2 hours to die after lethal injection drugs given.

[djAdvocate]

Jul 29, 2014 21:46:53 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

Jul 29, 2014 21:10:50 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

Confessions are admitted as evidence IN the Court of Law and the accused is always asked some variation of "is this your confession?" as well as some variation of "is this true?" or "do you agree with it?"

As to the bolded: If you would care to actually READ what I have written you would have notice my stress on "uncoerced confession". So, no. I never said that.

Not sworn testimony and not subject to perjury.  Not to mention the 14th amendment violation.

And if you want to go that route- how do we determine what is a forced confession vs. one of free will?  History shows quite plainly people do not confess to crimes they did not commit as a general rule.

i already suggested a scenario that undermines the argument considerably.  if you are protecting someone from an accusation: true or false- you might confess.  if you are paid by someone handsomely (or your family is paid) you might falsely confess.  or, if you feel safer confessing than NOT, you might falsely confess.  now, you can make the case for the relative wrongness of any of these things.  but to say that they are as bad as murder is just silly.  they aren't.  not even close.

[EVT1]

Pretty much settled law- just wanted to hear the arguments.

[Deleted]

Jul 29, 2014 22:02:42 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Jul 29, 2014 21:46:53 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

Not sworn testimony and not subject to perjury.  Not to mention the 14th amendment violation.

And if you want to go that route- how do we determine what is a forced confession vs. one of free will?  History shows quite plainly people do not confess to crimes they did not commit as a general rule.

i already suggested a scenario that undermines the argument considerably.  if you are protecting someone from an accusation: true or false- you might confess.  if you are paid by someone handsomely (or your family is paid) you might falsely confess.  or, if you feel safer confessing than NOT, you might falsely confess.  now, you can make the case for the relative wrongness of any of these things.  but to say that they are as bad as murder is just silly.  they aren't.  not even close.

Never said they were as bad as murder. I said they deserve the same PUNISHMENT as the crime they lied about (if it happens to be murder, then so-be-it).

The problem with people that confess as a lie is, they keep the REAL criminal free and able to be a criminal again. So, by lying the "illegitimate confessor" could not only be an "accessory after the fact" in the first crime (well... they know they didn't do it! and by helping the real criminal evade justice they are just as guilty of being an accessory as someone that hides the criminal in their basement), but they could also be an accomplice to any future crimes by the very fact that they did the time instead of the actual criminal.

[djAdvocate]

Jul 29, 2014 22:48:13 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

Jul 29, 2014 22:02:42 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

i already suggested a scenario that undermines the argument considerably.  if you are protecting someone from an accusation: true or false- you might confess.  if you are paid by someone handsomely (or your family is paid) you might falsely confess.  or, if you feel safer confessing than NOT, you might falsely confess.  now, you can make the case for the relative wrongness of any of these things.  but to say that they are as bad as murder is just silly.  they aren't.  not even close.

Never said they were as bad as murder. I said they deserve the same PUNISHMENT as the crime they lied about (if it happens to be murder, then so-be-it)..

you have actually said two different things on this thread.  you started with an eye for an eye.  here you are an eye for an eyelash.

[truthbound]

He didn't care when the girlfriend he shot through the lung Sucked and wheezed until she died. I could care care less how long he sucked and wheezed.

[achelois]

Jul 28, 2014 8:56:25 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

Jul 25, 2014 17:00:38 GMT -5 achelois said:

This screw up was preventable and was due to inadequate input from medical professionals. 

There was no backup plan. People had no idea what to do when the guy didnt die. They stood around in total bewilderment. 

This was sloppiness, not error. Sorry you dont see the difference. 

Additionally, while I am now retired, I worked in a high-stress job (anesthesia) for most of my working life and handled it just fine. Thanks for your concern, though. Even though it is completely unnecessary. 

Sloppiness is an error, as the job wasn't done correctly. So I don't see what difference you're talking about. Medical professionals should stay out of the killing business, it really isn't their line of work. Don't they take an oath or something ? Things like this supposedly botched execution wouldn't happen if you used professionals that know how to kill instead of jury rigging medical equipment and chemicals that were designed and intended for life saving.

I agree with you, that the job was poorly done. But the fact is, they DIDN'T use professional killers, DID they?  Would it have been better if the State had chosen professional killers?  Why, yes; yes, it would have been. BUT THEY DIDN'T, did they?

NO, instead, The State elected to go with lethal injection. In their infinite wisdom, the State chose ineffective drugs and an inefficient manner of proceeding. 

If the State is going to elect a specific manner of execution, don't you think they should get someone who actually knows what they are doing with that particular method to implement it? You do--you said so; you would like to see a professional. What is a professional?  Someone who knows what he is doing.

In this case, the protocol itself was sloppy--the drugs inffective and they had no backup plan for what to do if the drugs did not work. I personally consider that to be a sloppy way to go about something. An error would have been not following a correct protocol. The protocol, in this case, was actually followed, but the protocol itself was defective in the way it was set up. 

I am against the death penalty myself and would like to see medical professionals stay out of it, if it is used.  I would love to see it completely abolished or, failing that, go with a method that is completely non-medically-related.  But if the State INSISTS on using drugs and doing lethal injection, it ought to have a procedure that actually works quickly and reliably instead of having a fiasco like this. 

You know, like consulting a professional who knows about drugs to provide input? 

Are you just being deliberately obtuse?  I am not arguing FOR lethal injection--for some reason, you seem to think I am--but I don't understand what the problem is with my wanting to avoid a long, drawn-out charade like the one that occurred. 

In any case, I cannot express myself more clearly, so, whatever you think, I am done trying to discuss it. Thank you for your input. 

[Deleted]

Jul 30, 2014 0:17:17 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Jul 29, 2014 22:48:13 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

Never said they were as bad as murder. I said they deserve the same PUNISHMENT as the crime they lied about (if it happens to be murder, then so-be-it)..

you have actually said two different things on this thread.  you started with an eye for an eye.  here you are an eye for an eyelash.

It's still "an eye for an eye"... the liar confessed that they damaged the eye. Should the confessor expect there be no punishment?

[djAdvocate]

Jul 30, 2014 17:58:50 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

Jul 30, 2014 0:17:17 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

you have actually said two different things on this thread.  you started with an eye for an eye.  here you are an eye for an eyelash.

It's still "an eye for an eye"... the liar confessed that they damaged the eye. Should the confessor expect there be no punishment?

expectations are different than what is earned, imo.  not in yours, tho, apparently.

[Deleted]

Jul 30, 2014 16:55:48 GMT -5 achelois said:

Jul 28, 2014 8:56:25 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

Sloppiness is an error, as the job wasn't done correctly. So I don't see what difference you're talking about. Medical professionals should stay out of the killing business, it really isn't their line of work. Don't they take an oath or something ? Things like this supposedly botched execution wouldn't happen if you used professionals that know how to kill instead of jury rigging medical equipment and chemicals that were designed and intended for life saving.

I agree with you, that the job was poorly done. But the fact is, they DIDN'T use professional killers, DID they?  Would it have been better if the State had chosen professional killers?  Why, yes; yes, it would have been. BUT THEY DIDN'T, did they?

NO, instead, The State elected to go with lethal injection. In their infinite wisdom, the State chose ineffective drugs and an inefficient manner of proceeding. 

If the State is going to elect a specific manner of execution, don't you think they should get someone who actually knows what they are doing with that particular method to implement it? You do--you said so; you would like to see a professional. What is a professional?  Someone who knows what he is doing.

In this case, the protocol itself was sloppy--the drugs ineffective and they had no backup plan for what to do if the drugs did not work. I personally consider that to be a sloppy way to go about something. An error would have been not following a correct protocol. The protocol, in this case, was actually followed, but the protocol itself was defective in the way it was set up. 

I am against the death penalty myself and would like to see medical professionals stay out of it, if it is used.  I would love to see it completely abolished or, failing that, go with a method that is completely non-medically-related.  But if the State INSISTS on using drugs and doing lethal injection, it ought to have a procedure that actually works quickly and reliably instead of having a fiasco like this. 

You know, like consulting a professional who knows about drugs to provide input? 

Are you just being deliberately obtuse?  I am not arguing FOR lethal injection--for some reason, you seem to think I am--but I don't understand what the problem is with my wanting to avoid a long, drawn-out charade like the one that occurred. 

In any case, I cannot express myself more clearly, so, whatever you think, I am done trying to discuss it. Thank you for your input. 

You are against the death penalty. I'm for the death penalty. You agree with me that the medical trade shouldn't be involved with killing death row convicts. I believe there is a simple and effective way to terminate a human life not using medical equipment. A human error was made terminating a death row convict. You were unhappy that it happened. I was indifferent because of what he was. You spent a lifetime working in the medical field as an anesthesiologist. I owned a company that designed and built weapons and weapon delivery system components. Humans are fallible in their actions and everything they make. Hopefully they will learn from this execution error and correct it in the future, for your sake. I would of taken that convict, strapped him down and duct taped his head to the muzzle of an anti-aircraft cannon, after reading what he did to get on death row. Obtuse just means we're both believing in our own convictions. I believe in discussing the differences. That's why I take part in these forums.

[djAdvocate]

jma- you are ignoring something, and that is that there is a yawning chasm between what we had a decade ago in terms of lethal injection and what we have now.  it has nothing to do with "procedure" or "training".  the lethal injection camp is EXPERIMENTING.  and we are watching it play out in real time.  no amount of training prepares you for things going wrong in an experiment.

now, i am sure that you and others are fine with us experimenting on human beings- loathsome ones, that is.  my whole problem is this: what if the human being is NOT loathsome?  THEN how do you feel about the experiments?

after all, during the late unpleasantness, experiments were done on homosexuals and gypsies, because they were "loathsome", too.

[Deleted]

Jul 31, 2014 11:28:41 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

jma- you are ignoring something, and that is that there is a yawning chasm between what we had a decade ago in terms of lethal injection and what we have now.  it has nothing to do with "procedure" or "training".  the lethal injection camp is EXPERIMENTING.  and we are watching it play out in real time.  no amount of training prepares you for things going wrong in an experiment.

now, i am sure that you and others are fine with us experimenting on human beings- loathsome ones, that is.  my whole problem is this: what if the human being is NOT loathsome?  THEN how do you feel about the experiments?

after all, during the late unpleasantness, experiments were done on homosexuals and gypsies, because they were "loathsome", too.

I didn't consider it as an experiment, but that doesn't make that description wrong. I'm firmly in the not using lethal injection camp. In any form.

[djAdvocate]

Jul 31, 2014 12:16:35 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

Jul 31, 2014 11:28:41 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

jma- you are ignoring something, and that is that there is a yawning chasm between what we had a decade ago in terms of lethal injection and what we have now.  it has nothing to do with "procedure" or "training".  the lethal injection camp is EXPERIMENTING.  and we are watching it play out in real time.  no amount of training prepares you for things going wrong in an experiment.

now, i am sure that you and others are fine with us experimenting on human beings- loathsome ones, that is.  my whole problem is this: what if the human being is NOT loathsome?  THEN how do you feel about the experiments?

after all, during the late unpleasantness, experiments were done on homosexuals and gypsies, because they were "loathsome", too.

I didn't consider it as an experiment

it IS an experiment, jma.  these drugs are completely untested for this procedure.

, but that doesn't make that description wrong. I'm firmly in the not using lethal injection camp. In any form.

right.  you are in the humanely rip off their heads camp, right? 

[Sum Dum Gai]

The simple fact is that killing a human being isn't really all that hard.  The military has been perfecting ways to do it for thousands of years.  They're pretty good at it by now.  The only problem is that society at large wants it to be done in a way that it doesn't really look like death.  If we got over our squeamishness in that regard we could come up with a way that would be extremely quick and extremely reliable.  However, it would probably be messy.

What this case shows is that having non medical personnel try to quickly and painlessly poison somebody to death is a crapshoot.  When it works it looks like they just went to sleep and never woke up, which our society is more or less OK with.  When it doesn't work it looks like they suffer for most of two hours, which our society is not OK with.

[Deleted]

Jul 31, 2014 16:28:13 GMT -5 Sum Dum Gai said:

The simple fact is that killing a human being isn't really all that hard.  The military has been perfecting ways to do it for thousands of years.  They're pretty good at it by now.  The only problem is that society at large wants it to be done in a way that it doesn't really look like death.  If we got over our squeamishness in that regard we could come up with a way that would be extremely quick and extremely reliable.  However, it would probably be messy.

What this case shows is that having non medical personnel try to quickly and painlessly poison somebody to death is a crapshoot.  When it works it looks like they just went to sleep and never woke up, which our society is more or less OK with.  When it doesn't work it looks like they suffer for most of two hours, which our society is not OK with.

Correction: The squeamish in our society are not o.k. with.

[Deleted]

Jul 31, 2014 13:38:54 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Jul 31, 2014 12:16:35 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

I didn't consider it as an experiment

it IS an experiment, jma.  these drugs are completely untested for this procedure.

, but that doesn't make that description wrong. I'm firmly in the not using lethal injection camp. In any form.

right.  you are in the humanely rip off their heads camp, right? 

More like vaporize. You keep applying adjectives like "humanely" where I wouldn't use them. Humane isn't a requirement for me. Kill the death row convicts quickly, if anything, to stop giving descriptive word ammunition to the death penalty opponents. See post #54 for my basic starting point. Efficient and economical means are the best because it takes away the majority of arguments available to the death penalty opponents. We can't have the death penalty ended because some media outlets are playing a mistake for all it's worth, and by worth I mean big time commercial sales.

[Deleted]

Jul 29, 2014 21:03:48 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

Maybe the better option is to sentence police that extract false confessions to the same fate their victims faced.

Are these the same police I'm supposed to call and wait for at my own risk instead of defending myself ?

[EVT1]

You are free to defend yourself 24/7- just don't murder anyone and call it self-defense and we're good

[Deleted]

Aug 1, 2014 18:56:37 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

You are free to defend yourself 24/7- just don't murder anyone and call it self-defense and we're good

Agreed, killing is the last resort.

[jeep108]

Jul 30, 2014 4:47:59 GMT -5 truthbound said:

He didn't care when the girlfriend he shot through the lung Sucked and wheezed until she died. I could care care less how long he sucked and wheezed.

[Virgil Showlion]

[Deleted]

Aug 5, 2014 12:59:20 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

The anti-death penalty crowd is slowly getting what they're striving for ?

[Tennesseer]

Aug 7, 2014 10:52:12 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

I'm sorta like John Kerry regarding the death penalty.... I was for it before I was against it.

The number of innocents that were falsely convicted changed my mind.  But, if you're going to do it.....Git 'er done.

Firing squad certainly works well.  I am also curious why euthanasia seems to work quite well when it is practiced (mostly abroad) yet we can't seem to do effectively the same thing here in our prisons.

Because euthanasia (it is really physician assisted death) is voluntary?  

[Deleted]

Aug 7, 2014 10:52:12 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

I'm sorta like John Kerry regarding the death penalty.... I was for it before I was against it.

The number of innocents that were falsely convicted changed my mind.  But, if you're going to do it.....Git 'er done.

Firing squad certainly works well.  I am also curious why euthanasia seems to work quite well when it is practiced (mostly abroad) yet we can't seem to do effectively the same thing here in our prisons.

If it's any consolation to the death penalty opponents, Missouri's next lethal injection execution went off without a hitch. Seems they learned from the mistake. Not a peep on the national network evening news regarding the correction of the error of course. Commercial time doesn't sell as well for non-inflammatory news stories.

[Tennesseer]

Aug 8, 2014 11:41:52 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

Aug 7, 2014 10:52:12 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

I'm sorta like John Kerry regarding the death penalty.... I was for it before I was against it.

The number of innocents that were falsely convicted changed my mind.  But, if you're going to do it.....Git 'er done.

Firing squad certainly works well.  I am also curious why euthanasia seems to work quite well when it is practiced (mostly abroad) yet we can't seem to do effectively the same thing here in our prisons.

If it's any consolation to the death penalty opponents, Missouri's next lethal injection execution went off without a hitch. Seems they learned from the mistake. Not a peep on the national network evening news regarding the correction of the error of course. Commercial time doesn't sell as well for non-inflammatory news stories.

I am not sure why national evening news should have mentioned the correction.  The execution you are referring to took place ìn Missouri (two days ago).  This is the seventh execution ìn Missouri this year that went down without a hitch.

The three states where there was some type of complication with an execution this year are Arizona, Oklahoma and Ohio.

[Deleted]

Aug 8, 2014 12:12:09 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Aug 8, 2014 11:41:52 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

If it's any consolation to the death penalty opponents, Missouri's next lethal injection execution went off without a hitch. Seems they learned from the mistake. Not a peep on the national network evening news regarding the correction of the error of course. Commercial time doesn't sell as well for non-inflammatory news stories.

I am not sure why national evening news should have mentioned the correction.  The execution you are referring to took place ìn Missouri (two days ago).  This is the seventh execution ìn Missouri this year that went down without a hitch.

The three states where there was some type of complication with an execution this year are Arizona, Oklahoma and Ohio.

I did say "the" mistake not "their" mistake. So you feel a well executed execution is not newsworthy ? How about a slightly botched one ?

[Tennesseer]

Aug 8, 2014 12:50:27 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

Aug 8, 2014 12:12:09 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

I am not sure why national evening news should have mentioned the correction.  The execution you are referring to took place ìn Missouri (two days ago).  This is the seventh execution ìn Missouri this year that went down without a hitch.

The three states where there was some type of complication with an execution this year are Arizona, Oklahoma and Ohio.

I did say "the" mistake not "their" mistake. So you feel a well executed execution is not newsworthy ? How about a slightly botched one ?

No.  Not newsworthy.   Clean executions seem to be a dime a dozen in a few states.

What did Missouri have to learn from "the mistake"?  After all, all seven of their executions went off perfectly.

Perhaps Arizona, Ohio and Oklahoma can correct their mistakes by learning from Missouri.

[Deleted]

Aug 8, 2014 13:05:08 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Aug 8, 2014 12:50:27 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

I did say "the" mistake not "their" mistake. So you feel a well executed execution is not newsworthy ? How about a slightly botched one ?

No.  Not newsworthy.   Clean executions seem to be a dime a dozen in a few states.

What did Missouri have to learn from "the mistake"?  After all, all seven of their executions went off perfectly.

Perhaps Arizona, Ohio and Oklahoma can correct their mistakes by learning from Missouri.

Agreed, they should contact Missouri for a few pointers. You know, you're taking all the fun out of ragging on the media for their headline hyperbole on a slight execution mistake. Maybe I could be allowed a little leeway in the other direction ? I'm not making any money on it.

[Tennesseer]

Aug 8, 2014 13:17:46 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

Aug 8, 2014 13:05:08 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

No.  Not newsworthy.   Clean executions seem to be a dime a dozen in a few states.

What did Missouri have to learn from "the mistake"?  After all, all seven of their executions went off perfectly.

Perhaps Arizona, Ohio and Oklahoma can correct their mistakes by learning from Missouri.

Agreed, they should contact Missouri for a few pointers. You know, you're taking all the fun out of ragging on the media for their headline hyperbole on a slight execution mistake. Maybe I could be allowed a little leeway in the other direction ? I'm not making any money on it.

Okayyyyy.....  

[Wisconsin Beth]

Aug 8, 2014 13:05:08 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Aug 8, 2014 12:50:27 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

I did say "the" mistake not "their" mistake. So you feel a well executed execution is not newsworthy ? How about a slightly botched one ?

No.  Not newsworthy.   Clean executions seem to be a dime a dozen in a few states.

What did Missouri have to learn from "the mistake"?  After all, all seven of their executions went off perfectly.

Perhaps Arizona, Ohio and Oklahoma can correct their mistakes by learning from Missouri.

What has Missouri doing differently from Arizona, Ohio and Oklahoma?  Clearly Missouri has this down. 

And I don't expect to see headlines outside of Missouri stating it worked.  I don't need to hear about executions when they work.  I want to know why other states are having problems doing a clean execution and I want them to fix their problems. 

Some states use the death penalty as part of their penal system.  I'm ok with that.  I'm also ok with states NOT having the death penalty in their penal system if that how they (we) want to handle it.  I am very opposed to having it as part of the system and botching it when they do use it.  Is it too much to ask that they get it right? 

[djAdvocate]

Aug 8, 2014 14:52:57 GMT -5 Wisconsin Beth said:

Aug 8, 2014 13:05:08 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

No.  Not newsworthy.   Clean executions seem to be a dime a dozen in a few states.

What did Missouri have to learn from "the mistake"?  After all, all seven of their executions went off perfectly.

Perhaps Arizona, Ohio and Oklahoma can correct their mistakes by learning from Missouri.

What has Missouri doing differently from Arizona, Ohio and Oklahoma?  Clearly Missouri has this down. 

And I don't expect to see headlines outside of Missouri stating it worked.  I don't need to hear about executions when they work.  I want to know why other states are having problems doing a clean execution and I want them to fix their problems. 

Some states use the death penalty as part of their penal system.  I'm ok with that.  I'm also ok with states NOT having the death penalty in their penal system if that how they (we) want to handle it.  I am very opposed to having it as part of the system and botching it when they do use it.  Is it too much to ask that they get it right? 

to the best of my knowledge, there was a two month period this year where NO executions took place, as states that have LI checked their protocol.  that is newsworthy, as it is the first time since the early 70's this has happened in the US.