Heh, this is the standard Jophiel response. Note that he doesn't offer an opinion, nor does he explain how he came to the position which nearly always (amazingly) stands square with whatever the law states. His posts contain no fire, no passion, just the dry, flavorless recitation of whatever the prevaling legal position of the era. When he does disagree with someone it's done in a short sentence that offers nothing more than a varient of, "Well, hell.. if that's your argument, you MUST be right! :smiley face:" attempting to disguise an accountant's demeanor and fastidiousness for what is supposed to pass for independent thought. It's as if when asked to come up with his own reasoning beyond what the courts publish he shrugs with his arms out from his sides, palms up in supplication, implying to you "what else is there to think?" A drone.
My observation is this is the basis for the preponderence of his threads when arguing with gbaji or myself. There is no conviction, just... an arid recitation of whatever cites he can scour from the web or a lightly scoffing tone that someone could dare to think the liberal group-think might be wrong. In another culture he'd be the consumate salaryman, sacrificing any independent thought to whatever cause his boss (who in this case is the courts) champions.
Don't misunderstand me, Jo, I'm not in any way peeved here. It just struck me this afternoon while reading your responses that these encapsulated the entireity of your posting existence on Allakhazam. Mind you, I think it's obvious you have a sizable intellect, yet I am unable to recall any specific instance where you displayed any passion in wielding that intellect. The same can't be said of anybody else here on this board-- nor any other board I frequent.
Meh. To the discussion at large, the medical sources that you say claim death row inmates feel pain during the lethal injection, I'd offer that in my experience (no cites, bar graphs, charts or lawyer's briefs on what constitutes cruel pain here, just plain ol' anecdotal evidence) medical practitioners generally assume that a patient-- any patient --feels discomfort by definition simply because they are under his care and are thus needing something to deaden the pain, pardon the pun. My nurses and flight paramedics are a living example of this. Upon treating a patient, regardless of the circumstances, one of the first questions is, "Are you feeling any pain or discomfort?" In other words, there is an expectation that pain attenuation is the first issue to be addressed.
And this attitude is brought into the death chamber where they strap the con to the table. Regardless of the crime or outside of any discussion about the legality or definition of what cruel and unusual punishment is, I believe there is a very basic bias that medical practioners bring into the equation that supercedes any issues of actual pain.
A more basic question should be does the death penalty automatically mean that departing this mortal coil should be a pain-free experience? After all, there is cruel and then there is cruel. And regardless your stance on the moral rightness or wrongness of capital punishment, I think you'd agree that in terms of sheer unpleasentness or discomfort, taking a massive overdose of painkillers is, at it's heart, not a bad way to go if you had to choose. And considering how many here on this board regularly (ab)use illegal chemicals and narcotics, I'd be surprised if there were any who disagreed.
So, does the Constitution describe what is cruel and unusual? No, that is left to the lawyers and politicos who ostensibly place into law what we as a people believe is proper. But what was once "normal" punishment, such as keel hauling-- a common disciplinary action taken against serious offenders in our and other's navies --for example, would be considered outrageous today. Yet on the other end of the spectrum, we have people such as PETA who believe catching fish with a hook is wildly painful and cruel. So, by way of comparison, a little poke with a needle, the warm rush of anesthesia, a drifting off into unconsciousness and subsequent stopping of the heart is utterly mild and gentle compared to what was administered during the Framer's day.
That is what makes an article like that which I posted so ridiculous. And that's my opinion, Jophiel. Something I firmly and passionitely believe in. But hey, maybe you aren't given to demonstrative displays of emotion in life or on a message board. Whatever. But my observation still stands: you prefer to cloak yourself with other's opinions rather than risk telling us your own.
Totem