Too fat to be executed

[Boxlicker101]

have so little appeal to the advocates of c p.

it's quite easy to dispatch mr. cooey. first have him eat some anti nausea pills. then have him eat some mashed potatoes with about 50 seconal capsules in them.

i don't suppose that would satisfy box; he wants a bit more fun and drama in killing the "mad dog."

Actually, I would prefer public hanging, and the death penalty applied for only the most heinous crimes. I would prefer that all juries were faced with a series of possible verdicts, and that one of them would be "capital murder". A conviction of capital murder would mean a sentence of death by public hanging, and the judge would pronounce it immediately, because that would be the only legal sentence.

And a person who rapes and tortures his victims before killing them would be one of those who would face such a penalty. The verdict would be 100% up to the jury.

 

[GabrielDaemon]

So much has been, and is continuously, made about the legality and morality of capital punishment. The majority of the arguments are philosophical in nature, and philosophy is all about exercise, not execution.

Pun fully intended, in this case.

As Starr pointed out, the basic issue in this case is whether or not Cooey's argument about being 'too fat' to be executed through standard means holds any water. If a vein cannot be sufficiently found through which to administer the poison that will kill him, should he still be killed?

The answer is complex. On what grounds would someone justify persuing the execution of Cooey? Judicial authority? State-sponsored righteousness? Upholding the law? Revenge?

Cases like this are always complex, and always raise numerous questions which invariably rouse the ire of those watching closely. When it comes to the taking of a human life, things get more than a little dicey. Even the most infinitesimal of details comes into question, in an effort to balance all views and philosophies in favor of one end (death) or another (life).

If only all deaths could be so meticulously weighed and measured before they happen.

Humans, by nature, are A) violent, and B) basic. "You hurt me, so I will hurt you." "You killed someone wrongfully, so I will kill you." That's how the majority of people think, from what I've witnessed. The ancient adage of an eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth grew out of the basic human doctrine of exacting just revenge for a crime. It is the interpretation of that basic sense of law of righteousness that is so carefully and tenaciously and sometimes absurdly broken down, point by point, until the original reason is forgotten.

There are many who do not feel that capital punishment is necessary, legal, and/or moral. Wonderful. Kudos for them for thinking along a higher plane of thought. Congratulations for being in the minority. But I sincerely doubt any arguments in Cooey's behalf will avail him. The basic and violent nature of humanity pushes too hard for his execution, and they will most likely win, excessive fat or no.

It doesn't even matter anymore that his victims are less likely to be Googled than he is. He's just the latest poster boy in a legal/media flame war that has been going on for decades. There is less at stake in his life than in those who advocate either his execution or stay of such. After he's gone, there will be someone else, and very few will remember Cooey's name.

For the record, I stand by the court order to kill Cooey. I refrain from the stoic term of 'execution' in this particular instance on purpose. This man is to be killed. Call it state-sponsored murder if you wish. One person's murder is another's justifiable punishment and revenge. All such factors are considered when a verdict of execution is upheld.

As you may already know, or have guessed, I am in favor of the death penalty. Big surprise. At times, I think of it as a civilized application of Darwinian logic; others, as a traditional meteing of justice. It is not perfect, and never could be. Certainly, there are those who have been convicted wrongly and placed on death row. Some were saved from execution (though I wonder to the quality of life they may lead after coming home), others were tragically killed.

But then there is the other side of the coin, probably not as flipped nor considered often: those who have committed murder and were nearly executed, only to be saved due to a judicial or bureaucratic mix-up. Let loose as free men or women, to potentially be allowed to commit cimilar crimes once again.

As I said, the answer to capital punishment is complex. So many variables.

But should Mr. Richard Cooey be executed, even if, through virtue of his obesity, he cannot be killed by standard means?

Hmm. He was convicted in a court of law. A dozen men and women all agreed that he should pay for his crimes with his life. Persons selected from the populace to represent the society in which Cooey and his victims lived.

Unequivocally, I say yes. And if a needle won't do it, then give him a few sleeping pills and send in a Marshall with a sidearm. Truly, he'll never feel a thing.

Now, how humane is that?

 

[cloudy]

Exodus 20:13; Deuteronomy 5:17: Thou shall not kill. (the sixth commandment).

Moreover, two wrongs have never made a right.

 

[rgraham666]

Trust a demon to know all about evil.

So, as a supporter of capital punishment, what are your thoughts on the execution of people innocent of the crime they are executed for? How do you feel in such cases?

Do you feel joy that someone has died? Do you feel shame that it was an unnecessary death? Or do you just shrug saying, "You can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs."?

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

PURE

Murderers appeal to lawyers on the make. If they can cut a monster loose it improves their income prospects as defense attorneys. So they like inventing wacky theories and spinning evidence and judge shopping. And there are plenty of judges who believe most criminals are lost souls in need of TLC rather than punishment.

We had a lost soul carve up 7 victims here almost 20 years ago. He was in and out of prisons in his home state, then came to Florida. He stalked his victims (followed them home from WAL-MART), tied them up, then butchered them with a large knife.

Society has an obligation to its members to protect them from men like this guy, and the lawyers who serve them.

 

[_man_]

Having witnessed an execution (a judicial beheading, when I lived in Saudi Arabia) I can say that public executions probably have an impact on the people that actually see them.

As for hanging, it is still on the books in a few states - NH and Washington State, but I think the last hanging in the US was in 1996.

However, hanging really obese people can be a problem - several cases of accidental decapitation have occured. That was the case in Arizona, which is why the then adopted lethal gas.

In the particular case - I agree with one of the first posters - a single pistol shot to the back of the head would take care things with a minimum of fuss.

 

[GabrielDaemon]

Exodus 20:13; Deuteronomy 5:17: Thou shall not kill. (the sixth commandment).

Moreover, two wrongs have never made a right.

My understanding is that the original intent is that "thou shalt not kill unjustly." If the simple act of killing was a sin, then God him/herself would be placed on trial.

Semantics.

Trust a demon to know all about evil.

So, as a supporter of capital punishment, what are your thoughts on the execution of people innocent of the crime they are executed for? How do you feel in such cases?

Do you feel joy that someone has died? Do you feel shame that it was an unnecessary death? Or do you just shrug saying, "You can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs."?

It's an easy thing to say, "You can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs." It's also an easy thing to lump someone into an all-or-nothing school of thought concerning the application of corporal punishment. As I have already said, it's a complex issue.

Do I feel joy when someone has died? The immediate answer is, "no." But then, it might depend on the person. I doubt even you would cry if you witnessed the execution of Hitler, or Stalin. But their evils have been backed by the weight of history. A luxury most current court cases cannot afford.

So we are left with making the best judgement with the most accurate evidence at hand. It is, as I said, a complex issue. You make a decision based upon what you know, or think you know. In such cases, the courts are little more enlightened than the common man. They only have the advantage of details.

Don't ask me for general responses to a particular case. Don't use me for a half-handed attempt to exercise your own righteousness. Ask me a for a specific stance on a specific case, and I'll give it to you, as I have. I'm only one man; I can only give one opinion and one vote.

 

[rgraham666]

http://bestsmileys.com/lol/2.gif

I was asking those questions honestly, not as a attempt to show how 'righteous' I am. I have no use for righteousness as it's been nothing less than a source of endless misery in this world. Which is one of the reasons I don't like capital punishment. Far too many of its supporters wallow in their 'righteousness'.

But I'm guessing from your answer to my questions that you're cool with executing innocent people.

Fine. It's a free country. I don't share your opinion.

 

[starrkers]

http://bestsmileys.com/lol/2.gif

I was asking those questions honestly, not as a attempt to show how 'righteous' I am. I have no use for righteousness as it's been nothing less than a source of endless misery in this world. Which is one of the reasons I don't like capital punishment. Far too many of its supporters wallow in their 'righteousness'.

But I'm guessing from your answer to my questions that you're cool with executing innocent people.

Fine. It's a free country. I don't share your opinion.

That's an ugly comment and one I would've thought was beneath you.

Live and learn, I guess.

 

[keeblercrumb]

Dreams of Polina

That's an ugly comment and one I would've thought was beneath you.

Live and learn, I guess.

I don't think it was particularly "ugly"..... I appreciate that Gab was seeking not to respond to the " break a few eggs" concept, but that was exactly Rob's point, I would assume... His failure to answer the question directly, basically boiled down to that.....

It is certainly one of the principal arguements against the death penalty, it is kind of hard to say "whoops.... we fucked up.... you are innocent"...

And as Rob said.... If you are willing to accept that risk... "killing innocent people occasionally" in order to maintain the presumed deterence of a death penalty.. THAT is an opinion..... One that I also do not share.

-KC

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

KEEBLER

I'm wondering if you and Rob are too fat-headed to be executed.

 

[oggbashan]

I find it difficult to understand the concept of Death Row and the endless appeals.

When we had capital punishment in the UK, the death sentence was carried out promptly and the appeal process took days or weeks at the most.

Keeping a convicted person on Death Row for years seems more inhumane than prompt execution.

If there was doubt about the convicted person's guilt the death penalty was usually commuted to life imprisonment.

Our system made a few well-publicised mistakes.

The death penalty is now extinct in the UK. Even the remaining exceptions - arson in a Royal Dockyard and High Treason - do not now have the death penalty.

I think that if the legal system includes execution then that sentence should be carried out expeditiously.

Og

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

OGG

Part of the solution is competent legal defense, ethical prosecution, and adjudication that adheres to the law.

Another part of the solution is realistic penalties and restitution.

And the final part of the solution is stiff professional penalties if the lawyer (defense, prosecution, judge) is incompetent.

 

[Boxlicker101]

I find it difficult to understand the concept of Death Row and the endless appeals.

When we had capital punishment in the UK, the death sentence was carried out promptly and the appeal process took days or weeks at the most.

Keeping a convicted person on Death Row for years seems more inhumane than prompt execution.

If there was doubt about the convicted person's guilt the death penalty was usually commuted to life imprisonment.

Our system made a few well-publicised mistakes.

The death penalty is now extinct in the UK. Even the remaining exceptions - arson in a Royal Dockyard and High Treason - do not now have the death penalty.

I think that if the legal system includes execution then that sentence should be carried out expeditiously.

Og

The USA used to do pretty much the same thing. Here is a link to info on someody who got what he had coming. This was about 50 years ago. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Starkweather

Probably the first person who had a long stay on Death Row was Caryl Chessman, who went to the California gas chamber for rape. I don't know why there were so many delays in his case. As JBJ said, since then, lawyers have made up ideas claiming that their clients shouldn't be put to death. Usually, their claims have no virtue whatsoever, but there are always some bleeding heart judges who will delay justice until that fact can be pointed out. A part of the problem was the Rose Bird court, who tried to coddle all the criminals they could.

Most ctizens are absolutely disgusted with the whole charade. Richard Allen Davis abducted and murdered 12 year old Poly Klaas and was sentenced to death. There is no question at all as to his guilt, but it will take twenty years or more for the sentence to be carried out. This is ridiculous. I really wish the state supremes or somebody like that would develop some balls and clesr out Death Row by carrying out the sentences.

 

[GabrielDaemon]

http://bestsmileys.com/lol/2.gif

I was asking those questions honestly, not as a attempt to show how 'righteous' I am. I have no use for righteousness as it's been nothing less than a source of endless misery in this world. Which is one of the reasons I don't like capital punishment. Far too many of its supporters wallow in their 'righteousness'.

But I'm guessing from your answer to my questions that you're cool with executing innocent people.

Fine. It's a free country. I don't share your opinion.

Nor would I expect you to.

Whenever it comes to the subject of the death penalty, passions are aroused. And righteousness always plays a factor. You can't claim to be any less righteous than I am with your position on the issue, regardless of your claim otherwise. You think you're right; so do I. At least we can disagree civilly.

Am I 'cool with executing innocent people?' That's a loaded question, but then, it was meant to be. No, of course I am not 'cool' with it. I might ask, instead, if you can accept a convicted murderer being turned back out on the streets after, say, the third or fourth offense. Or perhaps you would rather continue to pay for his incarceration, health care, food and free cable out of your tax dollars for the next few decades.

There can be, and will never be, a clear and cut answer to any support of either side. I'll never be able to provide an answer in support of my position on the death penalty that satisfies you, or anyone else who is firmly against capital punishment. All I want to do is state my case, which I have done.

 

[GabrielDaemon]

I don't think it was particularly "ugly"..... I appreciate that Gab was seeking not to respond to the " break a few eggs" concept, but that was exactly Rob's point, I would assume... His failure to answer the question directly, basically boiled down to that.....

There's the problem, though . . . answering a complex question 'directly.' Can't be done. I support the death peanlty, yes. Do I support killing innocents? no. Do I accept that mistakes will be made? yes.

I can only leave it at that.

 

[Elianna]

Do I wade through this? Sure, why not.

For me the answer to whether or not I believe in the death penalty comes to this test:

If someone came into my house and I knew he/she was going to rape and murder my family, would I blow his fucking head off before he could? You betcha!

I think deep down if you think you could pull the trigger to save your family, and you feel the aching in your heart even thinking about it, you've considered the death penalty more realistically than you ever will. If you were the parents of these two girls... what would you have chosen?

The problem: it's after the fact. They've already killed. We couldn't save the girls by blowing off this guy's head off first, and so now... we wonder; are we any better than he is?

Could I pull the trigger if he just sat before me... I don't know. It wasn't my kid, or my family. But the thought that I wouldn't hesitate to turn him into Swiss cheese if he confronted me at my door with evil intent makes me think about it.

What's the difference between killing him at my door and killing him in prison? It's still death, isn't it?

 

[keeblercrumb]

Dreams of Polina

Nor would I expect you to.

...... I might ask, instead, if you can accept a convicted murderer being turned back out on the streets after, say, the third or fourth offense. Or perhaps you would rather continue to pay for his incarceration, health care, food and free cable out of your tax dollars for the next few decades....

.

Fair point, Gab.... and a good post. I would answer, for myself only, that my unqualified repsonse to your hypothetical.... Yes.. to either question, certainly prefering the latter.....

Looking back and around the world now, for that matter, it is certainly possible to have a system which guarantees the punishment of the guilty...
THAT has never been a particularly tough nut to crack in general.

Just arrest a whole bunch of suspects and shoot them all.... That sounds facetious, but there have been governements which have adopted that strategy..... to one degree or another..

The bit that has always been a hang-up for us resides around the "protection of the innocent" which has historically and constitutionally been the priority for OUR system of justice.

The problem, as noted above, with the Death Penalty is that there is simply no recourse for any subsequent determination of innocence.

My basic objection to "capital punishment", however, is that I think it is not only NOT a deterrent, I think it both de-sensitizes our society to killing AND actually establishes murder as an acceptable and rational response to a perceived injustice. Both of these result in an increased propensity for lethal violence in a given society.

Tho not without exception,this is supported by the observation that the highest rates of murder and other violent crime typically occur in those developed nations with a death penalty. If revenge is the ONLY justification, however, then this lack of any effective deterence is irrelevent.

I would prefer we, as a society, see "murder" as a severe mental illness that should deserve our pity as well as the isolation of the "guilty" individual from the rest of us. Sort of the pychological equivalent of a highly contagious and uncurable form of leprosy, if you will.

Having said all that... I suppose I should be happy with any reason for NOT executing some apparent sick fuck as is the subject of this thread. But the "too fat" one seems a far stretch..... at least let the appeal be on the real issues concerning the death penalty.

Anyway..... good post...

-KC

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

KEEBLER

Death is always a deterrent. If I hang you, there's about a 95% level of confidence that you wont murder anyone, ever again.

If I swat a mosquito and kill his ass, it wont stop his colleagues from biting me.

If I vaccinate my dogs from rabies it doesnt stop other dogs getting the disease.

No. But executing killers does reduce the problem a smidgen.

 

[AphroditeReborn]

The Bible also says something about "an eye for an eye"..... not that I've read it recently

 

[keeblercrumb]

Dreams of Polina

JBJ

Thanks for another piece of silliness.... I am impressed by the fact you stretched your post to four lines... even if the logic fell apart on the second sentence.

Maybe the anti-poo flinging drugs are helping..... but up the dosage a little.

-KC

 

[keeblercrumb]

Dreams of Polina

The Bible also says something about "an eye for an eye"..... not that I've read it recently

Nor have I.... but luckily for us both, the ten commandments are not the same as the bill of rights...

I always had trouble with that thing about not coveting my neighbor's ass..... but My God, what an ass that woman had!



-KC

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

KEEBLER

Some people need killin.

The trick is to hang the right people. And this will happen when lawyers/cops/jurors pay a penalty for getting it wrong.

 

[rgraham666]

Well, Gabe. You may regard this as complex but I do not. The basis is very simple.

That is, knowing how fallible human beings are, how should an individual handle their responsibility when the society of which they are a part executes someone for a crime they did not commit?

Myself? I feel guilt and horror. Executing an innocent person makes me culpable of first degree murder. I support the society I live in and, by my standards, that means I assume some responsibility for society's actions.

I'd rather not be guilty of murder.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Society also rewards people with honors and money they dont deserve.

The cops get the right guy 80% of the time, and 98% of the time the right guy gets hanged.

What's more, individuals always have the option to murder, and eliminating the death penalty is a license for them to do more killing inside prison.