This is why we ignore layman's opinions on the death penaltyFollow

he did a bad thing he was put to death the familly probley just wants money for pain and suffering.

Edited, Dec 17th 2006 3:53am by Flixa

I'm with the Totem, if they don't want it to be painless find another way. Otherwise quit yer ********

That'd be a lot more convincing if his niece's thoughts and misuse of the word "literally" didn't come at the end of an article full of qualified medical opinions.Yeah. Fuck the Constitution.

I'm willing to bet that this criminal didn't extend the same 'no pain death' to the person he killed.

And?Oh, I see what you meant. Nevermind then.

I'll betcha you go around singing "Feelings" under your breath, don't you, FleaJo2? Cruel & unusual is entirely in the eye of the beholder. You, hopefully, don't go whining about how painful anesthesia is after surgury, do you? These guys are doped out of their skulls before anything lethal hits them. I hardly think their grimacing is anything more than gas from that burrito in their last meal or picking the meat out of their teeth with their tongues while they die.

Pul-lease. Constitution, constismooshtion. The thing was describing being drawn and quartered or flogged to death, not going nitey-nite to the soft caresses of barbituites.

Totem

I'm willing to bet that this criminal didn't extend the same 'no pain death' to the person he killed.

I'm with you. This is why guys that blow 2 year olds should be punished with blowjobs.

Rock solid logic.

Do you really think the person who's dieing cares about how they look after?

Capital punishment has nothing to do with the person being executed.

What would be really nice is if someone would start a religion where you don't get to go to Heaven if someone else kills you. That would make a much more fun constitutional debate.

Fuckin' framers of the Constitution. Buncha whiners, all of them.

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

As opposed to ad hominem attacks, some off-handed racist remarks and false claims of African ancestry as a tired gag? I guess we all do what we're best at

C'mon now. You linked to an entire article regarding doctors talking about the potential for extreme pain on the part of the now deceased, honed in one some comment in the last line of the article and that's that? Who the hell cares what the niece thinks? You can't even seriously say that the author of the article does for the one line attributed to her.The article you linked suggests that the pain-killers injected prior to the treatment had worn off and that the criminal was potentially in (perhaps) severe pain. I'm not qualified to make a judgement on whether this is true or not since I'm not a doctor. However, I do think that, absent any more qualified opinions, those in the article are a good place to start.Exactly. When something happens which potentially violates a citizen's Constitutional rights, it's worth questioning and not dismissing with half-assed remarks like "Gee, I bet he didn't care if his victims were hurt!". Our criminal legal code isn't based on "an eye for an eye" but on something supposedly more civilized. In this case, the medical reports would play a pivotal role in any discussion regarding how much pain he may have felt and whether or not it violated his civil liberties as laid out in the Bill of Rights.

Comments such as "Why not just use a shotgun then?" are just as pointless. Executions are conducted at the state level by the demands of the state legislature, so long as the state can abide by the Eighth Amendment. I would assume the state attempts to balance expedience and dignity as best as it can and "shotgun blast to the head" weighs too heavily towards the former and not the latter. Anyway, if you have a gripe regarding how executions in your state are carried out, go pen a letter to your state legislature.Not true. At the very moment, my heart is breaking under your slings and arrows. See? --->

As I said, the article would imply otherwise (although one of its principle experts is an admitted anti-capital punishment advocate) but I'm in no position to make an informed argument. I'd be more satisfied anyway to know that the arguments were being made before the courts and legislature instead of to me.Flea can attest that existance of an audience has never stopped me from singing in the shower.

Knew that one off the top of your head, did you?