informative – and contradictory to your claims – that (among so many others) this scumbag in Atlanta who slaughtered that young female hiker agreed to show authorities where the rotting corpse of another of his victims – if they agree to not seek the death penalty!
If that doesn’t prove that murderers DO care whether or not they’re executed, I don’t know what else could. And it takes no great leap of the imagination to figure out that it’s quite likely he might not have murdered those girls if the DP was the guaranteed penalty, given how much he wants to avoid it…
‘Not a deterrent?’ As the great Alec Baldwin once remarked, quite cogently, “fuck YOU!” 🙂
I agree that the special circumstances of a murder which specifically enable the pronouncement of the death penalty are clear enough indicators that killers have tendered their resignation from humanity. Any manner of death more humane than what they dealt their victim is merciful. However, there are still a couple of compelling reasons we might want to choose the most humane method possible.
One such reason is for the sake of the killer’s family, who, unless the state has shown clear complicity, must be presumed innocent (let’s not drag guilt through upbringing into this discussion). If family ties have any value in our society, we should seek to inflict the least pain possible on the killer’s family, while still seeking justice and carrying out the death penalty on their loved one. The family of a convicted killer deserves to know that their family member will receive humane treatment. I think this is an aspect that most people forget.
The other reason, more obvious than the previous, is that when given a choice of execution methods, choosing the one more likely to cause pain simply adds fuel to the fire of those who say executions are mostly about revenge. Frankly, revenge is the only reason I can see not to choose the least painful method of ending a killer’s life. Revenge appeals to our darker side, and the state should not be an agent of revenge. So if executions are not about revenge, and death penalty proponents nearly always claim it’s not, let’s prove it by always choosing the most humane method available.
A lot of cowardly twits here seem to assume that humans are perfect and have NEVER sent an innocent person to their death…
After all, our court system is perfect and that would never happen, right?
I agree… don’t hurt ’em… just kill ’em.
#15 natefrog, good point, and I’ll chime in on that as well. My own acceptance of the death penalty is conditioned upon reforms that insist on the highest standards of proof, just as others here (notably 3HC) have suggested in past discussions. My arguments in #14 were based merely on principle, without taking the fallibility of current systems into account.
I’ll cop to being a “cowardly twit” on completely different grounds — I didn’t want to have to do any tedious research to support an argument that required such 😉
…and on that point, natefrog – please, please, by all means feel free to do that thing that DP opponents have so far found to be impossible, and therefore don’t enjoy seeing brought up: find one – just one, mind you – factually innocent person who has been executed in the United States in the last, say 40 or 50 years.
Be my guest. If you can do that, the entire anti-DP community will make you world-famous overnight.
…and i forgot to say: Gary, your points, as is to be expected, are well-taken.
But I will still take issue with your second – as mentioned before, I personally find, and have no reason to egocentrically assume that other sane persons would think otherwise, that if contemplating some act that may expose me to being executed, that being put to sleep, to not wake up again, would be much less a deterrent than the prospect of suffering a lingering, agonizing torment similar to what my victims experienced. I would – and they do, you can be certain – know the difference between the two punishments. The first, one can resign oneself to; the other is to be most definitely avoided at all costs.
#18 3HC, without doing the sort of tedious research I hate so much, I don’t think your argument is strong enough to show that guilty people haven’t been executed. Too many “last minute saves” have been achieved just because the case happened to catch the attention of the right person or organization before it was too late. Those entities, such as “The Innocence Project,” have very limited resources, and have to choose which cases show the most promise. Such efforts receive little or no attention once the execution has occurred.
The amount of effort expended is also highly dependent on the convicted killer’s family as well, and only those with significant resources and a strong desire to clear the family name will vigorously continue the effort postmortem. Coincidentally, killers from families with such resources are the least likely to have received a death sentence in the first place, and are the smallest minority (a bit of irony) among convicted killers.
I’m not at all certain you’re wrong on this, 3HC, but the basis of your argument is not as sound as it appears.
The DP should be abolished for no other reason than it costs much more in court costs, appeals, the execution itself etc than to sentence them to life without parole.
Between Gay Marriage, DP, and Abortion, we should get those distractions behind us as a nation and get on with trying to solve our REAL problems. No one is going to care if any of there are allowed or not if the US is bankrupt.
You know—if the DP were a deterrent, a coupla innocent people executed every once in a while would be acceptable. Call it a civil duty to keep society safe.
“if the DP were a deterrent.”
I find it hard to believe the DP is not a deterrent, but most experts/studies seem to report that it is not. I think that result might be subject to push-polling?
Certainly irrelevant that once caught, they don’t want to be executed. Can we agree that factoid is irrelevant?
In #20, I wrote “I don’t think your argument is strong enough to show that guilty people haven’t been executed.”
Maybe saying “innocent people” would make a little more sense in that context. Hey, my writers are still on strike 😉
So you don’t like electrocution. Just watched Saw IV this morning. In Saw I-IV you will find plenty of options.
21. “The DP should be abolished for no other reason than it costs much more in court costs, appeals, the execution itself etc ”
The only reason it costs more is because nut-jobs like you make us go through costly appeal after appeal after appeal. A death row defendant should get one and only one appeal. And the process should be fast tracked to get the sorry sack of shit criminal off the face of the earth as soon as possible.
I’ll agree that TX executes more than any other state, but we’re not a PC state that has no DP. “Do the crime, you get no time.” (See #18 by 3HC)
And it’s just about the only state where a legal defense that still works is, “That sumb*tch needed killin’.” Some here get the DP without costing the taxpayers a fortune.
Murder rate has decreased over the last few years even with a huge population growth.
http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/txcrime.htm
#25 Jerk-Face, the problem with the “one and only one appeal” approach is that it only takes one incompetent or unmotivated public defender (not terribly uncommon) to exhaust that one appeal. After that, it virtually takes an act of God for justice to prevail in the case of an innocent defendant.
# 25 “The only reason it costs more is because nut-jobs like you make us go through costly appeal after appeal after appeal. A death row defendant should get one and only one appeal. And the process should be fast tracked to get the sorry sack of shit criminal off the face of the earth as soon as possible.”
You see the problem here is that I am talking at a level up here, and well, you are thinking at a level way down here. It would take much too long to bring you up to a level to properly understand.
#28–so bs, way up there YOU “think” if there was only one appeal, no gays, and no abortions that the GOUSA would not be bankrupt?
HAW, HAW.
Right now, the only thing more bankrupt than the GOUSA is your thinking on these matters.
So come on down to the real world and grapple with #25’s point. Seems to me if you and your type weren’t busy bankrupting this country, you might be anti-death penalty if only to avoid that very issue===but you have it ass backwards. You must be one of those “values voters.” – – -Dolt.
27. “After that, it virtually takes an act of God for justice to prevail in the case of an innocent defendant.”
When the scum-bag meets his maker he can ask for that act first-hand!