USA Death Penalty

[PureX]

It's becoming harder and harder for states with the death penalty to find both suppliers who are willing to sell euthanasia drugs to them and medical professionals who are willing to participate in an execution. Some of this comes down to ethics, some comes down to risk of legal liability.

They could walk out into the streets next to the prison and buy all the fentanyl they can carry. And the drug manufacturers have no issue with their drugs ending up there. In fact, some of them worked hard to make that happen. So they aren't fooling anyone pretending it's an ethical problem for them. And there is no liability involved in a legal execution.

There are some states that have decided to go full steam ahead with executions anyway, which has meant using untested methods and having unqualified people carry out the executions.

Those states don't even care if they got the right criminal. They just want to kill a "bad guy" and feel all smug and righteous about it.

 

[PureX]

Perhaps my wording was unclear.

In the view of Bentham, Jurors were less likely to find someone guilty if they believed the judge would sentence them to the death penalty than if the maximum punishment were a prison sentence.

Then they shouldn't have been accepted as a jurist.

 

[Secret Chief]

I see the electric chair and firing squad are being made options again in some states since the 25 or so global companies approved by the FDA have all stopped supplying the drugs. Texas seems to be buying stuff from a local gardening centre but is refusing to be more specific. (when the article was published)

"Texas, with the country's busiest death chamber, obtains its pentobarbital for lethal injections from a supplier the state identifies only as a licensed compounding pharmacy."
- Pfizer blocks use of its drugs for lethal injections

 

[Twilight Hue]

If someone is sentenced to death, it should be at the lowest expense of the government or make the family members pay for any expense beyond a single 45 caliper bullet.

I agree. Definitely more graphic , but death comes quickly with a skilled shot.

Not to mention a hell of a lot cheaper in taxpayers dollars, which is where I think all these other alternative methods somehow have to do more with profit and revenue then quickly and humanely putting a human monster down.

 

[Altfish]

Sure, lawyers are often better at finding loop holes

Sure.... there are errors in every system

Stop it. The US is the benchmark that most countries aspire too.

Loop holes = doubt.

Error = state murder

Most countries scrapped the barbaric system years ago; the UK ended it in 1964.

 

[metis]

There would be no Christianity without the death penalty.

So, it's all fine & dandy? Please clarify.

 

[McBell]

So, it's all fine & dandy? Please clarify.

If not for the death penalty, 2 billion plus people in the world would be without a deity.

 

[McBell]

Why is it so damn hard to kill a person efficiently and painlessly?

It has to be done humanely.
and ethically
and morally
and legally
and insurance has to cover it

thats a lot of hoops to jump through.

 

[metis]

If not for the death penalty, 2 billion plus people in the world would be without a deity.

If one believes Jesus was and is a deity, I guess.

 

[stvdv]

What strikes me as hypocrisy is that so many Christians are for the death penalty and yet Jesus not only talked about redemption but also said "Let he whom is without sin cast the first stone" when a woman was about to be stoned for prostitution.

There is a huge difference with this case and your Bible example.

The difference makes that there is no hypocrisy from Bible POV in this case

 

[metis]

There is a huge difference with this case and your Bible example.

The difference makes that there is no hypocrisy from Bible POV in this case

I fail to see your point. Are you saying that Jesus would likely condone capital punishment?

 

[libre]

Then they shouldn't have been accepted as a jurist.

I don't believe the legal system has the capacity to account for that sort of bias, given that it could be unconscious and if it were conscious it may well be something the prospective juror would not not disclose if it was a view they held openly.

There's no magical solution to jury nullification.

 

[stvdv]

I fail to see your point.

Stoning was about a woman who committed adultary. So, just having sex (desire). Who is without desire (sin). This was about being Judgmental. She did not harm others. And if you stone the woman, then stone all who have sex in this way.

The man in post #1: this was not about committing adultary. He killed someone

We should not compare killing with adultary when applying Jesus' words. Too different.

Are you saying that Jesus would likely condone capital punishment?

I don't know what Jesus would condone

 

[PureX]

I don't believe the legal system has the capacity to account for that sort of bias, given that it could be unconscious and if it were conscious it may well be something the prospective juror would not not disclose if it was a view they held openly.

There's no magical solution to jury nullification.

Yes, that is very true. It is an imperfect system. Good point.

 

[PureX]

It has to be done humanely.
and ethically
and morally
and legally
and insurance has to cover it

thats a lot of hoops to jump through.

"Ethically, morally, and legally" is all the same hoop. And that will have been decided by the time the mechanical issue comes up.

I understand the insurance issue if we have incompetent morons administering less that ideal drugs. But let's be honest, with a modicum of expertise and care the odds on an 'accidental survival' would be extremely slim. I think most insurers would take that bet under reasonable circumstances. Money is money, after all.

 

[Secret Chief]

He killed someone

He said he did not. Either way, he's been in prison for 20+ years. The jury recommended life imprisonment. (In the UK the jury don't make recommendations).

 

[metis]

Stoning was about a woman who committed adultary. So, just having sex (desire). Who is without desire (sin). This was about being Judgmental. She did not harm others. And if you stone the woman, then stone all who have sex in this way.

The man in post #1: this was not about committing adultary. He killed someone

We should not compare killing with adultary when applying Jesus' words. Too different.

I don't know what Jesus would condone

I'm getting mixed signals, so let me leave this with that I am opposed to capital punishment, and I think Jesus also was opposed to it even though it was allowed by Jewish Law. However, my opinion is not based on what Jesus said or didn't say, nor on Jewish Law.

 

[stvdv]

He said he did not

That was not relevant in my explanation about why a Christian is not hypocritical in this case

Of course it would be horrible if he is truly innocent. Although he admitted that he was there when the killing took place, and he did not say he was just passing by or so.

 

[Bthoth]

It's one of many reasons.



It's one of them.

So end justice, to save errors of a justice system?

 

[Bthoth]

My country has a lot of problems, but we mostly see the US as a template showing us what to avoid.

I am quite happy to live in a country that has abolished the death penalty and tightly controls guns. Our rates of murder and violent crime are significantly lower than in the US.

Which prison do you live in?