This Pisses Me Off

[cloudy]

Yep. It's those damn California liberals! Only they would be nuts enough to put lethal injections and executions on hold just because some inmates are enduring a little suffering! You'd never catch, say, a Florida conservative doing something like this! No, sirree!

Oh. Wait....this just in....


Evidently, the Judge's decison in California came the same day as Gov. Bush's decision in Florida. But never fear, the California Judge said that the state's system "is broken, but it can be fixed," meaning that CA can get back to excuting people if it makes sure that certain, very sloppy points in its method of execution are fixed (points listed in this article: Lethal Injection Problems).

I'm not so sure if the outlook is so rosy for Florida.

But getting back to the point: when did Jeb Bush become a liberal?...and why isn't anyone pissed at him for doing the exact same thing for the exact same reason?

But, that doesn't fit into Zeb's (skewed) view of the world, so it can't possibly be true or even matter if it was.

I'm so glad that I'm not the only one who sees what a shit-stirrer he is.

 

[R. Richard]

Never said it was.

You said:
[Hanging, gas chanbers, electric chairs, lethal injections, guilliotines... they're all for show, a spectacular way for the revenge hungry to watch their nemesis go down. None of them are instant, and all of them are easy to mess up. But they take a few seconds, up to a minute. Enough for the spectators to say "take that, you bastard" under their breath.]

Obviously gas chanbers or electric chairs are not instantaneous. Lethal injections are not only not instantaneous, it has now been proven that improperly done lethal injections can take a while. The guillotine takes about seven seconds.

However, when properly done, hanging is "instantaneous." Death by hanging is caused by breaking of the neck after a suitable drop and, assuming that the "trap door" works, almost fool proof. Death is accomplished in milliseconds [~instantaneous.] I assumed that you thought that hanging was death by asphyxiation and not instantaneous.

 

[Lisa Denton]

I know I should stay outta this but:

I think the reason this is so volatile is because the so often the victim of a killer is subjected to cruel and unusual punishment while being raped and tortured and killed.

The killers don't do it humanely.

If the killers would quit with the rape and torture, and find a humane nice way to kill peoples. Then society would need to also find a nice way to kill the killers.

I dunno why they don't just put them to sleep, like deep sleep, like coma, and then do whatever. That way even if they fucked up the poor lil killer would never know the fear, agony, torture , pain, and dying gasps which he inflicted upon an innocent person or persons.

The death penalty will never completly die, until the killers stop killing.

We, as a society, might be able to stop the death penalty, and killing these people.

But who will stop them from killing thier victims?

Perhaps the anti-death penalty peoples should just slightly change thier agenda, and I will join up.

Make it anti-death.

 

[Dr_Strabismus]

I agree with the death penalty in the U.S. The death penalty is what many Americans deserve.

 

[Liar]

Obviously gas chanbers or electric chairs are not instantaneous. Lethal injections are not only not instantaneous, it has now been proven that improperly done lethal injections can take a while. The guillotine takes about seven seconds.

However, when properly done, hanging is "instantaneous." Death by hanging is caused by breaking of the neck after a suitable drop and, assuming that the "trap door" works, almost fool proof. Death is accomplished in milliseconds [~instantaneous.] I assumed that you thought that hanging was death by asphyxiation and not instantaneous.

Hanging, in theory, breaks the neck, thus for all intents and puposes detatches the head from the rest of the body. Oh yes, it still hangs on by tissue and bone but nerves are disconnected as well as sustenance/blood flow.

Pretty much the same as with a gulliotine. Where, according to what I've heard and read about it, the head and the concioussness of the killed, lives on for several seconds. Does it not do that to a hanged man too?

This is why I figure that if you absolutely have to execute, the most instant way must be to directly destroy the brain. Shoot it, blow it up, club it with a sledgehammer (just don't miss). But that won't catch on, because people want the death penalty to be neat, clean and tv friendly, so that they can go home and feed their cat and feel good about themselves afterward.

 

[Liar]

Perhaps the anti-death penalty peoples should just slightly change thier agenda, and I will join up.

Make it anti-death.

Not following you. What are you saying? That anti death penalty people like murder? That they weant innocent people killed by maniacs? What?

 

[rgraham666]

But who will stop them from killing thier victims?

Perhaps the anti-death penalty peoples should just slightly change thier agenda, and I will join up.

Make it anti-death.

Every time we 'liberals' try that we get bitched at for being communists.

Welfare? The bastards don't deserve it.

Social housing? Not with my money!

A decent education system, available to all? They can pay for it themselves.

I suppose you mean more police and bigger jails. Well, the police can't stop every crime unless you have a police officer for every person 24/7. I don't think you'd like that very much.

Here's an odd thought, perhaps we ought to start seeing violence as the too often useless action it is, and start teaching ourselves other ways to do things.

(Takes a moment to laugh)

Nah. Violence, hatred and anger are so easy. Why strain ourselves? Lives are cheap anyway.

 

[R. Richard]

Hanging, in theory, breaks the neck, thus for all intents and puposes detatches the head from the rest of the body. Oh yes, it still hangs on by tissue and bone but nerves are disconnected as well as sustenance/blood flow.

Properly done with a proper drop, hanging breaks the neck, no theory about it. The breakage is blunt object trauma. [By the way, if the drop is greater than a certain height, decapitation normally results.] Blunt object trauma of the force of a hanging is thought to cause "instant" unconsciousness.

Pretty much the same as with a gulliotine. Where, according to what I've heard and read about it, the head and the concioussness of the killed, lives on for several seconds. Does it not do that to a hanged man too?

A guillotine inflicts sharp object trauma, different from blunt object trauma. Sharp object trauma is known to not cause "instant" unconsciousness, assuming that the brain is not the site of the sharp object trauma.

This is why I figure that if you absolutely have to execute, the most instant way must be to directly destroy the brain. Shoot it, blow it up, club it with a sledgehammer (just don't miss). But that won't catch on, because people want the death penalty to be neat, clean and tv friendly, so that they can go home and feed their cat and feel good about themselves afterward.

All of the methods you listed in the paragraph above involve blunt object trauma. [In the case of a bullet, it is actually shock wave trauma, but that is effectively blunt object trauma.] The problem with each method is that it tends to be a bit messy. Hanging overcomes the "messy problem." [By the way, even people who don't have a cat tend to get hung up on the messy problem.]

 

[Dr_Strabismus]

Every time we 'liberals' try that we get bitched at for being communists.

Welfare? The bastards don't deserve it.

Social housing? Not with my money!

A decent education system, available to all? They can pay for it themselves.

I suppose you mean more police and bigger jails. Well, the police can't stop every crime unless you have a police officer for every person 24/7. I don't think you'd like that very much.

Here's an odd thought, perhaps we ought to start seeing violence as the too often useless action it is, and start teaching ourselves other ways to do things.

(Takes a moment to laugh)

Nah. Violence, hatred and anger are so easy. Why strain ourselves? Lives are cheap anyway.

Hey, Rob, what happened to "I'm backing off?"

 

[rgraham666]

Hey, Rob, what happened to "I'm backing off?"

I'm in a suicidal mood.

 

[Dr_Strabismus]

I'm in a suicidal mood.

Yep, this thread will do the trick alright

 

[JamesSD]

In theory, I support capital punishment in some cases. In practice, I have a lot of concerns.

Poor people are far more likely to be sentenced to death than rich people. (If OJ had been poor, not only would have been convincted, he would have gotten the death penalty).

Thanks to everyone and their mom pleading insanity as a defense, the truly mentally ill are often disserved by our justice system.

The rise of DNA evidence and retrying cases has overturned MANY older death penalty convictions. So basically, the system was perfectly willing to put innocent people to death.

Criminal justice is a complicated issue. For one thing, you have to go all the way back to what the goal of punishments are. A deterrant to future crimes? Removing likely future criminals from the street, to protect society? Vengence for past transgressions?

I don't think lethal injection is cruel and unusual. Except in very rare cases, it's akin to dying on the operating table while under anestetics.

Let's introduce the death penalty for white collar crimes, like those perpetrated by Enron

 

[rgraham666]

Let's introduce the death penalty for white collar crimes, like those perpetrated by Enron

Seconded. Who knows how many people ended up hanging from their own belt or eating the business end of a shotgun because of those irresponsible assholes?

 

[Liar]

Properly done with a proper drop, hanging breaks the neck, no theory about it. The breakage is blunt object trauma. [By the way, if the drop is greater than a certain height, decapitation normally results.] Blunt object trauma of the force of a hanging is thought to cause "instant" unconsciousness.

Hm, I could have sworn that was blunt object trama to the neck, and not to the thing above the neck. I didn't know you could knock a guy out cold by afflicting BOT anywhere except directly at the grey matter.

But hey, I'm no hanging expert.

Except hanging around. I'm good at that.

 

[Jenny_Jackson]

I've seen this very same argument before. The side you chose to support depends on whose bull is being goarded, as far as I can tell.

 

[Lisa Denton]

I agree with the death penalty in the U.S. The death penalty is what many Americans deserve.

(?)

I take it then you are pro-death penalty.

and anti-american.


Since I am a american I didn't chuckle when I read that, and also because I didn't think it was meant to be humurous. Lots of peoples in the world right now is hating americans, rather than hating the leaders who make the screwy decisions like us americans do.

Unless you are an american, which then means your statement is really whacko.

 

[Lisa Denton]

Not following you. What are you saying? That anti death penalty people like murder? That they weant innocent people killed by maniacs? What?

What?

Of course not Liar.

I have said it before, that we shouldn't have two sides. One side viewed as caring only about the victims.

And another side viewed as caring about only the peoples accused of killing the victims.

An Anti-death side would care about both, try desperately to stop the death penalty, and try just as desperately to stop peoples from deserving it.

Finding a way to stop the killing, all killing. That would be meeting in the middle, something that almost everyone would support, or at least I would.

 

[Mesachie]

Oh, from his post one can only suspect that Dr_Strabismus is sick fuck, but that would be, perhaps too rewarding for him given the context of the website. So wishing him months of bed rest with both arms in a cast and no sexual activity for many, many moons to come is my fond holiday wish for Dr_S.

 

[Pure]

note to James

I don't think lethal injection is cruel and unusual. Except in very rare cases, it's akin to dying on the operating table while under anesthetics.

if that were true, the use of a paralytic agent would not be required; it is.

it's also to be noted that some veterinarians have rejected the standard human death cocktail as inhumane (due to the potassium drug--the third). so i'd rather 'go' with a vet than the CA executioner.

i basically agree with liar. people don't *want* instantaneous OR peaceful. the latter is easily achieved with a massive dose of the first drug, sodium thiopental, which can cause deepening sleep, then coma and respiratory arrest. i believe A reason for the next two [the paralytic and the potassium bromide] is 1) to cause suffering [if only for a few mins), and 2) to mask it so the observers don't actually see it, but imagine it.
---

to solve box's problem, perhaps the 'lead pipe' method should be used. four or five volunteers from the public could be issued short lengths of lead pipe, and they then beat the person to death. that would provide an outlet for Box's anger and give him some exercize.

 

[SlickTony]

I don't think lethal injection is cruel and unusual. Except in very rare cases, it's akin to dying on the operating table while under anesthetics.

if that were true, the use of a paralytic agent would not be required; it is.

it's also to be noted that some veterinarians have rejected the standard human death cocktail as inhumane (due to the potassium drug--the third). so i'd rather 'go' with a vet than the CA executioner.

i basically agree with liar. people don't *want* instantaneous OR peaceful. the latter is easily achieved with a massive dose of the first drug, sodium thiopental, which can cause deepening sleep, then coma and respiratory arrest. i believe A reason for the next two [the paralytic and the potassium bromide] is 1) to cause suffering [if only for a few mins), and 2) to mask it so the observers don't actually see it, but imagine it.
---

to solve box's problem, perhaps the 'lead pipe' method should be used. four or five volunteers from the public could be issued short lengths of lead pipe, and they then beat the person to death. that would provide an outlet for Box's anger and give him some exercize.

If a pit bull were to tear your child to pieces, of course you would want to cut it up live with a chainsaw or beat it to death with a lead pipe or something. But this seldom happens, unless you happen to have a chainsaw or a led pipe on you at the time. Usually, the animals gets euthanized. It gets the needle, and since it's being administered by a veterinarian, it's painless. If you simply want to take the murderer out of the world, so he won't kill again, why not give him no worse a death than you would give the dog? Otherwise, why not go back to lynching, where the victim takes quite time to die?

 

[Liar]

What?

Of course not Liar.

I have said it before, that we shouldn't have two sides. One side viewed as caring only about the victims.

And another side viewed as caring about only the peoples accused of killing the victims.

An Anti-death side would care about both, try desperately to stop the death penalty, and try just as desperately to stop peoples from deserving it.

Finding a way to stop the killing, all killing. That would be meeting in the middle, something that almost everyone would support, or at least I would.

Thing is...we're already there.

No, not "there" as in that there are no killings, but "there" as in there's an anti-death side. We're all (or at least most of us) on the anti-death side. Because most death penalty supporters don't WANT to kill criminals, but they feel that they have no other option. And death penalty opposers think that the supporters are wrong about that. That's the only difference. Everuybody (everybody sane, that is) would agree that it would be better if there were no severe crimes. No rapes, no murder. Or at least, since no crime is virtually impossible, to make it as rare as possible.

And again, here the sides differ on how to achieve that. And at what cost. You could probably reduce crime at the cost of personal liberty, with surveillance cameras in every home and heavily armed police on every street corner. but really, is it worth it?

 

[R. Richard]

Let's try to look at the whole issue, not just part of the issue.

Someone commits a capital crime. He/She is sentenced to death. Some support the death sentence, others oppose the death sentence. The only alternative suggestion I have read is life imprisonment, without parole.

Charles Manson is serving "life without parole." He comes up for parole hearings on a regular basis. Since he is serving "life without parole," how can he come up for parole hearings? Well, it seems a California judge decided that "life without parole" didn't really mean life without parole. After a certain number of years in jail, anyone would have a parole hearing. Of course, freeing Charles Manson would have a positive side, he is able to gather restless, drifting youth and infuse them with a purpose in life.

If you take a person and lock them away in a federal penitentiary for a number of years, they change. Either they become a sex slave to another inmate or they become a predator, probably keeping at least one sex slave. Then, a mistake is discovered in the trial that led to their conviction and they are freed. As soon as they exit the penitentiary, they immediately revert to a kind, gentle member of society once again and the mistake is erased. Sure they do!

 

[Lisa Denton]

Thing is...we're already there.

No, not "there" as in that there are no killings, but "there" as in there's an anti-death side. We're all (or at least most of us) on the anti-death side. Because most death penalty supporters don't WANT to kill criminals, but they feel that they have no other option. And death penalty opposers think that the supporters are wrong about that. That's the only difference. Everuybody (everybody sane, that is) would agree that it would be better if there were no severe crimes. No rapes, no murder. Or at least, since no crime is virtually impossible, to make it as rare as possible.

And again, here the sides differ on how to achieve that. And at what cost. You could probably reduce crime at the cost of personal liberty, with surveillance cameras in every home and heavily armed police on every street corner. but really, is it worth it?

No and yes, I think we should have heavily armed police. In most major cities the PD has a small gang unit, it should be a big gang unit armed with AK-47's and tanks and shit, maybe call in the USAF for some air support.

Small cities around mine are already funding survielance cameras on every street corner, thats mostly traffic crap but I agree with the idea and can see it branching out and cameras in all public areas, and maybe spaced along every street. Lil cams are cheap, I got one for 10 bucks for my computer

This all started from that botched execution in florida, I don't know why CA suspended executions after it, maybe Arnold and Jeb spend time bonding in the everglades or something.

They said the guy took 40 minutes to die, which was twice as long as usual, but there was no mention of how long his victim took to die.

The story I read also said Florida stopped the electric chairs after a couple guys heads caught on fire. Which might be visually pleasing and/or a sign from god for the victims family, but is a fire hazard and probably not a humane way to execute someone.

Most peoples agree there is some times when the death penalty is deserved, and should be used.

Maybe it should be used in only the extreme cases. Mass murders, child/rape/torture/murder and stuff.

I dunno.

I just wish we could find a way to stop the person from killing, and since I thing wanting to murder is sick, maybe help the would be killer instead of executing him.

A win, win solution. But yea, not very possible.

Just My Opinion.

 

[only_more_so]

According to this, California is going to be suspending executions, for fear some bloodthirsty killer/rapist might suffer a few minutes of discomfort. I honestly believe we should go back to public hangings. That was the method used when the Bill of Rights was written, and it was constitutional then, so it would still be constitutional.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061216/ap_on_re_us/executions_suspended

Anybody with an ounce of sense knows that injunction against cruel and unusual punishment meant things like burning at the stake or pressing to death or hanging in irons or drawing and quartering or the other things that used to be done to amuse the kings and emperors of Europe.

People put up with more pain getting tattoos.

Actually, the irony of suggesting hanging is that it is actually one of the most humane means of execution when done properly. There is a very brief fall, the neck snaps and the person is dead. The guillotine is another example of a very quick means of killing a person. Unfortunately it is rather messy.

 

[Dr_Strabismus]

Actually, the irony of suggesting hanging is that it is actually one of the most humane means of execution when done properly. There is a very brief fall, the neck snaps and the person is dead. The guillotine is another example of a very quick means of killing a person. Unfortunately it is rather messy.

Hanging is messy too, because the hangee shits himself, to the great mirth of the Tyburn crowde.