What would happen if an inmate refused to cooperate with his or her execution?

[armyowalgreens]

Like if they refused to leave the cell or somehow refused to get into the chair for whatever form of execution the system is using.

Would the prison employees force the inmates execution, or would the state postpone carrying it out?

[slampoet]

1. The usual method is to use brute force to remove them and then they sedate the prisioner.

This HAS happened before.

[armyowalgreens]

3. That's pretty fucked up.

I'm against capital punishment. But this just goes a level further.

[Howzit]

10. You mean killing them before it is convenient makes it worse?

Death penalty = loss of the right to live. That probably includes the right to protest - after all appeals through legal channels are exhausted.

Why would tasering someone or sedating them to execute them be worse than the execution itself? How many executees go willingly into that good night?

[armyowalgreens]

11. The act of sentencing someone to death is disturbing enough...

But physically dragging them into the room and holding them down as they die just seems more disturbing than usual for some reason.

[Howzit]

12. That is why the act of sentencing someone to death must not be taken lightly

That is when the "switch is thrown".

[MH1]

33. 99.8% of them "sentenced" someone else to death

it's the .2% that make the death penalty immoral (among other reasons, like the state paying someone to kill a subdued person)

for the record, I just made up that statistic, it doesn't matter if it's .0002%. if the state executes one innocent person it's wrong.

but once the dp is in force, it doesn't really matter that much how you do it, so long as it isn't intentionally brutal. and to be honest I don't shed any tears for the truly brutal people who are executed. it's the other reasons that put me off on the death penalty.

[Statistical]

36. There is no need to hold them down during the execution they are restrained (chemicaly if needed)

If a prisoner resists he will be restrained in the cell and a doctor will give them a powerful dose of sedatives like you would receive for surgery. They will be "loopy" and compliant, likely needing assistance just to walk.

I mean if all you needed to do to avoid an execution was resist wouldn't you think every inmate would resist and nobody would ever get executed?

[Howzit]

14. "But this just goes a level further"

Isn't that like saying, it is worse to cut off a person's head than to cut off their body?

[JonQ]

38. Are you in favor of life in prison?

What if they don't voluntarily walk in to their cells? Would it be ok to physically make them go, or would we be forced to release them if they failed to cooperate?

Physical coercion is going to be necessary for most punishments, at the very least the threat of it.

[armyowalgreens]

50. I'm against vengeful sentences. So I am against life imprisonment or the DP.

At one point in US history, the prison system use to be about rehabilitation.

[JonQ]

72. Some people are beyond rehabilitation

some merely need to be removed from the general populace so they can't hurt anyone else.

But either way, it requires the use or threat of physical force to punish anyone, so is that ok?

[armyowalgreens]

76. There is a difference between permanent incarceration and a life sentence...

Someone that is incapable of being rehabilitated should be imprisoned permanently. But you cannot decide that in a single trial. It must constantly be reexamined. That is why we have parole (although the system is completely fucked as far as I'm concerned).

Life imprisonment without parole is cruel and unusual.

[JonQ]

83. And how do you decide if someone like say

timothy mcveigh had been reformed and felt bad and all that? Make him pinky swear to never kill hundreds of people again?

And how is detaining someone to prevent harm to others cruel and unusual? It would seem more cruel to let these people go, cruel to those of us who don't like getting murdered.

[armyowalgreens]

92. Yes because modern psychology and sociology is apparently...

incapable of diagnosing people like McVeigh. McVeigh was mentally ill. We wouldn't let someone like that out of prison because they testified nicely in front of a parole board. It would have to be proven that his mental illness was cured.

I'm sure there are ways of proving that.

[JonQ]

97. If modern psychology and sociology were as accurate as all that

then we'd have a 0% recidivism rate.

[Caliman73]

106. True

As much stock as I put into psychology, which is what I have chosen as my profession, I agree that the predictive accuracy of testing and assessment is not reliable enough to be the basis by which sentences are determined. Ted Bundy managed to convince many people that he was an upstanding young man until it was discovered that he had killed over 30 people. Kemper was the same. He was intelligent enough that he was picked to help score and scale other people's mental examinations when he was in the State Hospital. He learned how to manipulate the scores to show that he was able to be released. Once free he killed 6 female students and his mother.

Psychology is great, but it isn't a cure all.

[pitohui]

101. mcveigh wanted to die

i don't mcveigh is a good example, he wanted to be executed

as have some others, such as gary gilmore

to my mind i agree w. them, i think life imprisonment far more cruel than a quick death, but nobody asked my opinion, i'm just sticking in my 2 cents anyway

[DireStrike]

86. The smart ones would game the system to get out

And next time they'll be more careful.

The other poster's McVeigh could be anyone who believes they have a cause. These people would all get out, because they will put all their efforts into convincing the parole board that they've reformed.

Sentencing is important, and the ability to sentence for long periods (or life) without parole is, as well.


...Ideally, anyway. In practice our system fails at about every point.

[armyowalgreens]

91. Are the parole board members mindless idiots?

Or are they psychologists and sociologists?

A proper system wouldn't let just any moron get on a parole board.

[DireStrike]

104. Anyone can be fooled.

Psychologists, I know firsthand can be fooled. I dunno about sociologists.

[WildEyedLiberal]

87. Disagree - that system would be tailor-made for sociopaths

Sociopaths are VERY charming and convincing - it's a key trait of sociopathy. A sociopath in prison would win parole in your system as soon as they were eligible, because they have a very sophisticated understanding of how to dupe people and would pull out all the stops to convince the parole board that they were reformed.

[armyowalgreens]

90. If we already know that someone is a sociopath, we wouldn't let them out.

[JonQ]

98. You mean like life without parole?

[rd_kent]

42. That makes no sense.

A person has been convicted of a crime so heinous, that death is the penalty. Whether the person willfully walks into the death chamber or not is irrelevant, as the punishment is being FORCED on them either way.
Do you expect all death row inmates to just willfully walk to their death? The death penalty is about punishment and retribution, not peace and love.

[armyowalgreens]

49. The death penalty is about vengeance.

And I'm not sure how many times I've said this in here, but justice and vengeance are mutually exclusive concepts.

[rd_kent]

58. Whatever. Still doesnt apply to your original post.

How you feel about the death penalty has no bearing on whether a person must willfully walk to their death.

[armyowalgreens]

60. Excellent point. But sometimes the discussion takes a turn.

I started my OP because I was attempting to conceptualize different scenarios involving an execution.

Announcing "whatever" is a pretty crappy thing to do on such an important. Do you usually announce "whatever" when someones death is imminent? Or does the "whatever" apply because a jury of your "peers" decided that we can put a human to sleep like a dog?

[rd_kent]

62. No, you are tryng to turn the discussion.

I am responding to your OP. Lets get back to that.

[armyowalgreens]

64. No you aren't. I never addressed the purpose of the death penalty in my OP.

[rd_kent]

74. My op was in response to your post #3

that is what I am referring to as your OP, in this sub-thread. Sorry for the confusion.

[TxRider]

2. I don't know for sure

But I would assume it occurs and they use force when it does.

[midnight]

4. I don't think that the death penalty is a solution, and I wish it would

stop being used.

[armyowalgreens]

5. Agreed.

[ashling]

7. Self Delete

[ShortnFiery]

43. + 1

Retribution/execution is no way to run a western civilized society based on the rule of law.

Suggest: Life in Prison without the Possibility of Parole

[TexasObserver]

6. Ponchai Wilkerson, 28, was executed by lethal injection on 14 March 2000 in Huntsville, Texas

Ponchai Wilkerson, 28, was executed by lethal injection on 14 March 2000 in Huntsville, Texas, for robbery and murder of a jewelry store clerk.

A jury convicted Wilkerson of capital murder in July 1991 and sentenced him to death. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals upheld the conviction and sentence in March 1994. All of his subsequent appeals in state and federal court were denied.

<snip>

Wilkerson struggled against prison guards the day of his execution. He resisted their efforts to remove him from his cell on death row and had to be gassed. When the time of his execution came, he refused to leave the holding cell and guards had to use additional restraints to bind him to the gurney. He declined to make a last statement. Then, as the lethal injection began taking effect, he spit a handcuff key out of his mouth, to the shock of prison staff. "The secret of Wilkerson," he mumbled, before lapsing into final unconsciousness.


http://www.txexecutions.org/reports/210.asp

[armyowalgreens]

8. I'm not really sure what to think of that.

[TexasObserver]

9. It's one report of a circumstance such as you described.

I would assume it is typical. They use brute force and restraints, all the way to the end, if that is what it takes. They will minimize risk to officers. That means using overwhelming force from the first instance the prisoner on death row resists orders.

If you want to hear from the executioner's perspective:

Little Rest, or Peace, for Texas Executioners
Huntsville death chamber is nation's busiest
by Sara Rimer / New York Times Dec 17, 2000

http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/Texas-Executioner-Hunts...

Huntsville, Texas -- Jim Willett, the warden of the prison here, awakened a little before 5 a. m. on Dec. 5 in his home, which his wife, Janice, had decorated for Christmas. He had not been looking forward to the day.

"My first thought was 'Today's an execution,' " he recalled later that morning. " 'I wonder what he'll be like.' "

Willett said he was hoping that the man who was to be put to death shortly after 6 p.m. would not resist and that the execution would proceed smoothly. Willett's job requires him to stand at the head of the person strapped on the gurney and to signal the anonymous executioner in the next room to inject the sedative and two lethal chemicals through a syringe. In his two and a half years as warden, Willett has given the signal -- raising his glasses -- that has killed 84 people.

"Just from a Christian standpoint, you can't see one of these and not consider that maybe it's not right," said Willett, 50. It is the worst part of his job, he said, but it is his job just the same.

---------------------------------------

I oppose the death penalty and believe it harms all who impose it.

[TexasObserver]

13. oops

[gopiscrap]

24. Good for him!!!

The death penalty is WRONG!!!

[rd_kent]

44. No, robbing and murdering someone is wrong.

And he was punished for it.

[Bill McBlueState]

67. Oh, good point.

Only one of two given things can be wrong. Thanks for clearing that up.

[JeanGrey]

31. Look folks, I am dying a long slow death from stage four

cancer. When I think of murderers and rapists getting the easy death of lethal injection, it makes me mad. And I never hurt anyone, so why should THEY have an easy death while many of us will die slow horrible deaths? Yeah, it's fair!

[TexasObserver]

37. And that has absolutely nothing to do with the lack of morality of the death penalty.

The circumstances of your death, or mine, or of the victims of death row inmates has nothing to do with whether we, as a society, have a death penalty. There's a reason the civilized world doesn't have executions: they're barbaric and immoral.

I'm sorry for your condition, but your using it to justify the death penalty is just wrong. It's the kind of thing that has been used to justify torture and execution for many centuries, and it's been wrong then, too. The rationale that because you suffer it's right that criminals suffer is simply uncivilized. I hope you'll let go of that.

[EOTE]

53. I don't believe JeanGrey was justifying the DP.

In fact, I think she was making a case for the opposite. Either way, you're right in saying that civilized societies don't have executions and that the logic used to defend the DP is often specious. I believe the suffering that JeanGrey is referring to is life in prison.

[JeanGrey]

109. And not all of us agree with you. I find it ironic that horrible

killers and dogs and cats get better deaths than people who have done nothing to deserve pain.

[armyowalgreens]

51. Both of you should have any easy death. But your situations are vastly different.

You have no choice. They do.

No one is forcing society to put people to death.

[TexasObserver]

78. Well said.

I feel badly for this lady, and wish she would have all the care and meds she requires, but I cannot wish execution on even the worst humans.

In my view, the decision not to execute is one we make for our benefit, not the criminal's benefit.

[JeanGrey]

110. Yes they had a choice!!! They chose to murder and maim.

You bet.

[Gman2]

84. Would you like it better if prisoners were given stage 4 cancer?

Someone sometime said, we all deserve death.

And they die a slow death. By appeal closed. I hope you find peace. I'm not far behind you, and I'm 49

[JeanGrey]

No because IT WOULDN'T BE HUMANE.

Lethal injection IS humane.

[Brother Buzz]

100. I LIVE with stage four cancer and I have never waivered from my core belief

that EVERYONE incarcerated deserves to be treated with dignity, even inmates on death row.

[JeanGrey]

111. Lethal injection is a humane death. Much better than they

deserve.

[armyowalgreens]

114. There is no such thing as a humane death when you murder a human being.

[JeanGrey]

121. And the death penalty is not murder.

Sorry but we'll always disagree on this one.

[Heidi]

118. You have advanced the assertion that lethal injection is humane.

Please support your argument with some science. Thank you in advance.

[JeanGrey]

122. Well let's see. Compare starving to death for two weeks

or dying of stage four cancer in horrible pain for weeks to five minutes of the needle and then blessed nothingness. I can sure tell you which one I'd take!

[iris27]

15. I'm pretty sure most of them do, except for deluded martyr types like McVeigh.

At least, I know I'd resist in that situation. I think it's only Hollywoood stereotypes that have given us the impression of the stoic prisoner calmly shuffling toward his fate.

[LAGC]

16. We should end the Death Penalty, but legalize Euthanasia.

For its often more costly to put someone to death against their will than its worth with all the appeals and what not, but for those with Life sentences who WANT to die, I see no reason to not let them go peacefully.

[Xenotime]

75. Exactly.

[Old Codger]

17. All of my life

I have been pro death penalty, but with what I have seen happening the last few years with dna evidence showing so many were wrongly convicted I am now against it... Life without parole is good enough. at least they will have the chance to have new evidence come up and change it, way too many have happened that way lately...

[Journeyman]

18. Google Robert Pierce, San Quentin, 1956, or better yet, let Evan S. Connell explain. . .

Robert Pierce, awaiting execution at San Quentin prison,
contrived to slash his throat with a shard of glass,
precipitating a frantic quarrel among the authorities:
some insisted that he be executed before he bled to death
while others thought he should be taken to the hospital.
Presently, with gouts of blood bubbling from his neck,
he was carried into the gas chamber. Witnesses screamed,
vomited and several fainted. The decision had been reached,
officials later explained, because at the time of death
the prisoner probably would still be alive and therefore
conscious not only of his crime but of the retributions
justly demanded by the Sovereign State of California.

Evan S. Connell, Points for a Compass Rose



Pierce was a contemporary of Carl Chessman. They shared the Row together, but not a cell, and not even near each other, as Pierce was too dangerous to be kept with the other condemned prisoners; they kept him penned up in a special section dubbed the "Iron Curtain." Additional info can be found here: http://tinyurl.com/pqsfpo

[armyowalgreens]

21. Have you read that book?

[Journeyman]

23. "Points for a Compass Rose," yes. . .

but only the segment on Pierce in the Bisbort book in the link.

Caryl Chessman's book, Cell 2455, Death Row (there's a link for an electronic version on the page I linked to above), is an excellent source for discussion of the implications of the death penalty. Chessman's life -- and death -- is a chilling statement on that punishment in and of itself. Read up on him and you'll never think of justice or retribution in the same way ever again.

[GodlyDemocrat]

19. I believe brute force is used

I don't know how though.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

20. Governor delays Ohio execution after vein troubles.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090916/ap_on_re_us/us_ohio...

LUCASVILLE, Ohio – Gov. Ted Strickland ordered a weeklong reprieve for a condemned inmate Tuesday after the Ohio execution team had problems finding usable veins for the lethal injection even after the inmate tried to help.

Executioners were unable for more than two hours to find veins that would accept fluid from an IV without collapsing for 53-year-old Romell Broom, who was sentenced to die for the rape and slaying of a 14-year-old Tryna Middleton in 1984. At one point, Broom covered his face with both hands and appeared to be crying.... (more)

[armyowalgreens]

22. "His torso heaved up and down and his feet shook, as he appeared to be crying."

"The team began working on Broom, in a holding cell 17 steps from the execution chamber, at about 2 p.m., four hours after his execution was originally scheduled. That initial delay was due to a final federal appeals request.
After the team spent nearly an hour trying to find a workable vein, Broom tried to help them bring him a quicker death. He turned over on his left side, slid rubber tubing designed to clarify his veins up his left arm, then began moving the arm up and down while flexing and closing and opening his fingers. The execution team was able to access a vein, but it collapsed when technicians tried to insert saline fluid.
Broom then became visibly distressed, turning over on his back and covering his face with both hands. His torso heaved up and down and his feet shook, as he appeared to be crying. He wiped his eyes and was handed a roll of toilet paper, which he used to wipe his brow.
He sat up at the end of the bed and talked with his execution team.
The team had been asking Broom whether he wanted a break, but he chose to push ahead, as did the execution staff, prisons director Terry Collins said. Collins then insisted on a break and contacted the governor to let him know about the difficulties."


Wow. I almost couldn't finish reading that. I don't know how those medical persons can go through with that an still be able to live with themselves.

[proteus_lives]

25. They live with themselves just fine.

Considering Broom raped and killed a fourteen year-old girl in 1984. Not everyone has your endless love and compassion for murderers, rapists and pedophiles.

If they can't find a vein then breakout the scaffold and noose.

[armyowalgreens]

27. We are conditioned to react to human emotion...

I don't care who was doing the sobbing, I wouldn't be able to sit there stone cold as man sobs because we are taking too long to kill him.

But I'm sure you already know that I take a very different stance on these issues than most.

[proteus_lives]

29. Not always.

It cultural and social. Different people will react differently in the same situation.

"But I'm sure you already know that I take a very different stance on these issues than most."

I've noticed. In these types of threads you have no interest in the person's crimes or any sympathy for the victims. You always seem in a rush to demonstrate how much compassion you have for the criminals. Which I honestly don't get. I'm not attacking you, just an observation.

[polly7]

30. I couldn't do it either.

The story horrified me. Thinking of what he must have been going through is just really sad. Not a tenth as sad as knowing what his victim went through of course, but still .... it would haunt me forever.

[rd_kent]

46. How did he feel...

When he was killing his victim?

[armyowalgreens]

54. Who gives a fuck?

You are attempting to bring forth an emotional reaction in order to justify murder. Which is just as disgusting as the murderers actions.

[rd_kent]

61. Your opriginal post is an emotional reaction.

Point that finger of self-righteousness at yourself.

[armyowalgreens]

66. My OP was a question about technicalities. Show me how it was emotional?

[Gwendolyn]

99. Your OP is purely emotional.

You're implying that the emotional distress of the person about to be executed, mixed with the potential distress of those required to subdue the unwilling prisoner might somehow override the death sentence. Otherwise you wouldn't have put it up for discussion, since we all know that emotional distress of a prisoner has never, ever resulted in commutation of the death penalty.

[Gwendolyn]

107. What is the "technicality"? It's the prisoner's emotional state.

First of all, you and everyone else knows perfectly well that the sentence would not be postponed. According to the law, emotional distress does not constitute a technicality that would affect the application of a death sentence any more than my distress at going to prison for burglary would.

So what is the point of the OP then? It's either a moot question, or you're asking people to discuss based on emotion, namely empathy. Not that there's anything wrong with that. But it's definitely not a discussion based on the law and technicality.

[rd_kent]

73. Sorry, youre right.

It was most of your subsequent posts that were emotional reactions, like #3.

[proteus_lives]

88. Wow.

It says a lot about you when you would hold hands with a rapist/murderer then feel sympathy for the victim and her family.

[armyowalgreens]

93. Stop trying to smear me.

What you are doing is complete and utter bullshit. Get a life.

[proteus_lives]

108. I'm not smearing you.

You're doing it to yourself.

You don't care about the victims but have demonstrated empathy for the people who raped and killed them.

The disconnect is curious to say the least.

[armyowalgreens]

116. I'm willing to bet that you have a viscous hatred of defense attorneys.

Just a wild guess.

[Bill McBlueState]

70. "different stance on these issues than most"

About a third of the population consistently opposes the DP in polls, so it's not like you're in a tiny minority.

[proteus_lives]

89. He young and in college.

He's supposed to think he's being original.

[armyowalgreens]

95. Most people do not oppose life without parole.

I've gotten trashed in here before because of my beliefs. They are not in the least bit popular for most fringe persons on this board.

[Winterblues]

39. Do you think he thought about whether he would be put to death for his actions before he committed

them? There has never been any solid evidence that the death penalty is a deterrent, and in fact it is possible that the opposite is true. If you teach a child through spanking that hitting solves your problems then those children will grow up believing in hitting people to get their way. If we as a nation teach that we solve problems by killing people, then expect people to grow up believing just that..

[proteus_lives]

47. Are you serious?

Spanking creates murderers? The DP or prison isn't a deterrent. It's a punishment/consequence. I don't know if I believe in the concept of deterrence because there is no way to eliminate crime from society. No matter what laws or rules you have in place. So places like prison and methods like the DP are punishment. (Just in some cases, unjust in others.)

Mr. Broom deserves to be put to death for his crimes. I don't know what he was thinking when he raped and murdered a 14-year-old girl. He made a choice and now the time has finally come for him to face the consequences of that choice.

Many people were spanked as a child, or were faced with actual abuse. Guess what? They grew up and never harmed a fly. You're attempt to shift blame from the individual to society fails.

[armyowalgreens]

48. Your attempt to overlook sociology is odd at best and immoral at worst.

Yes, we are conditioned to do things. That doesn't mean that we lose the ability to reason. But we do learn behavior, including violent behavior, from society.

I don't believe that poster said that spanking a child would turn them into a murder. Nice try distorting what he or she said.

[proteus_lives]

94. Society does influence what we do. To a point.

In the end it comes to making a choice. Millions of people live in this violent society, read violent books, watch violent movies, were abused as children, go to war and never harm a fly.

Is Mr. Broom mentally ill? No. He is responsible for his crimes, not you, not me and not society. He deserves his death sentence.

[armyowalgreens]

96. No one deserves a death sentence.

I've heard the argument before. Most don't give in to violent influences. But more than a few will. You don't have to be mentally ill in order to be socially or intellectually disfunctional.

[proteus_lives]

112. I disagree.

Some people do deserve to die for their crimes.

"You don't have to be mentally ill in order to be socially or intellectually dysfunctional."

Define socially or intellectually dysfunctional. It still sounds like you're just absolving people of personal responsibility.

[Bill McBlueState]

69. the clip in post 9 disproves your statement pretty cleanly

"They live with themselves just fine" is a false statement.

[The Midway Rebel]

115. Convicted, never confessed

Though convicted of the crimes, he never confessed. His conviction is being appealed because of exculpatory evidence that was withheld from the defense counsel. Until we have a perfect justice system, we should not have a death penalty.

[Journeyman]

28. How do they live with themselves? Here's Carl Sandburg on "The Hangman at Home". . .

The Hangman at Home

A poem by Carl Sandburg

What does the hangman think about
When he goes home at night from work?
When he sits down with his wife and
Children for a cup of coffee and a
Plate of ham and eggs, do they ask
Him if it was a good day’s work
And everything went well or do they
Stay off some topics and talk about
The weather, baseball, politics
And the comic strips in the papers
And the movies? Do they look at his
Hands when he reaches for the coffee
Or the ham and eggs? If the little
Ones say, Daddy, play horse, here’s
A rope—does he answer like a joke:
I seen enough rope for today?
Or does his face light up like a
Bonfire of joy and does he say:
It’s a good and dandy world we live
In. And if a white face moon looks
In through a window where a baby girl
Sleeps and the moon gleams mix with
Baby ears and baby hair—the hangman—
How does he act then? It must be easy
For him. Anything is easy for a hangman,
I guess.



Published: 1922

[rd_kent]

45. You dont have to worry about how they live with themselves.

Its not your concern, nor your place to judge them.

[armyowalgreens]

52. No I'm pretty sure it's my place to judge them.

Just like it's your place to judge the murderers.

We judge the validity of peoples actions all the time. Yet you find it odd to judge someone for murdering another simply because it's state sanctioned? Now that is odd.

[rd_kent]

59. I have never judged a murderer

I have agreed or disagreed with the findings of a court. Until I serve on a jury, that will not change.

I do find it odd that you judge someone for the job they do, especially if its legal.

[armyowalgreens]

63. There are many acts that are perfectly legal but disgustingly immoral.

[rd_kent]

68. What one considers "immoral", other do not.

It really just keeps boiling down to your opinion.

[armyowalgreens]

71. It is not "opinion" anymore than political philosophy is "opinion"...

While multiple philosophies can be right, others can be absolutely wrong.

You are giving me the same bullshit that fundamentalist nuts give me. It's just my "opinion" that gay marriage is okay. See their position is just as valid as mine because it's all about opinion.

No. It is not about opinion. It's about presupposed rules for humanity and whatever society we choose to live in. We set fundamental standards that are the basis for the entire system of the rule of law.

[rd_kent]

77. You fail to see that I agree with you

It's about presupposed rules for humanity and whatever society we choose to live in. We set fundamental standards that are the basis for the entire system of the rule of law.

And currently, those standards allow for the death penalty (in many places, not everywhere).

[armyowalgreens]

79. No, the law allows for the death penalty in full violation of societal standards.

Like I have already said, things that are absolutely immoral can be perfectly legal. Sometimes the law should change. Sometimes it's impossible to legislate.

The death penalty is something that needs to be abolished.

[rd_kent]

80. "The death penalty is something that needs to be abolished."

Again with your opinion. In many places, a vote to abolish the death penalty was not passed, making it a societal standard. That would make your view "in full violation of societal standards."

[armyowalgreens]

81. And in California, Prop 8 was passed and in Arizona, Prop 102 was passed.

Making banning gay marriage perfectly fine because the legal and legislative system is perfect in every way.




What a ridiculously stupid example. Stupid laws are passed and enforced all the time with the full consent of an ignorant people.

[rd_kent]

82. And in this instance, I totally agree with you.

But in regard to the death penalty, I still disagree. We could find examples to support our different views all day long, and calling those example "stupid" only serves to degrade the discussion into insults.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

55. they aren't "medical persons"

they are whatever ghoul is willing to do the deed, professional executioners never caught on in America as their celebrity status in Europe was considered vulgar by us sensitive Americans. Which is also the reason executions are so often fucked up. The US even managed to fuck up so many executions of german war criminals they setup something of a work release program for the imprisoned SS more skilled in such affairs.

In Florida for instance it is just some random dude off the street paid $150

[armyowalgreens]

56. Most, if not all, have backgrounds in medicine.

I know that at least a few states mandate full medical teams with a backup medical team just in case.

[mitchum]

105. Maybe they could have distracted Broom with a dead teenage girl

[JeanGrey]

123. Simply give him ether or some ansesthesia and do a cut down.

He doesn't even have to wake up. Hundreds of thousands of people are put to sleep every single day in preparation for surgery, many have "conscious" sedation that is the same as being put out as you remember nothing.

It is silly to act like this is rocket science.

[proteus_lives]

26. They subdue him, restrain him and take to his meet his maker.

The inmate does not have a choice in these events. One way or the other he's going. I read somewhere that guards are prepared for them to resist.

[unblock]

32. state-sponsored forcibly dragging a subject to the chair is tame compared to

state-sponsored killing of a subject.

[AngryOldDem]

34. They'd force them.

In Ohio a few times they had people fighting back on the gurney. I think most realize there's nothing they can do and don't fight it. There's no point.

[Nye Bevan]

35. They use a cell extraction team

Unpleasant and dangerous.

A lot of these scum *deserve* to die. But the almost endless appeals, the cost of all the lawyers, the drama, the last-minute stays, midnight Supreme Court hearings, demonstrations, clemency hearings, interventions by religious leaders, mean that the death penalty is simply not worth the aggravation, even for the undeniably guilty. Add to this the possibility of executing innocent people and the DP should definitely be abolished. Lock these people up in a 10 by 10 cell with absolutely no possibility of release, ever, and be done with it.

[Prophet 451]

40. They have trained people to extract them from the cell

Most of the condemned, realising that there's no way to prevent it, choose to go out with a little dignity and co-operate.

[Deja Q]

41. Then kill them

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

57. John Spenkelink was beaten to death before he was put in the electric chair

The first man executed in Florida after the death penalty was restored resisted the guards, who then beat him to death, breaking his neck before he could be executed. But they fried his dead ass anyways just to put on a show for the death fetishists in attendance.

[ProudDad]

65. 10 Reasons to Abolish the Death Penalty

By 2004, 118 countries had abolished the death penalty, in law or practice. An average of three countries abolish the death penalty every year. The worldwide trend towards abolition of the death penalty is reflected in the Africa region, where 24 members of the African Union had abolished the death penalty, in law or practice, by 1 October 2004.(1) Here are ten reasons for the total abolition of this degrading and inhuman punishment:

1 - the death penalty violates the right to life.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) recognises each person’s right to life. Article 4 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples´ Rights (ACHPR) states that "human beings are inviolable. Every human being shall be entitled to respect for his life and the physical and moral integrity of his person." This view is reinforced by the existence of international and regional treaties providing for the abolition of the death penalty, notably the second optional protocol of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1989.

2 - the death penalty is a cruel and inhuman death.

The UDHR categorically states that "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment."All forms of execution are inhuman. No government can guarantee a dignified and painless death to condemned prisoners, who also suffer psychological pain in the period between their sentence and execution.

3 - the death penalty has no dissuasive effect.

No scientific study has proved that the death penalty has a more dissuasive effect on crime than other punishments. The most recent investigation into the links of cause and effect between capital punishment and the murder rate, was conducted by the United Nations in 1988 and updated in 2002. It came to the following conclusion: "...it is not prudent to accept the hypothesis that capital punishment deters murder to a marginally greater extent than does the threat and application of the supposedly lesser punishment of life imprisonment."

4 - the death penalty is premeditated murder, demeans the state and makes society more violent.

By executing a person, the state commits a murder and shows the same readiness to use physical violence against its victim as the criminal. Moreover, studies have shown that the murder rate increases immediately after executions. Researchers have suggested that this increase is similar to that caused by other violent public events, such as massacres and assassinations.

5 - the death penalty is discriminatory in its application.

Throughout the world, the death penalty is disproportionately used against disadvantaged people. Some condemned prisoners from the most impoverished social classes would not have been sentenced to death if they were from wealthier sectors of society. In these cases, either the accused are less able to find their way through the maze of the judicial system (because of a lack of knowledge, confidence or financial means), or the system reflects the generally negative attitude of society and the powerful towards them. It has also been proved that certain criminals run a greater risk of being condemned to death if their victims come from higher social classes.

6 - the death penalty denies the capacity of people to mend their ways and become a better person.

Defenders of the death penalty consider that anyone sentenced to death is unable to mend their ways and could re-offend at any time if they are released. However, there are many examples of offenders who have been reintegrated and who have not re-offended. Amnesty International believes that the way to prevent re-offending is to review procedures for conditional release and the psychological monitoring of prisoners during detention, and under no circumstances to increase the number of executions. In addition, the death penalty removes any possibility for the condemned person to repent.

7 - the death penalty cannot provide social stability nor bring peace to the victims.

An execution cannot give the victim his or her life back nor ease the suffering felt by their family. Far from reducing the pain, the length of the trial and the appeal procedure often prolong the family’s suffering.

8 - the death penalty denies the fallibility of human institutions.

The risk of executing innocent people remains indissolubly linked to the use of the death penalty. Since 1973, 116 people condemned to death in the United States have been released after proof of their innocence has been established. Some of them have only just escaped execution, after having passed years on death row. These repeated judicial errors have been especially due to irregularities committed by prosecution or police officers, recourse to doubtful evidence, material information or confessions, or the incompetence of defence lawyers. Other prisoners have been sent to their deaths when serious doubts existed about their guilt.

9 - the death penalty is a collective punishment.

This punishment affects all the family, friends and those sympathising with the condemned person. The close relatives of an executed prisoner, who generally do not have anything to do with the crime, could feel, as a result of the death penalty, the same dreadful sense of loss as the victim’s parents felt at the death of their loved one.

10 - the death penalty goes against the religious and humanist values that are common to all humanity.

Human rights are universal, indivisible and interdependent. They are based on many traditions that can be found in all civilisations. All religions advocate clemency, compassion and forgiveness and it is on these values that Amnesty International bases its opposition to the death penalty.

[MajorChode]

85. All of those are excellent reasons, and I would add more to the list

There is simply no way to insure that an innocent person is not put to death.

So regardless of whether anyone feels that murderers are getting their just rewards, thousands of executed murderers does not and can not justify the state sanctioned murder of one innocent human being. Those that are pro-death are in effect also murderers themselves because they support such a system.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-tc-nw-texas-exec...

[pitohui]

103. why is life in prison better for an innocent person?

i'm sure it's just me as an innocent person i would MUCH rather a quick execution than decades in prison -- you don't get your youth and strength back or your chance to make a life and a career -- in some states you don't even get any monetary payment

our system sucks, don't get me wrong, DNA proves that juries are miserable at determining an innocent man from a guilty man, and it begs the question how often innocent people go to prison for crimes where they can't be cleared because it isn't a DNA type of crime -- our system is absolutely broken

but i don't think storing innocent people in a cage for decades just in case we might one day bother to clear them is kindness either

i was falsely accused of something i didn't do while i was younger, and it was scary -- there isn't really any way for an innocent person to prove they are innocent -- this i know for sure!

as DNA becomes more widely used, i wonder why more criminals don't plant more DNA evidence, hell it's sure what i would do, i guess we are supposed to assume that ALL criminals are stupid but i bet even now that innocent people go to prison every day and having to live in prison even if one day they get out...their lives are pretty much ruined...at my age if i was accused again i'd prob. just kill myself if i was innocent, our system is that bad

[MajorChode]

119. A death penalty is sometimes better if you're innocent

In a death penalty case, mandatory appeals come into play. If you're not sentenced to death, you're on your own for filing appeals because after the initial trial the state is under no obligation to provide you with a free legal defense, and they don't.

Another pitfall of the death penalty is there's little doubt that lots of innocent people plead to life without parole rather than face a trial where the outcome could be a death sentence. The result is they have few, if any, avenues for appeal which means they will almost certainly rot in prison for the rest of their life unless someone like Barry Scheck and the Innocence Project picks up their case, and even then that will only happen if there is DNA evidence.

[ProudDad]

120. I would argue that the way USAmerika treats ALL prisoners

is a crime.

It's a crime against the prisoner -- torturing one who transgresses is evil...

It's a crime against society -- it's corrosive and unlikely to rehabilitate anyone...

Most of the civilized world (you know, those countries with Universal Health Care) do not treat their prisoners in such a barbaric manner -- and they have better results... Fewer incarcerated, more rehabilitated individuals and more humane societies.

You'd better hope you never have to find out -- just being in the wrong place at the wrong time might get you the chance to choose...

[RagAss]

102. I can't imagine starting a thread like this.

[H2O Man]

113. Like if they went

on a hunger strike?

[Ex Lurker]

117. as others have said

the authorities would use whatever means necessary. But it does seem that most of the inmates are just ready to get it over with.