Supremem Court Divided Over Lethal Injections

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-01-06-3213115505_x.htm

I think we need a constitutional amendment to define "cruel and unusual." As far as I'm concerned, as long as the punishment doesn't exceed the crime in its harshness, it's not cruel or unusual.

TICG,

We just saw a man spend most of his life in prison for supposedly raping a child, only to find out that DNA evidence proved without a doubt that it was not him. Had he killed the child, he'd be dead now instead of a free, exonerated man thanks to the death penalty in Texas. This is EXACTLY why the death penalty needs to be abolished. You can't take back killing someone. You can, however, free an innocent man from prison while he is serving a life sentence.

This made me LOLoad a little bit... I get what you were trying to say, but still it made me chuckle a bit... carry on!

That' a great point! 20 years ago the DP might not have been sucha great thing. But in this day and age, with DNA evidence, it can prove just the opposite of what you say - without a doubt it IS someone!

No shock here, but I am all for the death penalty, and I could care less if it hurts a bit. These people are on death row for a reason and some pain at the end is not a bad thing.

They are indeed on death row for a reason. However, a man was in prison for most of his life for a reason too. They thought he did something terrible, and a court convicted him. Strangely enough, when they actually checked EVIDENCE, they found out he was innocent and set him free. Do you or anyone you personally know have the ability to overturn and reverse a death sentence?

Unfortunately, we live in a nation where many people can afford lawyers who can overcome damning DNA evidence, and others cannot afford an attorney who will even bother to check the box marked not-guilty. Until that changes, you cannot be sure that everything is being done to prevent innocent men from going to jail, or worse yet, being executed. Any irreversible punishment is unjust.

Can you reverse the 20 years this man spent in prison? That is irreversible too, unless someone figures out time travel.

A figure in the tens of millions might do it for me...

Why do they sterilize the needle used for lethal injection and the injection site?

This is where DNA is going to be helpful in the future, it is becoming a faster less expensive way of proving guilt or innocence

In spite of the fact that you are a Bengals fan (Steeler fan here), I could not agree with you more. When I was in law school, one of my professors was involved in something called the Innocence Project where attorneys volunteered their time to help convicted criminals on death row who were unjustly found guilty. These types of cases are not unusual, there are hundreds of them. One cannot reclaim their time in jail, but they can start over. Once we kill someone, there is no coming back.

No, you can't. HOWEVER, you can give them the ability to go out and live the rest of their life.

OK, no DP at all, regardless of situation?

What if the news captures on video, some idiot unloading his gun at the mall and killing a number of people?

Live on national TV, no questions, no possiblities he didn't do it. And he's pledged to kill others either in prison or if he ever gets out.

Still no DP?

As far as I am concerned, there should be no punishment that cannot be reversed or overturned.

So, no, I don't care if the news has him on video and he says he did it and will do it again. If he's a danger to others, lock him up in solitary confinement for the duration of his life. Not only can you release him if you later find out that he was forced to do it while his wife was at gunpoint off camera, but you also save money by keeping the man in jail the rest of his life versus executing him.

HOWEVER, going out on a limb, I am going to say that those 20 years in prison are irreversible too. So if you standard is the fact that death is irreversible and therefore an unjust punishment, time is irreversible and therefore unjust because some of the people we send to prison may or may not be guilty.

You can't give time back, but you CAN give him the ability to live the rest of his life a free man. What is so hard for you to understand the difference between that and making someone dead?

I know why it is so hard for you to understand what I am saying so I won't ask you the question.

You stated that death is irreversible therefore, the death penalty is unjust. I am arguing that all punsishments are irreversible and if that is how to justify whether a punishment is just, all punishments would be unjust.

Stick to arguing about life's sanctity. Gives you the moral highground and you can stay away from tricky things like logic and syllogisms.

You're really pathetic if you can't understand that by irreversible, I mean you can't do anything to change the punishment if it is found to be unjust. You're even sadder because I'm sure you're getting some sick joy out of trying to be a pain in my butt, and all it is doing is making you look like a fool. You can't give someone the time they did in prison back, but you can free them. It's that simple.

We know everything is that simple to you. As to who is pathetic, I will leave that for other to decide and ultimately, the only One who can really judge.

Have a wonderful day!

stop arguing over semantics and get back to work. you know very well the proposition that he is arguing doesn't turn on the word "irreversible".

Read Grisham's "The Innocent Man"

Oh great Ron. I see you are done with finals and have nothing better to do.

You really want to step in and try to argue using logic.

And as far as getting back to work, do you think if I wasn't at work (like you), I would have nothing better to do than be on this site?

Trivia question... # of documented of innocent people being actually executed in this country,. (hint: rhymes w/ "hero"). DNA evidence makes it even more unlikely.

False.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/3472872.html

I believe, in the 1800s in Maine we hanged an innocent man...badly. Shortly thereafter DP was eliminated in Maine, but I can't find any documented info on this.

Bzzz wrong answer. There have been innocent people executed. Do a quick websearch for the Innocence Project and you'll find the correct number.

um.... here It is often claimed that 23 innocents have been executed in the US since 1900. Nonsense. Even the authors of that "23 innocents executed" study proclaimed "We agree with our critics, we never proved those (23) executed to be innocent; we never claimed that we had." While no one would claim that an innocent has never been executed, there is no proof of an innocent executed in the US, at least since 1900.

I never said it never happened, I said there has never been a documented case (meaning proof). Suspicion by Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and Innocence Project does not constitute proof (except to Comp Guy and BF).

Would it be ok with everyone if I just stab myself in the eyes with a mechanical pencil rather than get involved in this argument?

No, you must get involved

Ok, I will revert back to the texas article. (btw, I support the DP)


http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/3472872.html

well at least the debate is not about the death penalty itself, but whether or not lethal injection is too painful. I think it is utah that still has a firing squad listed as one of their DP procedures, all states could just revert to that.(well those with the DP)

It's very difficult to get someone to continue the process of trying to prove their innocence after you've killed them. Even bringing an action on their behalf is difficult because courts usually won't hear cases if they consider them to be moot.

I dont really care if it is too painful. They are dying people - why should they go peacefully?

queen bee, but the constitution protects against cruel and unusual punishment. and they are trying to resolve this exact issue i believe.

you are right but what is the death penalty? As you can see many feel that alone is cruel and unusual punishment.

constitution shmonstitution... lets all just get blazed and sing kumbayah....

I would think some of the other forms would be more painful

maybe the form where we do to them what they did to their victim.. I am partial to that.

I think the firing squad is the ideal execution method -- it's cheap, simple, and should result in the quickest death (considering you have sharpshooters aiming at a stationary target at close range).

good question...
about as useful as:
what is death?
What is penalty?
What is cruel?
What is unusual?
what is an analgesic?
Why are rainbows good?

if only this utopia were true.

well, this is a matter of jurisprudence: the court has decided to solve a comparatively narrow issue rather than the whole kit and caboodle.

Momentary Thread Hijack...

If you've ever had a kid ask one of those questions, you should read "Father Knows Less Or: "Can I Cook My Sister?": One Dad's Quest to Answer His Son's Most Baffling Questions" by Wendell Jamieson

Is there a non-cruel way to end someone's life if not by lethal injection?

Sicilian hooker-applied death by constriction.

so you think this court is going to go beyond the scope of the actual issue at hand: the cruel and unusual nature of this particular method of death? sure it could happen, but what of this court's recent jurisprudence makes you think that?

I did not mention the court at all. I asked you.

Do I deserve death?

well if you didn't ask a question that was supposed have bearing on what the court does and was simply my opinion: no.

so to all that support the death penalty: Would you be the executioner? Imagine there is a handcuffed killer on the floor and he is begging for his life. Would you stab him to death? If so, you, my friend, are a murderer. If not, you don't really support the death penalty.

Uh, ok.

only if it was you...

That makes no sense

why not? if you support laws that kill someone, then by extension you are killing someone.

Because

1) why is there a handcuffed killer on the floor?

2) the death penalty does not involve stabbing - why are you forced to stab the person?

3) I'd rather eat the guy

1) the floor is a jail cell, handcuffs are the bars (death row)

2) this makes my scenario more powerful, more personal(because murder is), makes the murder more 'real', than just pushing a button.

3) let the killers stab him first, remember cruel and unusual punishment is illegal

Totally man...I'm with you...

Now pass the sweet doob this way

bbs - i thought ron mexico had that, not tb123....

Watch out DDD! It looks like you're getting passed around...and I'm not sure what they're doing with you

hey man... get that lighter away from me...
you're starting to scare me bbs

don't worry... I blow softly

sign me up