If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Big Story)   NEWS: Attorney of death row inmate executed last week suspended and under investigation. FARK: Guards say attorney coached client to "make a show of his death"   (bigstory.ap.org) divider line 221
    More: Followup, death row, Ohio, convicts, OPD, The Columbus Dispatch, point guards  
•       •       •

8930 clicks; posted to Main » on 28 Jan 2014 at 12:22 PM (33 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



221 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-01-28 10:40:37 AM
You know, his defense attorneys weren't arguing that he didn't do it, just that the way they were killing him sucked and was painful.  If he actually did what they said, he raped and murdered a young, pregnant woman.  I have a fairly painless way to get rid of these people if that's the only thing that is bothering them.
 
2014-01-28 10:41:07 AM
Protected by attorney-client privilege, and in any case, "making a show of your death" as a way to protest capital punishment is protected political speech.
 
2014-01-28 10:51:08 AM

dittybopper: Protected by attorney-client privilege, and in any case, "making a show of your death" as a way to protest capital punishment is protected political speech.


The whole thing is hearsay anyways.
 
2014-01-28 10:53:43 AM

devildog123: You know, his defense attorneys weren't arguing that he didn't do it, just that the way they were killing him sucked and was painful.  If he actually did what they said, he raped and murdered a young, pregnant woman.  I have a fairly painless way to get rid of these people if that's the only thing that is bothering them.


I don't even particularly care if the way they killed him sucked and was painful, so long as it wasn't some egregiously drawn out torture session.

A few minutes of painful existence before you actually die?  No different than many heart attack victims.  Doesn't seem particularly cruel or unusual.
 
2014-01-28 11:00:04 AM

Theaetetus: dittybopper: Protected by attorney-client privilege, and in any case, "making a show of your death" as a way to protest capital punishment is protected political speech.

The whole thing is hearsay anyways.


Yep, and while it may fall under an exception, because in effect it was a "death bed" statement, it's still the statement of a person who had so little consideration of his fellow man that he raped and murdered a pregnant woman.

But even if every thing he said was completely true, I still think it would be protected, as it is "speech" intended to effect change to a matter of public policy.

First Amendment protects exaggeration.  Fark is proof of that.
 
2014-01-28 11:00:55 AM

Theaetetus: dittybopper: Protected by attorney-client privilege, and in any case, "making a show of your death" as a way to protest capital punishment is protected political speech.

The whole thing is hearsay anyways.


OT:  Kinda wish there were more cipher/code puzzles on Fark.  Maybe we should start something.
 
2014-01-28 11:08:55 AM
Attorney of death row inmate executed last week

That's a good start. What happened to the guy on death row?
 
2014-01-28 11:11:05 AM

Mugato: Attorney of death row inmate executed last week

That's a good start. What happened to the guy on death row?


Heh.
 
2014-01-28 11:17:11 AM

dittybopper: Theaetetus: dittybopper: Protected by attorney-client privilege, and in any case, "making a show of your death" as a way to protest capital punishment is protected political speech.

The whole thing is hearsay anyways.

Yep, and while it may fall under an exception, because in effect it was a "death bed" statement, it's still the statement of a person who had so little consideration of his fellow man that he raped and murdered a pregnant woman.


It was the day before, according to the article, so it wasn't imminent death.

Also, from TFA:
The Office of the Public Defender said Robert Lowe, one of the attorneys representing inmate Dennis McGuire, was back at work Monday after an internal review failed to substantiate the allegation.

So, Subby's headline is late.

But even if every thing he said was completely true, I still think it would be protected, as it is "speech" intended to effect change to a matter of public policy.
First Amendment protects exaggeration.  Fark is proof of that.


Sure, but it may be an ethics violation. He wouldn't be subject to criminal prosecution, but dismissal or sanctions? The bar for the Bar is lower.
 
2014-01-28 11:18:48 AM
"He wants me to put on this big show in front of my kids, all right when I'm dying!" McGuire is reported as having told one guard. "I ain't gonna do this. It's about me and my kids, not him and his cause!"

Sounds legit, prison guard.
 
2014-01-28 11:18:50 AM

dittybopper: Theaetetus: dittybopper: Protected by attorney-client privilege, and in any case, "making a show of your death" as a way to protest capital punishment is protected political speech.

The whole thing is hearsay anyways.

OT:  Kinda wish there were more cipher/code puzzles on Fark.  Maybe we should start something.


Agreed, but where do you find stuff to decipher that's fun?
 
2014-01-28 11:39:29 AM
I'm pretty sure this is ok.  Nothing to see here.
 
2014-01-28 11:51:04 AM

Theaetetus: dittybopper: Protected by attorney-client privilege, and in any case, "making a show of your death" as a way to protest capital punishment is protected political speech.

The whole thing is hearsay anyways.


Plus, even if this whole thing was true, we don't know how much was intentional theatrics and how much was actual writhing in pain.
 
2014-01-28 12:12:06 PM

RedPhoenix122: Theaetetus: dittybopper: Protected by attorney-client privilege, and in any case, "making a show of your death" as a way to protest capital punishment is protected political speech.

The whole thing is hearsay anyways.

Plus, even if this whole thing was true, we don't know how much was intentional theatrics and how much was actual writhing in pain.


That's what the pro-death penalty people would have us believe, yes. However, we  do know this: either it was actual writhing in pain, or the tranquilizer  failed such that he could do "intentional theatrics".
In other words, on the surface, it looks like this rebuts the people opposed to the death penalty... but in actuality, it only harms the argument that the drugs were effective at sedating him.
 
2014-01-28 12:16:12 PM

RedPhoenix122: Theaetetus: dittybopper: Protected by attorney-client privilege, and in any case, "making a show of your death" as a way to protest capital punishment is protected political speech.

The whole thing is hearsay anyways.

Plus, even if this whole thing was true, we don't know how much was intentional theatrics and how much was actual writhing in pain.


If he can put on a show while dying, he's damn good.
 
2014-01-28 12:23:01 PM
That was an episode of Boston Legal I believe.
 
2014-01-28 12:23:42 PM
Theaetetus:
That's what the pro-death penalty people would have us believe, yes. However, we  do know this: either it was actual writhing in pain, or the tranquilizer  failed such that he could do "intentional theatrics".
In other words, on the surface, it looks like this rebuts the people opposed to the death penalty... but in actuality, it only harms the argument that the drugs were effective at sedating him.


I'm anti-death penalty across the board, but let me tell you something:  I don't really care if it hurts.  10 minutes or so of pain, yeah whatever, not a huge deal.  The waiting, the endless appeals, the dates coming and sometimes going, that's FAR more torturous than a few minutes of discomfort and pain.  That and a whole host of other reasons I oppose it.  If we MUST have the death penalty, I think it should have an even higher burden of proof, only the clearly guilty beyond any shadow of a doubt should be taken to the gallows and hanged immediately after that guilt is determined.
 
2014-01-28 12:24:10 PM

dittybopper: Theaetetus: dittybopper: Protected by attorney-client privilege, and in any case, "making a show of your death" as a way to protest capital punishment is protected political speech.

The whole thing is hearsay anyways.

Yep, and while it may fall under an exception, because in effect it was a "death bed" statement, it's still the statement of a person who had so little consideration of his fellow man that he raped and murdered a pregnant woman.

But even if every thing he said was completely true, I still think it would be protected, as it is "speech" intended to effect change to a matter of public policy.

First Amendment protects exaggeration.  Fark is proof of that.


So if it was the inmate making that decision on his own, that would be an open and shut case.
Does the fact that it was the attorney's idea rather than the inmates make a difference, legally?  Could be used as abusing a position of power over him.  Though I don't know if there's technically anything wrong with that or not.

Let's go full tinfoil hat and assume the lawyer intentionally threw the case so he could get this guy onto death row to make his political statement.
 
2014-01-28 12:24:57 PM
Would it now be considered illegal to listen to an attorney and his client speak?

And so what if he made a show? That is NOT illegal.
But spying on an attorney and client is.
Once again, the man has put the wrong people in jail.
 
2014-01-28 12:26:08 PM
Bad luck death row inmate: don't agree with your attorney to put on a drawn out show of your death... Has a drawn out death.
 
2014-01-28 12:26:18 PM
Doesn't lethal injection render the person unconscious very early in the process?
 
2014-01-28 12:27:39 PM

dittybopper: Protected by attorney-client privilege, and in any case, "making a show of your death" as a way to protest capital punishment is protected political speech.


It's not if he voluntarily told people. The attorney has to protect the privilege, but the client is under no such orders. Sort of like my therapist/doctors can't go talking about me, but I can repeat the whole session/appointment word for word to my friend if I am so inclined. They have to keep my privacy, but if I make it common knowledge or tell people what happened repeatedly, it changes things a bit.

What really comes into play here, I think,  is it's hearsay, since there is no way a dead man can confirm or deny that he actually said it.
 
2014-01-28 12:27:41 PM
"He wants me to put on this big show in front of my kids, all right when I'm dying!" McGuire is reported as having told one guard. "I ain't gonna do this. It's about me and my kids, not him and his cause!"

It's not hearsay when three guards corroborate their lies...oops, their statements.
 
2014-01-28 12:28:08 PM

Mugato: Attorney of death row inmate executed last week

That's a good start. What happened to the guy on death row?


*shakes tiny fist*

came to say this...good show.
 
2014-01-28 12:28:31 PM
this is so ridiculous. I wouldn't care what anyone told me before hand. when they finally strap me down, I'm sure as hell not going to worry about putting on a show for anyone.
I think at that moment it really is "all about you"
 
2014-01-28 12:28:39 PM
Ending someone's life should look like a peaceful drifting off to sleep? Who is served by maintaining the appearance of peacefulness?
 
2014-01-28 12:29:15 PM

generallyso: Doesn't lethal injection render the person unconscious very early in the process?


Yeah if it was even possible for the guy to follow instructions then wouldn't that kind of be admitting that the drug cocktail wasn't appropriate?
 
2014-01-28 12:30:06 PM

nekom: Theaetetus:
That's what the pro-death penalty people would have us believe, yes. However, we  do know this: either it was actual writhing in pain, or the tranquilizer  failed such that he could do "intentional theatrics".
In other words, on the surface, it looks like this rebuts the people opposed to the death penalty... but in actuality, it only harms the argument that the drugs were effective at sedating him.

I'm anti-death penalty across the board, but let me tell you something:  I don't really care if it hurts.  10 minutes or so of pain, yeah whatever, not a huge deal.  The waiting, the endless appeals, the dates coming and sometimes going, that's FAR more torturous than a few minutes of discomfort and pain.  That and a whole host of other reasons I oppose it.  If we MUST have the death penalty, I think it should have an even higher burden of proof, only the clearly guilty beyond any shadow of a doubt should be taken to the gallows and hanged immediately after that guilt is determined.


Yeah, that's reasonable, and we'll let the trial court say whether you're "guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" or "guilty beyond any shadow of a doubt." I'm sure though that it really would be a higher burden of proof, even though the former would result in an immediate appeal and possible reversal, and the latter has no appeal and immediate death. Why, probably no more than 99% of defendants would be found "guilty beyond any shadow of a doubt".
 
2014-01-28 12:30:08 PM
Meh. Easy solutions abound. If we're absolutely, positively sure a guy raped and murdered someone, knock him out with an injection and shoot him a lot. Big whoop.
 
2014-01-28 12:30:20 PM
I keep asking this and not getting an answer.  When you take your pet to the vet it takes about 15 seconds and they die with a smile and don't seem uncomfortable at all.  It took this dude 20 minutes+ to suffocate.  What are they teaching at vet school that these folks are ignoring?
 
2014-01-28 12:31:14 PM

serpent_sky: dittybopper: Protected by attorney-client privilege, and in any case, "making a show of your death" as a way to protest capital punishment is protected political speech.

It's not if he voluntarily told people. The attorney has to protect the privilege, but the client is under no such orders. Sort of like my therapist/doctors can't go talking about me, but I can repeat the whole session/appointment word for word to my friend if I am so inclined. They have to keep my privacy, but if I make it common knowledge or tell people what happened repeatedly, it changes things a bit.

What really comes into play here, I think,  is it's hearsay, since there is no way a dead man can confirm or deny that he actually said it.


Just because it is hearsay doesn't mean you can't use it in court.  I can think of multiple ways to get the statements in despite hearsay rules.
 
2014-01-28 12:31:49 PM

generallyso: Doesn't lethal injection render the person unconscious very early in the process?


They used new drugs.
 
2014-01-28 12:31:57 PM
good.
 
2014-01-28 12:32:13 PM
Death throes are so over done
 
2014-01-28 12:32:24 PM
You are very great. 100,000 pesos. Come to Santa Poco put on show, stop. The In-famous El Guapo.
 
2014-01-28 12:33:02 PM
Lawyers are the scum of the Earth, so I'll assume it's true because when it comes down to it, the word of any prison guard means more to me than any attorney's, moreover, I'm not taking the word of a condemned man.

He may have been warped enough to go through with it yet still feign distress over the request enhanced by the very real stress of getting killed soon.

We'll never know for sure, unless they put someone else to death and the same "symptoms" manifest.

Again, few lawyers would be above that kind of thing as life and decency are meaningless to them, unless they're attached to a smile and many thousands of dollars.
 
2014-01-28 12:33:33 PM
I find it odd that, where ethical suicide is allowed, they give the patient an overdose of barbiturates and they simply nod off, with their families around them.  But, when the same is done to these scumbags, it's inhumane torture.  Garbage like this needs to go, I don't care if it's a bullet to the back of the head.
 
2014-01-28 12:34:01 PM

dittybopper: Protected by attorney-client privilege, and in any case, "making a show of your death" as a way to protest capital punishment is protected political speech.


Isn't the "Attorney-client protected speech" kind of moot once the client is dead? And if the client said this, it is no longer protected.
 
2014-01-28 12:34:23 PM

Theaetetus: Sure, but it may be an ethics violation. He wouldn't be subject to criminal prosecution, but dismissal or sanctions? The bar for the Bar is lower.


Hah.  Go on, pull the other one.

I actually had a reason to complain about a lawyer I had hired, because of his either indifference or incompetence (the distaffbopper and I were never able to actually figure out which it was).  We actually had to fire the lawyer in question and continue the case pro se, otherwise we'd have had to start from Square One, and it was over a very, very minor thing the lawyer needed to perform (produce a document he had).

I looked into filing a complaint with the state bar, and found that the process was stacked against the complainant and for the lawyer.  Well, no surprise there:  It's an association of lawyers, after all.

The lawyer in question was eventually suspended twice (he's currently under suspension for a year), but it took years and years of multiple complaints, including those involving large sums of money, and he still hasn't been disbarred.

I won't say his name, but...

DLTGF LALOA QSNAO LGQIG MLLNE
HEAEE LEYGN WQRQH SQJQA EQYQO
NRFOG FDQAR AQQOL K
 
2014-01-28 12:35:10 PM

mcreadyblue: generallyso: Doesn't lethal injection render the person unconscious very early in the process?

They used new drugs.


That are used in every surgical center in the US.  All they did was up the dosage and not stick a tube down his throat
 
2014-01-28 12:35:57 PM

Lee451: dittybopper: Protected by attorney-client privilege, and in any case, "making a show of your death" as a way to protest capital punishment is protected political speech.

Isn't the "Attorney-client protected speech" kind of moot once the client is dead? And if the client said this, it is no longer protected.


Yeah, I actually wrote that before I RTFA'd.
 
2014-01-28 12:36:35 PM

dittybopper: Theaetetus: Sure, but it may be an ethics violation. He wouldn't be subject to criminal prosecution, but dismissal or sanctions? The bar for the Bar is lower.

Hah.  Go on, pull the other one.

I actually had a reason to complain about a lawyer I had hired, because of his either indifference or incompetence (the distaffbopper and I were never able to actually figure out which it was).  We actually had to fire the lawyer in question and continue the case pro se, otherwise we'd have had to start from Square One, and it was over a very, very minor thing the lawyer needed to perform (produce a document he had).

I looked into filing a complaint with the state bar, and found that the process was stacked against the complainant and for the lawyer.  Well, no surprise there:  It's an association of lawyers, after all.

The lawyer in question was eventually suspended twice (he's currently under suspension for a year), but it took years and years of multiple complaints, including those involving large sums of money, and he still hasn't been disbarred.

I won't say his name, but...

DLTGF LALOA QSNAO LGQIG MLLNE
HEAEE LEYGN WQRQH SQJQA EQYQO
NRFOG FDQAR AQQOL K


it seems like most of the time when someone gets disbarred or sanctioned its because they farked another lawyer over or pissed off a judge.
 
2014-01-28 12:36:37 PM

NickelP: I keep asking this and not getting an answer.  When you take your pet to the vet it takes about 15 seconds and they die with a smile and don't seem uncomfortable at all.  It took this dude 20 minutes+ to suffocate.  What are they teaching at vet school that these folks are ignoring?


The use of drugs that the manufacturers refuse to sell to prisons, because they don't want them associated with killing people.

Which is not unreasonable. However, you could also do it with a gas chamber and nitrogen. Dude peacefully goes to sleep, dies without twitching within 5 minutes.
 
2014-01-28 12:37:15 PM

Theaetetus: dittybopper: Protected by attorney-client privilege, and in any case, "making a show of your death" as a way to protest capital punishment is protected political speech.

The whole thing is hearsay anyways.


So YOU say.
 
2014-01-28 12:37:30 PM
What were the dearly departed's last words? Any smidgen of remorse? Did he acknowledge his victims or did he, like so many before him, partner with no less than Jesus himself in forgiving us all?

Allso, does the prison monitor the inmate's vital stats during the execution? I always see the length of time it took from the start (injection of the drugs) till the inmate dies, and observations of the inmate's movements, but do they also monitor things like heart rate, etc., which might give an indication of whether he was actually physically suffering or if his visible movements were more exaggerated than what their monitoring showed?
 
2014-01-28 12:37:51 PM
Sounds like a perfect scenario for a future haunting.
 
2014-01-28 12:38:06 PM
This alternately sucks and blows
 
2014-01-28 12:38:32 PM

bigbobowski: this is so ridiculous. I wouldn't care what anyone told me before hand. when they finally strap me down, I'm sure as hell not going to worry about putting on a show for anyone.
I think at that moment it really is "all about you"


when I am literally on my deathbed, the last thing on my mind would be to make my lawyer look good.
 
2014-01-28 12:38:33 PM
If I'm dying on a table while people watch, I don't think I'll care what the hell my lawyer just told me to do. Or what anyone thinks about anything.
 
2014-01-28 12:41:12 PM

jigger: If I'm dying on a table while people watch, I don't think I'll care what the hell my lawyer just told me to do. Or what anyone thinks about anything.


Yeah, but you're not a person who cares about those who you might affect, like a convicted murderer does.
 
2014-01-28 12:41:16 PM
That poor attorney. First executed and then suspended and investigated.

What's next: killing his firstborn?
 
2014-01-28 12:41:18 PM

dittybopper: Protected by attorney-client privilege, and in any case, "making a show of your death" as a way to protest capital punishment is protected political speech.


Agreed. and the investigation has already closed for lack of evidence that actually happened

furthermore not sure how the inmate who was supposed to be paralyzed and completely sedated by the fatal drugs could have "made a show" of anything.

 IF watching the man die bothers somebody, maybe they should reconsider their stance on the Death penalty .  In my opinion, backed up by DP cases I have helped handle,Capital Punishment is nothing more than a fancy name for killing another human being deliberately cause it made you feel good.  It serves no financial, or legal, or even deterrent purpose, and is nothing more than revenge.
 
2014-01-28 12:41:55 PM
So what if he did?

If it took 20 minutes to kill him, someone did their job terribly wrong.

// In this case, good. But in too many cases I don't trust the jury and/or prosecutors.
 
2014-01-28 12:42:06 PM
Professional ethics on the part of the attorney has nothing to do with protected political speech on the part of the inmate.
 
2014-01-28 12:43:45 PM
Yeah, if you want fair, objective witnesses, ask prison guards...

... Who by their own admission eavesdropped on confidential communications.
 
2014-01-28 12:44:53 PM

NickelP: I keep asking this and not getting an answer.  When you take your pet to the vet it takes about 15 seconds and they die with a smile and don't seem uncomfortable at all.  It took this dude 20 minutes+ to suffocate.  What are they teaching at vet school that these folks are ignoring?


The problem isn't really the method, the problem is getting someone qualified to do the job. Any anesthesiology resident could painlessly kill someone by putting them under and then stopping their heart.

With veterinary medicine, the vet is qualified to determine dosages and so on. Again, the issue is that the process has to be dumbed down enough for someone willing to use it. A macabre twist of "I don't want to belong to any club that would have me as a member".
 
2014-01-28 12:45:06 PM

indylaw: Yeah, if you want fair, objective witnesses, ask prison guards...

... Who by their own admission eavesdropped on confidential communications.


They still have more integrity than most lawyers.
 
2014-01-28 12:45:17 PM

Mugato: Attorney of death row inmate executed last week

That's a good start. What happened to the guy on death row?


Soon a planet without frelling lawyers
 
2014-01-28 12:45:20 PM
In the course of my duties, I discovered evidence of bribery and turned the said evidence over to the proper authorities, which lead to the disbarment of an attorney who was a buddy/pal of the then governor of my state.  That gave me a warm, tingly feeling all over.
 
2014-01-28 12:45:34 PM

dittybopper: Protected by attorney-client privilege, and in any case, "making a show of your death" as a way to protest capital punishment is protected political speech.


There's nothing about attorney-client privilege that protects the attorney.  Especially true when the client tells a 3rd party.

That said, I agree with the rest.
 
2014-01-28 12:45:35 PM

zimbomba63: I find it odd that, where ethical suicide is allowed, they give the patient an overdose of barbiturates and they simply nod off, with their families around them.  But, when the same is done to these scumbags, it's inhumane torture.  Garbage like this needs to go, I don't care if it's a bullet to the back of the head.


Barbiturates?  Goddammit, I thought they said "bar biatch urates"!

Oops.
 
2014-01-28 12:47:23 PM

walktoanarcade: indylaw: Yeah, if you want fair, objective witnesses, ask prison guards...

... Who by their own admission eavesdropped on confidential communications.

They still have more integrity than most lawyers.


They're small town bullies too stupid to be cops and too crazy to join the Army.
 
2014-01-28 12:47:58 PM

dittybopper: But even if every thing he said was completely true, I still think it would be protected, as it is "speech" intended to effect change to a matter of public policy.


The lawyer is perfectly free to stage a protest himself against the death penalty. Attempting to use one's client as a propaganda proxy for one's own personal politics is something else entirely.
 
2014-01-28 12:48:32 PM
Two words: Nitrogen asphyxiation.
 
2014-01-28 12:48:39 PM
They executed the attorney too? I might have to change my stance on the death pel-aty.
 
2014-01-28 12:48:45 PM

dittybopper: Protected by attorney-client privilege, and in any case, "making a show of your death" as a way to protest capital punishment is protected political speech.


The person who was being investigated was not the person making political speech, and he was not being charged at a crime.  You can have your ability to practice law suspending without commiting a crime.

Obviously the guy wasn't with anything, but still..
 
2014-01-28 12:48:49 PM
Glenn Beck was executed last week?
 
2014-01-28 12:49:06 PM
On the contrary, rather than suppress the rate of violent crime, seems to embiggen it.
 
2014-01-28 12:49:08 PM

indylaw: walktoanarcade: indylaw: Yeah, if you want fair, objective witnesses, ask prison guards...

... Who by their own admission eavesdropped on confidential communications.

They still have more integrity than most lawyers.

They're small town bullies too stupid to be cops and too crazy to join the Army.


Agreed, and still better than most lawyers who nearly fit the same description. ;)

/most lawyers
//not all lawyers
 
2014-01-28 12:50:01 PM
Can someone direct me to the law or canon of professional ethics he purportedly violated, even in the very unlikely event the allegations are true?
 
2014-01-28 12:50:03 PM

dittybopper: Protected by attorney-client privilege, and in any case, "making a show of your death" as a way to protest capital punishment is protected political speech.


That makes sense, and it is not like he is touring the country with his protest movement.
 
2014-01-28 12:50:04 PM
The same prison guards who strapped a man down and killed him claim he faked the signs of torture and suffering?

You don't say.
 
2014-01-28 12:50:13 PM
I can place commas in so many places in that headline to make a more interesting story.
 
2014-01-28 12:50:19 PM
Guess he couldn't act. What a failure
 
2014-01-28 12:50:29 PM

super_grass: That was an episode of Boston Legal I believe.


y God, I think you're right. It clicked in right after I read that.
 
2014-01-28 12:51:04 PM

ShadowKamui: mcreadyblue: generallyso: Doesn't lethal injection render the person unconscious very early in the process?

They used new drugs.

That are used in every surgical center in the US.  All they did was up the dosage and not stick a tube down his throat


espngrantland.files.wordpress.com
 
2014-01-28 12:51:09 PM

Lee451: dittybopper: Protected by attorney-client privilege, and in any case, "making a show of your death" as a way to protest capital punishment is protected political speech.

Isn't the "Attorney-client protected speech" kind of moot once the client is dead? And if the client said this, it is no longer protected.


No, the attorney has the obligation to protect the client in perpetuity.  But has been mentioned above, the client has no such duty.
 
2014-01-28 12:54:05 PM
"We have no way of knowing, obviously, because we can't interview Mr. McGuire," she said.
Well, obviously.
 
2014-01-28 12:55:05 PM
Adios murdering rapist.
 
2014-01-28 12:55:52 PM

dittybopper: Theaetetus: dittybopper: Protected by attorney-client privilege, and in any case, "making a show of your death" as a way to protest capital punishment is protected political speech.

The whole thing is hearsay anyways.

OT:  Kinda wish there were more cipher/code puzzles on Fark.  Maybe we should start something.



OK, I will start
rlv.zcache.com
And of course....
i133.photobucket.com
 
2014-01-28 12:55:57 PM
Something something writ of habeus corpse.
 
2014-01-28 12:56:23 PM

Stile4aly: Two words: Nitrogen asphyxiation.


Carbon Monoxide. Levels above 12000 ppm (1.28% of atmospheric gases) are recommended.
Unconscious within 2-3 breathes, death occurs in under 3 minutes.
 
2014-01-28 12:58:15 PM
If we're going to execute people, we should have a very, very high standard of evidence.

Then we should hang them or shoot them and be done with it.

Lethal injection is a silly, euphemistic show, that gets medical personnel involved when they needn't be.
 
2014-01-28 12:58:49 PM
make 'a show' of it, eh?
i815.photobucket.com
 
2014-01-28 12:59:44 PM

dittybopper: Theaetetus: dittybopper: Protected by attorney-client privilege, and in any case, "making a show of your death" as a way to protest capital punishment is protected political speech.

The whole thing is hearsay anyways.

Yep, and while it may fall under an exception, because in effect it was a "death bed" statement, it's still the statement of a person who had so little consideration of his fellow man that he raped and murdered a pregnant woman.

But even if every thing he said was completely true, I still think it would be protected, as it is "speech" intended to effect change to a matter of public policy.

First Amendment protects exaggeration.  Fark is proof of that.


Fark is perfect, and never exaggerates.
 
2014-01-28 01:00:40 PM

dfenstrate: If we're going to execute people, we should have a very, very high standard of evidence.

Then we should hang them or shoot them and be done with it.

Lethal injection is a silly, euphemistic show, that gets medical personnel involved when they needn't be.

^this


It bothers me that they swab their arm. At that point, they should just say stop all this, we can't kill him/her because afterall, we don't even want him/her to get an infection.
 
2014-01-28 01:00:57 PM

zimbomba63: In the course of my duties, I discovered evidence of bribery and turned the said evidence over to the proper authorities, which lead to the disbarment of an attorney who was a buddy/pal of the then governor of my state.  That gave me a warm, tingly feeling all over.


That was the taser.
 
2014-01-28 01:01:03 PM

jigger: If I'm dying on a table while people watch, I don't think I'll care what the hell my lawyer just told me to do. Or what anyone thinks about anything.


I'm gonna announce winning lottery numbers but die before I get to the Powerball
 
2014-01-28 01:02:28 PM

FlyingJ: make 'a show' of it, eh?
[i815.photobucket.com image 259x401]


Damn you for stealing the reference I wanted to make. Damn you to hell!
 
2014-01-28 01:02:38 PM
I swear everyone involved here is stupid.

To the anti-death penalty people - The drugs used are the same ones used during surgery.  10 minutes in he wasn't struggling for breath, he was unconscious.  When a brain dead person on life support makes an audible gasp or something like it, the doctors explain it's a reflex, not a conscious breath.  So no, this guy making a noise 10 minutes later doesn't mean he suffocated to death.  He didn't suffer, he had the same medications surgery patients get.  He died quite peacefully.

To the pro-death penalty people - The drugs used are the same ones used during surgery.  10 minutes in he wasn't acting, he was unconscious.  When a brain dead person on life support makes an audible gasp or something like it, the doctors explain it's a reflex, not a conscious breath.  So no, this guy making a noise 10 minutes later doesn't mean he was acting.

For farks sake people.  Lots of reasons to be pro or anti death penalty.  But stop making shiat up.
 
2014-01-28 01:02:42 PM

Harry Freakstorm: jigger: If I'm dying on a table while people watch, I don't think I'll care what the hell my lawyer just told me to do. Or what anyone thinks about anything.

I'm gonna announce winning lottery numbers but die before I get to the Powerball


As in "Next week's PowerBall is 6,... 12,... 23,... 42,... 46.......... and......(thump)'
 
2014-01-28 01:04:13 PM

lennavan: I swear everyone involved here is stupid.


You shouldn't call yourself stupid.
 
2014-01-28 01:05:03 PM

FlyingJ: make 'a show' of it, eh?
[i815.photobucket.com image 259x401]


Rocky Sullivan.

Came here looking for this. Took long enough. But thanks though.
 
2014-01-28 01:05:41 PM

walktoanarcade: lennavan: I swear everyone involved here is stupid.

You shouldn't call yourself stupid.


Whoa now, let's not rush to conclusions.
 
2014-01-28 01:08:40 PM

Theaetetus: dittybopper: Theaetetus: dittybopper: Protected by attorney-client privilege, and in any case, "making a show of your death" as a way to protest capital punishment is protected political speech.

The whole thing is hearsay anyways.

OT:  Kinda wish there were more cipher/code puzzles on Fark.  Maybe we should start something.

Agreed, but where do you find stuff to decipher that's fun?


If solving the puzzle revealed a nekked woman, it wouldn't matter whether it was particularly fun or not.
 
2014-01-28 01:08:41 PM
Here is the first thing I thought of when reading the article.  It's been done before.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3jUvL-7F18
 
2014-01-28 01:10:01 PM

sambluesnark: Stile4aly: Two words: Nitrogen asphyxiation.

Carbon Monoxide. Levels above 12000 ppm (1.28% of atmospheric gases) are recommended.
Unconscious within 2-3 breathes, death occurs in under 3 minutes.


My idea for the perfect, painless execution is this:

Implode the criminals head.

No, seriously:  Have them wear a device on their head that is similar in construction to how the Fat Man/Trinity nuclear bomb:  Using "slow" explosive inclusions or "lenses" imbedded in "fast" explosives to make a nearly circular shockwave front to implode the head of the person being executed.

Because the shockwave of every explosive you might possibly use is faster than nerve conduction speed, death from the standpoint of the criminal happens before they can even perceive it:  The shockwave will have destroyed their head before their nerves have enough time to conduct the sensations of heat, light, pressure, pain, etc. to the (now destroyed) brain.

It's like shutting off a light, you exist, and then nothing.  Not even a very fleeting perception of the end.

Of course, it's messy, which is why I think it hasn't really caught on.
 
2014-01-28 01:11:31 PM

dittybopper: Protected by attorney-client privilege, and in any case, "making a show of your death" as a way to protest capital punishment is protected political speech.


Not reading all this crap again so sorry I repeat, but: 1. No attorney-client priv if client volunteered info to non-privileged party. 2. Didn't understand yr first amend point initially, but got it. I think it'd be more of a possible Bar violation of ethics for the attorney, which is highly situational and subjective. Not really a free speech issue.
 
2014-01-28 01:13:07 PM

Magorn: It serves no financial, or legal, or even deterrent purpose, and is nothing more than revenge.


It does do one thing really well:  It prevents the person from ever committing another heinous crime.
 
2014-01-28 01:15:23 PM

Serious Post on Serious Thread: dittybopper: Protected by attorney-client privilege, and in any case, "making a show of your death" as a way to protest capital punishment is protected political speech.

Not reading all this crap again so sorry I repeat, but: 1. No attorney-client priv if client volunteered info to non-privileged party. 2. Didn't understand yr first amend point initially, but got it. I think it'd be more of a possible Bar violation of ethics for the attorney, which is highly situational and subjective. Not really a free speech issue.


Yeah, Umm, I admitted to posting that before reading the farkin' article.
 
2014-01-28 01:16:31 PM

dittybopper: devildog123: You know, his defense attorneys weren't arguing that he didn't do it, just that the way they were killing him sucked and was painful.  If he actually did what they said, he raped and murdered a young, pregnant woman.  I have a fairly painless way to get rid of these people if that's the only thing that is bothering them.

I don't even particularly care if the way they killed him sucked and was painful, so long as it wasn't some egregiously drawn out torture session.

A few minutes of painful existence before you actually die?  No different than many heart attack victims.  Doesn't seem particularly cruel or unusual.


It goes to the heart of why we execute criminals in the first place, though.  Capital punishment is supposed to be a deterrent, not punishment for punishment's sake.  Now, granted, I've never been killed, so I can't say this with ABSOLUTE certainty, but dying, period, is all the deterrent I need to never commit a capital offense.

We can argue back and forth all day long about the merits of capital punishment itself, but this is--or at least should be--indisputable: not reveling in, or not being indifferent to, the pain of our society's rulebreakers when we punish them is what should separate us from those rulebreakers.
 
2014-01-28 01:17:06 PM
HaywoodJablonski


That poor attorney. First executed and then suspended and investigated.

What's next: killing his firstborn?

Too Jewish.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-01-28 01:18:39 PM

FlyingJ: make 'a show' of it, eh?
[i815.photobucket.com image 259x401]


vgboxart.com
 
2014-01-28 01:18:50 PM
Wonder how much pain and suffering these people go through.  Hard to say because we paralyze them before giving them the lethal drugs.

I tend to think this would be the most humane way to go (if done correctly):

img.photobucket.com
/sorry for the spoiler
 
2014-01-28 01:19:46 PM

lennavan: For farks sake people. Lots of reasons to be pro or anti death penalty. But stop making shiat up.


Ignoring the fact that you supported absolutely none of your claims with citations before accusing everyone else of making things up...

It doesn't matter if the drugs are the same as those used in other applications or not. Drugs, particularly sedatives, can have wildly different affects on the body depending on their concentration.

You can confirm this fact on a small scale in your own home with everyday alcoholic beverages if you're so inclined.

Even if we accept your claims about the drugs at face value, your conclusions still cannot be accepted based solely on your provided reasoning.
 
2014-01-28 01:20:02 PM

Mugato: Attorney of death row inmate executed last week

That's a good start. What happened to the guy on death row?


Lulz, good sir. Lulz.
 
2014-01-28 01:20:03 PM
If I was being executed I'm not sure I have the commitment or diligence to try and follow a script offered by my lawyer. Particularly as they'd sucked in their job at keeping me alive.
 
2014-01-28 01:20:16 PM
Just more proof that lawyers are as much a part of the problem as anything else.
 
2014-01-28 01:21:07 PM

dittybopper: A few minutes of painful existence before you actually die?  No different than many heart attack victims.  Doesn't seem particularly cruel or unusual.


try it
 
2014-01-28 01:22:27 PM

dittybopper: It does do one thing really well:  It prevents the person from ever committing another heinous crime.


If only there were some way we could segregate dangerous people from society so we didn't need to worry about the danger they pose.
 
2014-01-28 01:23:13 PM
So, they're saying someone who is evil and demented enough to rape and kill a pregnant woman wouldn't be evil and demented enough to put on a show resembling torture for those in attendance at his execution?  That he had to be coached into doing so and farking with the heads of all those present? Really?  Even if the attorney suggested it, this would be like giving a bone to a dog and then saying "chew on this".
 
2014-01-28 01:23:22 PM

TheShavingofOccam123: "He wants me to put on this big show in front of my kids, all right when I'm dying!" McGuire is reported as having told one guard. "I ain't gonna do this. It's about me and my kids, not him and his cause!"

It's not hearsay when three guards corroborate their lies...oops, their statements.


They phoned this one in. No one believes this,BS, right?

mcreadyblue: generallyso: Doesn't lethal injection render the person unconscious very early in the process?

They used new drugs.


That didn't work well and they certainly can't admit it now can they?
 
2014-01-28 01:23:25 PM

dittybopper: Serious Post on Serious Thread: dittybopper: Protected by attorney-client privilege, and in any case, "making a show of your death" as a way to protest capital punishment is protected political speech.

Not reading all this crap again so sorry I repeat, but: 1. No attorney-client priv if client volunteered info to non-privileged party. 2. Didn't understand yr first amend point initially, but got it. I think it'd be more of a possible Bar violation of ethics for the attorney, which is highly situational and subjective. Not really a free speech issue.

Yeah, Umm, I admitted to posting that before reading the farkin' article.


Yeah ummm, as I admitted I didn't read/re-read all this crap b/c the last thread was ITG barfworthy.

BUT I *did* follow your link above and that's wrong too. Attorney client priv doesn't terminate with the client's death.
 
2014-01-28 01:25:25 PM
The process would be a lot smoother if a certain political group wasn't trying to ban the import and creation of the chemicals used in the process.
 
2014-01-28 01:25:29 PM

skozlaw: Ignoring the fact that you supported absolutely none of your claims with citations before accusing everyone else of making things up...


Do I really need to?  It will take you 2 minutes of googling TOPS to figure it out for yourself.  If youre not willing to do 2 minutes of googling, there's no way in hell you'd bother reading any citation I gave you.

skozlaw: It doesn't matter if the drugs are the same as those used in other applications or not. Drugs, particularly sedatives, can have wildly different affects on the body depending on their concentration.


Kinda makes you wonder why we even bother giving these medications for surgery then, right?  I mean, it's just a crapshoot, so many patients suffocate and suffer during surgery and whatnot.  Lawsuits are common.

skozlaw: You can confirm this fact on a small scale in your own home with everyday alcoholic beverages if you're so inclined.


Right.  Some people drink alcohol and get drunk, others suffocate, some still become super strong and many alcohol has no effect on.  Drinking definitely has different effects on different people.  Good example.

skozlaw: Even if we accept your claims about the drugs at face value


YOU DONT HAVE TO, YOU HAVE GOOGLE.COM YOU DIPSHIAT
 
2014-01-28 01:26:09 PM

mcreadyblue: generallyso: Doesn't lethal injection render the person unconscious very early in the process?

They used new drugs.


What new drugs did they use?
 
2014-01-28 01:27:47 PM
dittybopper: My idea for the perfect, painless execution is this:

Implode the criminals head.

No, seriously:  Have them wear a device on their head that is similar in construction to how the Fat Man/Trinity nuclear bomb:  Using "slow" explosive inclusions or "lenses" imbedded in "fast" explosives to make a nearly circular shockwave front to implode the head of the person being executed.



Your thinking: I like.

The gadgety goodness of nukes, with several million points out of ten for showmanship.

Still, I'd vote for Nitrogen asphyxiation too. Simple, cheap, painless, less messy. Usher them into a room, with a TV, recliner, bowl of chicken wings, tell them to "wait right here", leave and lock the door, quietly flood the room with N2.

/really, I think this is how I'll put my dogs down when it's their time, and me too later...
 
2014-01-28 01:28:03 PM

profplump: dittybopper: It does do one thing really well:  It prevents the person from ever committing another heinous crime.

If only there were some way we could segregate dangerous people from society so we didn't need to worry about the danger they pose.


That worked for society in Ted Bundy's case when they locked him up in Colorado-until he escaped and went on to murder even more women and young girls in Florida. Thankfully Florida had the intelligence to finally put a stop to him.

Some people you can only stop-for sure-by killing.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-01-28 01:28:42 PM

Magorn: dittybopper: Protected by attorney-client privilege, and in any case, "making a show of your death" as a way to protest capital punishment is protected political speech.

Agreed. and the investigation has already closed for lack of evidence that actually happened

furthermore not sure how the inmate who was supposed to be paralyzed and completely sedated by the fatal drugs could have "made a show" of anything.

 IF watching the man die bothers somebody, maybe they should reconsider their stance on the Death penalty .  In my opinion, backed up by DP cases I have helped handle,Capital Punishment is nothing more than a fancy name for killing another human being deliberately cause it made you feel good.  It serves no financial, or legal, or even deterrent purpose, and is nothing more than revenge.


It certainly does NOT make me feel good. What a cavalier and presumptuous thing to say!
However, at some point it makes sense to remove a miscreant from society and end thei ability to harm another person. EVER.
P E R I O D.

We need to revamp laws so that stupid things like small drug infractions don't land your ass in jail.
We are paying for far too many to be housed on the cost, and far too many are jailed for silly crap as well.

Then, we need to be clear on the line we draw as to what will get you killed.
Call the killing whatever the frik you wish. Murder, death, execution, etc. I don't care. Semantics, all of it.
When a person decides to continually cause death or suffering of others it's time to look at next steps for them.
If they are unremorseful, unrepentant and clearly intend on continuing with their crap then, Adieu. Bonsoir.
 
2014-01-28 01:30:01 PM

dittybopper: Magorn: It serves no financial, or legal, or even deterrent purpose, and is nothing more than revenge.

It does do one thing really well:  It prevents the person from ever committing another heinous crime.


which can be accomplished just as well, and for far less money, if you merely imprison the person for the rest of his life too
 
2014-01-28 01:30:09 PM
Man, that's not the way I want to go.

I want to be struck in the back of the head, completely by surprise.

By the space shuttle on takeoff.

// Missed my chance.
 
2014-01-28 01:30:27 PM
They gave him IV Dilaudid.  He died in ecstasy, not agony.  If he was gasping for air it was because he didn't want the brain orgasm to end.
 
2014-01-28 01:31:45 PM

nekom: only the clearly guilty beyond any shadow of a doubt should be taken to the gallows and hanged immediately after that guilt is determined.


Every single person who has been released from death row for false conviction was found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-01-28 01:32:04 PM

mcreadyblue: generallyso: Doesn't lethal injection render the person unconscious very early in the process?

They used new drugs.


But.....he WANTED the new drug.......
img.fark.net
 
2014-01-28 01:33:13 PM

CalvinMorallis: Capital punishment is supposed to be a deterrent, not punishment for punishment's sake.


No, it isn't.

The purpose of any punishment isn't to deter, per se.  The honest and moral people don't need such things to keep them on the straight and narrow, and the people that are liable to commit crimes generally don't think about the potential consequences of their actions in the first place.

Certainly, there is very little evidence that increased penalties lower crime rates via deterrence, and some evidence that they lower crime rates by removing those people who are predisposed to commit crimes from society for a longer period.

The purpose of all legal punishments, as least as far as incarceration goes, is to remove a dangerous person from society.   We make some effort to "rehabilitate" those who we feel can be rehabilitated, and sometimes it actually works for non-violent criminals (but rarely for the really violent ones), but that's a secondary consideration.

I don't know where this idea that a prison sentence or the death penalty is supposed to be a deterrent came from, but no matter what you feel the answer is, it's the wrong question in the first place.

Violent criminals (the type that get the death penalty), almost by definition, have poor impulse control.  They live in the moment.  They might plan a crime, but they don't look towards the future consequences of getting caught, going to trial, and being convicted and punished.

They just don't think that far ahead.

So the idea of any particular set of legal punishments being a deterrent to that sort of person is simply laughable when you actually *THINK* about it.
 
2014-01-28 01:33:38 PM
a particular individual:
Every single person who has been released from death row for false conviction was found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Right, which is why I think the burden of proof should be even higher than that if we're going to be killing someone.  Though I still oppose the death penalty for any number of other reasons.
 
2014-01-28 01:34:09 PM

CalvinMorallis: dittybopper: devildog123: You know, his defense attorneys weren't arguing that he didn't do it, just that the way they were killing him sucked and was painful.  If he actually did what they said, he raped and murdered a young, pregnant woman.  I have a fairly painless way to get rid of these people if that's the only thing that is bothering them.

I don't even particularly care if the way they killed him sucked and was painful, so long as it wasn't some egregiously drawn out torture session.

A few minutes of painful existence before you actually die?  No different than many heart attack victims.  Doesn't seem particularly cruel or unusual.

It goes to the heart of why we execute criminals in the first place, though.  Capital punishment is supposed to be a deterrent, not punishment for punishment's sake.  Now, granted, I've never been killed, so I can't say this with ABSOLUTE certainty, but dying, period, is all the deterrent I need to never commit a capital offense.

We can argue back and forth all day long about the merits of capital punishment itself, but this is--or at least should be--indisputable: not reveling in, or not being indifferent to, the pain of our society's rulebreakers when we punish them is what should separate us from those rulebreakers.


Do you think it really does this?   This guy committed his Murder in 1989.  25 Years ago,    What's the average age of Murderer?  How many of them are old enough to connect the crime with the execution?
 
2014-01-28 01:35:26 PM
You'll excuse me if I don't take the word of people who choose to work as prison guards in a death house.
 
2014-01-28 01:35:52 PM

CrazyCracka420: I tend to think this would be the most humane way to go (if done correctly):


Head lives on for a long-ish time.  There is evidence of conscious action of a severed head from a guillotine for up to 20 seconds or so, and the amount of time the severed head can still perceive their surroundings is likely to be even longer.
 
2014-01-28 01:36:56 PM
Guards say attorney coached client to "make a show of his death"

It's of my opinion that these guards are a bunch of sadists who are entirely overflowing with bullsh*t.
 
2014-01-28 01:36:59 PM

dittybopper: CrazyCracka420: I tend to think this would be the most humane way to go (if done correctly):

Head lives on for a long-ish time.  There is evidence of conscious action of a severed head from a guillotine for up to 20 seconds or so, and the amount of time the severed head can still perceive their surroundings is likely to be even longer.


Yes, it's a particularly cruel death when you think on it.
 
2014-01-28 01:37:09 PM

a particular individual: nekom: only the clearly guilty beyond any shadow of a doubt should be taken to the gallows and hanged immediately after that guilt is determined.

Every single person who has been released from death row for false conviction was found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.


So the extensive, lengthy appeals process works?
 
2014-01-28 01:37:25 PM
Who cares that he suffered? I'm fairly sure he wasn't concerned about cruel and unusual when he was raping and killing that girl. Think about what horrors the girl was going through during the ordeal. And the bastard lived decades after he killed her. No sympathy for him.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-01-28 01:37:27 PM

Magorn: dittybopper: Magorn: It serves no financial, or legal, or even deterrent purpose, and is nothing more than revenge.

It does do one thing really well:  It prevents the person from ever committing another heinous crime.

which can be accomplished just as well, and for far less money, if you merely imprison the person for the rest of his life too


But if they are unapologetic, unprepentant, remorseless, and intent hurting others and on doing so at any possible chance, jail just contains the problem to smaller confines. Why should the poor asshole who stupidly smuggled drugs but never really committed a violent crime have to get thrown in with the guy whos' answer to "Why did you kill everyone in the house?" is "They were home".

And why should society pay for all this? Last I checked Max/Super-max incarceration if exorbitantly expensive for us taxpayers.
 
2014-01-28 01:37:47 PM

Theaetetus: NickelP: I keep asking this and not getting an answer.  When you take your pet to the vet it takes about 15 seconds and they die with a smile and don't seem uncomfortable at all.  It took this dude 20 minutes+ to suffocate.  What are they teaching at vet school that these folks are ignoring?

The use of drugs that the manufacturers refuse to sell to prisons, because they don't want them associated with killing people.

Which is not unreasonable. However, you could also do it with a gas chamber and nitrogen. Dude peacefully goes to sleep, dies without twitching within 5 minutes.


dittybopper: sambluesnark: Stile4aly: Two words: Nitrogen asphyxiation.

Carbon Monoxide. Levels above 12000 ppm (1.28% of atmospheric gases) are recommended.
Unconscious within 2-3 breathes, death occurs in under 3 minutes.

My idea for the perfect, painless execution is this:

Implode the criminals head.

No, seriously:  Have them wear a device on their head that is similar in construction to how the Fat Man/Trinity nuclear bomb:  Using "slow" explosive inclusions or "lenses" imbedded in "fast" explosives to make a nearly circular shockwave front to implode the head of the person being executed.

Because the shockwave of every explosive you might possibly use is faster than nerve conduction speed, death from the standpoint of the criminal happens before they can even perceive it:  The shockwave will have destroyed their head before their nerves have enough time to conduct the sensations of heat, light, pressure, pain, etc. to the (now destroyed) brain.

It's like shutting off a light, you exist, and then nothing.  Not even a very fleeting perception of the end.

Of course, it's messy, which is why I think it hasn't really caught on.


Implosion would also be somewhat expensive and run into the same potential for the manufacturers of said explosives to not want them used this way. Carbon monoxide has to go somewhere somehow once it's used, and we already have enough in our atmosphere from other causes, thenkyewverramuch.

Nitrogen is nearly 80% of the atmosphere as it is. It's necessary for life processes, so no need to be concerned about disposal. It would be cheap and very effective. No feeling of suffocation, as that results not from the lack of oxygen but from carbon dioxide buildup, which wouldn't happen with nitrogen asphyxiation. You breathe normally, maybe feel a bit light-headed, then lights out.
 
2014-01-28 01:38:38 PM

gshepnyc: You'll excuse me if I don't take the word of people who choose to work as prison guards in a death house.



Not sure why that should disqualify them from anything, but ummm, ok?


/there normally isn't a lot of opportunity in a prison town.
 
2014-01-28 01:40:18 PM

Magorn: dittybopper: Magorn: It serves no financial, or legal, or even deterrent purpose, and is nothing more than revenge.

It does do one thing really well:  It prevents the person from ever committing another heinous crime.

which can be accomplished just as well, and for far less money, if you merely imprison the person for the rest of his life too


Until, of course, they murder someone in prison.

Oh, I suppose you could put them in permanent isolation at a supermax prison and drive them aslowly insane, but that seems more cruel than simply killing them.
 
2014-01-28 01:41:10 PM

generallyso: Doesn't lethal injection render the person unconscious very early in the process?


Yes, IF it is done in a professional and competent way.

But in this case however, we had a penal system Hell-bent on murdering some people even if the drug companies boycotted them, so they had Beavis & Butthead working the buttons.

"Whoah! uh huh huh huh. Look at him gasp, or something. uh huh huh huh. huh huh"

"Yeah! Hmhh heh heh heh heh. Now he's moving up and down. Push another button Butthead. Push em! PUSH EM! BOoOOoOIiiINNNNNnNGGGG!!Mh heh ehehehehheheheehe....!"
 
2014-01-28 01:41:28 PM

Magorn: How many of them are old enough to connect the crime with the execution?


I don't support the death penalty, but the deterrerent is not for the defendant, it is for others who see that the death penalty is a crappy way to go.
 
2014-01-28 01:43:02 PM

nekom: If we MUST have the death penalty, I think it should have an even higher burden of proof, only the clearly guilty beyond any shadow of a doubt black should be taken to the gallows and hanged immediately after that guilt is determined.


Texasised that for you.
 
2014-01-28 01:43:28 PM

COMALite J: Nitrogen is nearly 80% of the atmosphere as it is. It's necessary for life processes, so no need to be concerned about disposal. It would be cheap and very effective. No feeling of suffocation, as that results not from the lack of oxygen but from carbon dioxide buildup, which wouldn't happen with nitrogen asphyxiation. You breathe normally, maybe feel a bit light-headed, then lights out.


Actually, just replace the typical 80/20 mixture of nitrogen/oxygen with an 80/20 mixture of nitrogen/helium, and make them read their final words that way.

/For hilarious justice.
 
2014-01-28 01:44:04 PM

lennavan: Do I really need to?


Yes, that's how arguments work. If you make a claim, it's your job to support it. If you refuse to support it, it is fair for everyone else to write it off without any further consideration. You are obligated to support your own arguments, everybody else is not obligated to seek support for them.

Your way would be stupid since anybody adhering to it could just argue for eternity that they're not wrong, everybody else just isn't finding the evidence properly.

lennavan: Right. Some people drink alcohol and get drunk, others suffocate, some still become super strong and many alcohol has no effect on. Drinking definitely has different effects on different people. Good example.


Indeed. In fact, it's one of the best examples of hormesis, which is itself a great example of a non-linear dose-response where the effects at one dosage can be wildly different at another dosage even to the point that a low level is beneficial while a high level is outright destructive.

Not that I think you have the slightest idea of what any of that means, based on your prior comments, but now you can go inform yourself, at least of the basis, and perhaps come back with an argument that makes some measure of sense.
Although I somehow doubt you'll do any of that since it seems you've decided instead to just wail and gnash your teeth based on how you imagine the world works rather than bothering to learn about how it really does work in this instance.
 
2014-01-28 01:45:04 PM
So, wait, wait.. all of this is based on stuff that the convicted murderer told guards and stuff that they heard the convicted murderer tell his family?

I'm not saying the conversation between the lawyer and the killer didn't happen, but it isn't like the guards overheard that conversation.

From the guards' perspective, I bet this is all standard issue CYA stuff issued from higher up.
 
2014-01-28 01:45:11 PM
I still say... huge reinforced pit with a one-way trapdoor.

Pull the lever, down they go, forget about them.

Have the pit built with a self-cleaning fire system to be done every year.
 
2014-01-28 01:45:38 PM

lennavan: I swear everyone involved here is stupid.

To the anti-death penalty people - The drugs used are the same ones used during surgery.  10 minutes in he wasn't struggling for breath, he was unconscious.  When a brain dead person on life support makes an audible gasp or something like it, the doctors explain it's a reflex, not a conscious breath.  So no, this guy making a noise 10 minutes later doesn't mean he suffocated to death.  He didn't suffer, he had the same medications surgery patients get.  He died quite peacefully.

To the pro-death penalty people - The drugs used are the same ones used during surgery.  10 minutes in he wasn't acting, he was unconscious.  When a brain dead person on life support makes an audible gasp or something like it, the doctors explain it's a reflex, not a conscious breath.  So no, this guy making a noise 10 minutes later doesn't mean he was acting.

For farks sake people.  Lots of reasons to be pro or anti death penalty.  But stop making shiat up.


The first time I read the story of him gasping for breath so long after the drugs were administered I just assumed it was reflex.  I've seen enough videos on LiveLeak of the exact same type of reflex...  And in some of those videos the majority of the brain of the featured individual was several feet from the body so there was no question that they were quite dead.   But what remained of the body was still running on autopilot and attempting to gasp for breath.

As far as capital punishment goes I don't understand why someone who raped and murdered a pregnant newlywed does not get tossed feet first into a wood chipper minutes after the gavel bangs with a guilty conviction.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-01-28 01:46:00 PM

dittybopper: Oh, I suppose you could put them in permanent isolation at a supermax prison and drive them aslowly insane, but that seems more cruel than simply killing them.


THIS^^^^^

Further reinforcement on why I have you faved. I would rather get offed than be in a 5x5 forever.
 
2014-01-28 01:46:17 PM

cig-mkr: Who cares that he suffered? I'm fairly sure he wasn't concerned about cruel and unusual when he was raping and killing that girl. Think about what horrors the girl was going through during the ordeal. And the bastard lived decades after he killed her. No sympathy for him.



Ideally, there should be something to separate us (acting collectively through the State) from the criminals we punish.  If we are just as bloodthirsty and willing to torture or kill as the people we are punishing, then what is it that separates them from us?  Right from Wrong?  Aside from superior fire-power, that is...

That's probably one of the reasons why the Founding Fathers wrote the "cruel & unusual" punishment prohibition into the Bill of Rights -- along with freedom of speech and the right to bear arms.
 
2014-01-28 01:48:31 PM

Theaetetus: However, you could also do it with a gas chamber and nitrogen. Dude peacefully goes to sleep, dies without twitching within 5 minutes.


That's not necessarily true.  An inert-gas atmosphere would quickly lead to unconsciousness & death, but not necessarily without twitching/spasms/gasping/etc.  Granted, the subject would be unconscious when that happened, but it could still look bad to observers.
 
2014-01-28 01:50:50 PM

CalvinMorallis: It goes to the heart of why we execute criminals in the first place, though.  Capital punishment is supposed to be a deterrent, not punishment for punishment's sake.  Now, granted, I've never been killed, so I can't say this with ABSOLUTE certainty, but dying, period, is all the deterrent I need to never commit a capital offense.


If someone given the death penalty is guilty (as opposed simply to being poor and black) then deterrence has, by definition, failed.
 
2014-01-28 01:55:46 PM

gja: dittybopper: Oh, I suppose you could put them in permanent isolation at a supermax prison and drive them aslowly insane, but that seems more cruel than simply killing them.

THIS^^^^^

Further reinforcement on why I have you faved. I would rather get offed than be in a 5x5 forever.


I've got you faved in green because you're a ham.
 
2014-01-28 01:57:18 PM

jshine: cig-mkr: Who cares that he suffered? I'm fairly sure he wasn't concerned about cruel and unusual when he was raping and killing that girl. Think about what horrors the girl was going through during the ordeal. And the bastard lived decades after he killed her. No sympathy for him.


Ideally, there should be something to separate us (acting collectively through the State) from the criminals we punish.  If we are just as bloodthirsty and willing to torture or kill as the people we are punishing, then what is it that separates them from us?  Right from Wrong?  Aside from superior fire-power, that is...

That's probably one of the reasons why the Founding Fathers wrote the "cruel & unusual" punishment prohibition into the Bill of Rights -- along with freedom of speech and the right to bear arms.


I don't believe in cruel and unusual either, but I'm willing to bet that there are people willing to pull the lever at a hanging or volunteer for the firing squad. Did they eliminate the firing squad / hanging because it was cruel and unusual ? I remember one time a lawyer said they couldn't hang a guy because he was too fat and his head would pop off. Don't remember the ruling.
 
2014-01-28 01:58:47 PM

skozlaw: Yes, that's how arguments work. If you make a claim, it's your job to support it.


I only need to support the claims you find disagreeable or aren't common knowledge.  You actually didn't know these drugs were the same ones used in surgery and you were too stupid/lazy to google it yourself?  WTF do you think they use?  Just some random crap they find left over in a factory somewhere?

skozlaw: If you refuse to support it, it is fair for everyone else to write it off without any further consideration. You are obligated to support your own arguments, everybody else is not obligated to seek support for them.


I don't refuse to support it.  I simply want to mock your laziness in the process.  It would have taken you 2 minutes of googling to figure it out yourself.  This is a clear demonstration of your active ignorance.  You are actually attempting to remain ignorant rather than learn to figure things out for yourself.

Ohio officials used intravenous doses of two drugs, the sedative midazolam and the painkiller hydromorphone

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/16/dennis-mcguire-execution_n_ 46 10582.html

Midazolam is used to produce sleepiness or drowsiness and to relieve anxiety before surgery or certain procedures. Midazolam is also given to produce amnesia (loss of memory) so that the patient will not remember any discomfort or undesirable effects that may occur after a surgery or procedure . It is also used to produce loss of consciousness before and during surgery.

http://www.mayoclinic.org/drugs-supplements/midazolam-injection-rout e/ description/drg-20064813

Hydromorphone belongs to the group of medicines called narcotic analgesics, which are medicines used to relieve pain

http://www.mayoclinic.org/drugs-supplements/hydromorphone-injection- ro ute/description/drg-20074244

Dipshiat, that took me less than 2 minutes.  It's not actually about the 2 minutes and who spent what.  It's more about you actively decided to not pursue the truth.  That's ignorance and you should feel bad about yourself for it.
 
2014-01-28 01:58:54 PM

CalvinMorallis: It goes to the heart of why we execute criminals in the first place, though. Capital punishment is supposed to be a deterrent, not punishment for punishment's sake.


Nice theory but death penalty supporters enjoy the idea inflicting pain and suffering. It's part of the authoritarian mindset.

Simply look up-thread at all the detailed, cruel fantasies
 
2014-01-28 01:58:56 PM

orbister: CalvinMorallis: It goes to the heart of why we execute criminals in the first place, though.  Capital punishment is supposed to be a deterrent, not punishment for punishment's sake.  Now, granted, I've never been killed, so I can't say this with ABSOLUTE certainty, but dying, period, is all the deterrent I need to never commit a capital offense.

If someone given the death penalty is guilty (as opposed simply to being poor and black) then deterrence has, by definition, failed.


You can't deter someone from doing what they've already done.  That doesn't even make sense to argue.

I'm speaking of deterrence in two different senses: 1) for the general population--other, non-murdery people will think "Oh, shiat, I better not murder anyone or they'll kill me"; and 2) for the perpetrator himself--make the punishment severe enough that he won't commit the crime again.  And for some people, and some crimes so severe, the thinking is that you absolutely can't safely assume any deterrence will work, save absolute prevention--that's where capital sentences come into play.
 
2014-01-28 01:59:55 PM

cig-mkr: jshine: cig-mkr: Who cares that he suffered? I'm fairly sure he wasn't concerned about cruel and unusual when he was raping and killing that girl. Think about what horrors the girl was going through during the ordeal. And the bastard lived decades after he killed her. No sympathy for him.


Ideally, there should be something to separate us (acting collectively through the State) from the criminals we punish.  If we are just as bloodthirsty and willing to torture or kill as the people we are punishing, then what is it that separates them from us?  Right from Wrong?  Aside from superior fire-power, that is...

That's probably one of the reasons why the Founding Fathers wrote the "cruel & unusual" punishment prohibition into the Bill of Rights -- along with freedom of speech and the right to bear arms.

I don't believe in cruel and unusual either, but I'm willing to bet that there are people willing to pull the lever at a hanging or volunteer for the firing squad. Did they eliminate the firing squad / hanging because it was cruel and unusual ? I remember one time a lawyer said they couldn't hang a guy because he was too fat and his head would pop off. Don't remember the ruling.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitchell_Rupe
 
2014-01-28 02:02:01 PM
Why don't we bring back firing squads?

No, seriously.

No arguing about drug cocktails and troubles with imports.  A high-powered rifle round will travel through the cranium faster than the nerve impulses in the brain, the trauma would destroy the brain before there was even conscious recognition of damage, they'll never even know they were dead.  Hard to be cruel when they die so fast they never even can realize they are being executed.

Is it that we try to make it clinical, medical, scientific?  We want our executions neat and clean and orderly.  Death isn't like that.
 
2014-01-28 02:04:46 PM

cig-mkr: I remember one time a lawyer said they couldn't hang a guy because he was too fat and his head would pop off. Don't remember the ruling.


Ah, yes, the pregnant Jane Doe v. Dandelion case.  I remember it well.
 
2014-01-28 02:04:55 PM

gja: Last I checked Max/Super-max incarceration if exorbitantly expensive for us taxpayers.


It is, but the death penalty is far MORE expensive. Because not only are you paying for the prisons, you have to pay for an army of lawyers on top of it because of all the mandatory appeals, which we have because innocent people keep getting executed.
 
2014-01-28 02:05:04 PM

gja: Magorn: dittybopper: Magorn: It serves no financial, or legal, or even deterrent purpose, and is nothing more than revenge.

It does do one thing really well:  It prevents the person from ever committing another heinous crime.

which can be accomplished just as well, and for far less money, if you merely imprison the person for the rest of his life too

But if they are unapologetic, unprepentant, remorseless, and intent hurting others and on doing so at any possible chance, jail just contains the problem to smaller confines. Why should the poor asshole who stupidly smuggled drugs but never really committed a violent crime have to get thrown in with the guy whos' answer to "Why did you kill everyone in the house?" is "They were home".

And why should society pay for all this? Last I checked Max/Super-max incarceration if exorbitantly expensive for us taxpayers.


Nowhere near as expensive as a death penalty case.  Seriously.  The numbers don't lie.  Executing a prisoner is roughly double what keeping him locked up for the rest of his life costs.  Why? Because, and I think you as a decent person would agree with this, we have to be absolutely certain that the accused is guilty*, got the fairest trial possible, and truly deserves the death penalty (that there are no hidden mitigating factors, mental illness etc).   That takes time, it takes extensive appeals, expensive specialty lawyers etc.  When it is all added up, it costs more than simply putting them in jail for life.


So why do we persist in a death penalty? IMHO because we are desperately trying to feed an illusion most of us NEED to get through the day.  We need to believe that there is some form of justice, either in this world or the next, depending on your philosophical outlook.  The reason we keep the death penalty is the same reason so many religions have invented a concept of hell.  The idea that bad people could do bad things and face no retribution equal to the evil they did is simply unacceptable to our innate, if childish notions of fair play.

But the awful truth is that the world is an ugly, messy, and wildly unjust  place and killing the occasional random murderer won;t change that.  Why does THIS guy deserve to die, when say Jeffery Dahmer who murdered and then ate his victims not?  What makes him worse than a rapist who chopped off his victim's arms and cut out her tongue so she couldn't ID him?  Not only was he not executed (not eligible since no murder) but he's actually out of jail a free man now.  IS this guy worse than say, Sammy "the Bull" Graviano or Whitey Bulger who murdered dozens of people and not only weren't executed but actively protected by law enforcement?

*(and  unless you've worked crim law, you'd probably be shocked to learn how unreliable most "definitive" evidence really is. Eyewitnesses?  Ridiculously unreliable. Signed confession?  Even if they didn't beat it out of the subject, the instance of "false confession syndrome" where a determined interrogator can convince an innocent person they actually DID commit a crime is shockingly high.   "hair and Fiber Matching"?  Junk science.   Fingerprint "matching"? With Zero standards for what constitutes a "match" completely unreliable.  Even DNA is really on reliable to rule a suspect out, not in.)
 
2014-01-28 02:05:13 PM

moike: lennavan: I swear everyone involved here is stupid.

To the anti-death penalty people - The drugs used are the same ones used during surgery.  10 minutes in he wasn't struggling for breath, he was unconscious.  When a brain dead person on life support makes an audible gasp or something like it, the doctors explain it's a reflex, not a conscious breath.  So no, this guy making a noise 10 minutes later doesn't mean he suffocated to death.  He didn't suffer, he had the same medications surgery patients get.  He died quite peacefully.

To the pro-death penalty people - The drugs used are the same ones used during surgery.  10 minutes in he wasn't acting, he was unconscious.  When a brain dead person on life support makes an audible gasp or something like it, the doctors explain it's a reflex, not a conscious breath.  So no, this guy making a noise 10 minutes later doesn't mean he was acting.

For farks sake people.  Lots of reasons to be pro or anti death penalty.  But stop making shiat up.

The first time I read the story of him gasping for breath so long after the drugs were administered I just assumed it was reflex.  I've seen enough videos on LiveLeak of the exact same type of reflex...  And in some of those videos the majority of the brain of the featured individual was several feet from the body so there was no question that they were quite dead.   But what remained of the body was still running on autopilot and attempting to gasp for breath.

As far as capital punishment goes I don't understand why someone who raped and murdered a pregnant newlywed does not get tossed feet first into a wood chipper minutes after the gavel bangs with a guilty conviction.


I'm all for capital punishment and I find a particular disgust for people worried about making sure a guy who anally raped and stabbed a pregnant lady to death doesn't feel any pain.  But holy shiat, this is not that example.  This guy went more peacefully than anyone not being executed ever will.  He died ODing on a surgical sedative, while high on morphine.  That's supposed to be considered inhumane.  For a guy who stabbed a pregnant lady to death after he raped her anally because she was so pregnant, the vaginal route was difficult to get to.

McGuire sought sex from Joy Stewart but she refused and he raped her. According to court documents, McGuire said that "because she was so pregnant it was difficult to engage in sex with her, so he anally sodomized her. Joy then became 'hysterical,' which made McGuire nervous. He ended up killing Joy for fear that he would go to jail for raping a pregnant woman."

We are arguing about whether or not high on morphine ODing on surgical sedative is human enough for this guy.  It's farking sick.  Be against the death penalty.  But this is not the case to hang your hat on.
 
2014-01-28 02:06:07 PM

jaytkay: CalvinMorallis: It goes to the heart of why we execute criminals in the first place, though. Capital punishment is supposed to be a deterrent, not punishment for punishment's sake.

Nice theory but death penalty supporters enjoy the idea inflicting pain and suffering. It's part of the authoritarian mindset.

Simply look up-thread at all the detailed, cruel fantasies


Mine is detailed, but I don't think cruel.  In fact, it's as painless and quick as it could possibly be.

/Not really a fantasy, either.
 
2014-01-28 02:06:12 PM

lennavan: moike:

We are arguing about whether or not high on morphine ODing on surgical sedative is human enough for this guy.  It's farking sick.  Be against the death penalty.  But this is not the case to hang your hat on.


Whoops, by the way this wasn't meant to be targeted at you or anything.  More agreeing and discussing with you.
 
2014-01-28 02:06:24 PM

dittybopper: CrazyCracka420: I tend to think this would be the most humane way to go (if done correctly):

Head lives on for a long-ish time.  There is evidence of conscious action of a severed head from a guillotine for up to 20 seconds or so, and the amount of time the severed head can still perceive their surroundings is likely to be even longer.


Guess I didn't realize that.  I just thought if you got decapped close to your brain stem it was an instant death.  I'd also have thought that would cut off any sensory perceptions (like sight).

I'm sure there are actually humane ways to kill someone, our lethal injections don't really seem to fit that bill however (from the accounts I've read about). 

Silverstaff: Why don't we bring back firing squads?

No, seriously.

No arguing about drug cocktails and troubles with imports.  A high-powered rifle round will travel through the cranium faster than the nerve impulses in the brain, the trauma would destroy the brain before there was even conscious recognition of damage, they'll never even know they were dead.  Hard to be cruel when they die so fast they never even can realize they are being executed.

Is it that we try to make it clinical, medical, scientific?  We want our executions neat and clean and orderly.  Death isn't like that.


That's pretty much what I was going for with the decapitation.  But I don't know how accurate it really is (if it's a quick and clean death, even if done perfectly).   I imagine there's ways we can completely knock a person out with gas, and then stop their breathing or heart functions while they stay knocked out.  Or like others have said, when we put animals to sleep, they are out very peacefully and very quickly (I've seen it happen to two of my pets).  At least I assume it's peaceful based on their reactions.  Just looks like they are going to sleep.
 
2014-01-28 02:08:01 PM

lennavan: That's ignorance and you should feel bad about yourself for it.


You seem to have a certain knack for missing the point, don't you? I already knew what you were talking about, that's why I simply mocked your hypocrisy before moving on to the factual inaccuracy of the statements. What I know isn't relevant, however, since your original comment wasn't directed at me, but at the thread as a whole. It's not that I needed you to tell me that, it's that you had the gall to make those unsupported claims, directed at everyone, while claiming the same "everyone" was just making things up on their own.

And since you finally decided to look up some evidence for those claims, was it really that hard? I mean, not counting all the effort you put into surrounding the links with all those childish insults.

I also assume, since you didn't bother responding to it, that you've accepted the fact that your claims about the drugs' suitability for execution are not supportable solely based on their suitability for sedating medical patients?
 
2014-01-28 02:08:10 PM
Silverstaff: Why don't we bring back firing squads?

No, seriously.

No arguing about drug cocktails and troubles with imports.  A high-powered rifle round will travel through the cranium faster than the nerve impulses in the brain, the trauma would destroy the brain before there was even conscious recognition of damage, they'll never even know they were dead.  Hard to be cruel when they die so fast they never even can realize they are being executed.

Is it that we try to make it clinical, medical, scientific?  We want our executions neat and clean and orderly.  Death isn't like that.


Long drop hanging, severs the brain stem between the base of the skull and C1, out like a light switch before you know you hit the bottom.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-01-28 02:10:24 PM

jaytkay: CalvinMorallis: It goes to the heart of why we execute criminals in the first place, though. Capital punishment is supposed to be a deterrent, not punishment for punishment's sake.

Nice theory but death penalty supporters enjoy the idea inflicting pain and suffering. It's part of the authoritarian mindset.

Simply look up-thread at all the detailed, cruel fantasies


So, "you people are all the same" argument?
Nice bigotry and generalization.

I support it, in a very limited sense. Reserved for only those who are as I have described in prior posts.
 
2014-01-28 02:11:38 PM

dittybopper: Mine is detailed, but I don't think cruel. In fact, it's as painless and quick as it could possibly be.

/Not really a fantasy, either.


You daydream about killing people. Think about that.
 
2014-01-28 02:12:15 PM
From the full article: "McQuire said that he understood Lowe as saying "if he started to choke or jerk in any way" the governor would put a stop to the execution." What? I thought the condemned had their arms and hands strapped down. I can certainly understand him not wanting to put on a show if his daughter was present,however.
 
2014-01-28 02:13:35 PM

skozlaw: You seem to have a certain knack for missing the point, don't you? I already knew what you were talking about, that's why I simply mocked your hypocrisy before moving on to the factual inaccuracy of the statements.


At this point, I have provided 3 citations to back my arguments.  You have provided 0.  Guess which one of us wrote:

Yes, that's how arguments work. If you make a claim, it's your job to support it. If you refuse to support it, it is fair for everyone else to write it off without any further consideration. You are obligated to support your own arguments, everybody else is not obligated to seek support for them.

SPOILER ALERT:  it was you!

skozlaw: And since you finally decided to look up some evidence for those claims, was it really that hard? I mean, not counting all the effort you put into surrounding the links with all those childish insults.


No, it really wasn't.  That's why it's so odd to me that you didn't bother to do it yourself.  Or that you still haven't bothered to cite a single one of your claims.  It's almost as if you're actively ignorant here.

You should feel bad about yourself.  Seriously.  If you felt bad about yourself, there would be hope for you.  Sadly, there is no hope for you.

skozlaw: I also assume, since you didn't bother responding to it, that you've accepted the fact that your claims about the drugs' suitability for execution are not supportable solely based on their suitability for sedating medical patients?


Wait, you want a citation now that the guy died?
 
2014-01-28 02:13:45 PM
Catch-22.  The only way he could fake a struggle is if the drugs weren't suitable for an execution.
 
2014-01-28 02:14:19 PM

walktoanarcade: cig-mkr: jshine: cig-mkr: Who cares that he suffered? I'm fairly sure he wasn't concerned about cruel and unusual when he was raping and killing that girl. Think about what horrors the girl was going through during the ordeal. And the bastard lived decades after he killed her. No sympathy for him.


Ideally, there should be something to separate us (acting collectively through the State) from the criminals we punish.  If we are just as bloodthirsty and willing to torture or kill as the people we are punishing, then what is it that separates them from us?  Right from Wrong?  Aside from superior fire-power, that is...

That's probably one of the reasons why the Founding Fathers wrote the "cruel & unusual" punishment prohibition into the Bill of Rights -- along with freedom of speech and the right to bear arms.

I don't believe in cruel and unusual either, but I'm willing to bet that there are people willing to pull the lever at a hanging or volunteer for the firing squad. Did they eliminate the firing squad / hanging because it was cruel and unusual ? I remember one time a lawyer said they couldn't hang a guy because he was too fat and his head would pop off. Don't remember the ruling.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitchell_Rupe


Thank you for that didn't realize it was 20 years ago.
 
2014-01-28 02:21:23 PM
McGuire was completely f*cking unconscious. He didn't feel pain, he didn't make a scene, it just took a while for him to die.
 
2014-01-28 02:23:29 PM

cptjeff: gja: Last I checked Max/Super-max incarceration if exorbitantly expensive for us taxpayers.

It is, but the death penalty is far MORE expensive. Because not only are you paying for the prisons, you have to pay for an army of lawyers on top of it because of all the mandatory appeals, which we have because innocent people keep getting executed.


Not to worry.  It'll get cheaper when we offshore it.
 
2014-01-28 02:24:02 PM

dittybopper: client


The attorney-client privilege protects the client, not the attorney.
 
2014-01-28 02:24:21 PM

Oldiron_79: Silverstaff: Why don't we bring back firing squads?

No, seriously.

No arguing about drug cocktails and troubles with imports.  A high-powered rifle round will travel through the cranium faster than the nerve impulses in the brain, the trauma would destroy the brain before there was even conscious recognition of damage, they'll never even know they were dead.  Hard to be cruel when they die so fast they never even can realize they are being executed.

Is it that we try to make it clinical, medical, scientific?  We want our executions neat and clean and orderly.  Death isn't like that.

Long drop hanging, severs the brain stem between the base of the skull and C1, out like a light switch before you know you hit the bottom.


The only cruel and stressful part about hanging, head chopping, or even firing squad is the thoughts of "oh shiat i'm about to be killed".

My solution? After the lengthy process of appeals (there are no do-overs when someone is dead, gotta make 100% sure you've got the right guy) is complete, have the equivalent of ceiling cat open a tile and laser aim a small/medium caliber rifle/pistol at the head and shoot 'em in the middle of the night when they are asleep.  Be nice to the other prisoners and use something sub-sonic so it can be properly suppressed.  230grn 45 slug moving at 850 fps, use a single shot or a bolt gun so there is no gas escape and no noise once a *good* suppressor is fitted.

No notice of "sorry, appeals are up, you have a week".  That is a weeks worth of stress and anxiety out of the way.  No notice of "last meal, you got an hour".  Just "oh, another day in prison waiting to find out..." and then *pfft* in the middle of the night, call the medical examiner/mortician/funeral home in the morning.
 
2014-01-28 02:25:33 PM

cig-mkr: walktoanarcade: cig-mkr: jshine: cig-mkr: Who cares that he suffered? I'm fairly sure he wasn't concerned about cruel and unusual when he was raping and killing that girl. Think about what horrors the girl was going through during the ordeal. And the bastard lived decades after he killed her. No sympathy for him.


Ideally, there should be something to separate us (acting collectively through the State) from the criminals we punish.  If we are just as bloodthirsty and willing to torture or kill as the people we are punishing, then what is it that separates them from us?  Right from Wrong?  Aside from superior fire-power, that is...

That's probably one of the reasons why the Founding Fathers wrote the "cruel & unusual" punishment prohibition into the Bill of Rights -- along with freedom of speech and the right to bear arms.

I don't believe in cruel and unusual either, but I'm willing to bet that there are people willing to pull the lever at a hanging or volunteer for the firing squad. Did they eliminate the firing squad / hanging because it was cruel and unusual ? I remember one time a lawyer said they couldn't hang a guy because he was too fat and his head would pop off. Don't remember the ruling.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitchell_Rupe

Thank you for that didn't realize it was 20 years ago.


You're welcome, and yeah, wow time flies. Sometimes when I look at a video game from 1994 my brain still classifies it as "newish."
 
2014-01-28 02:26:43 PM
i42.photobucket.com
 
2014-01-28 02:32:32 PM

dittybopper: CalvinMorallis: Capital punishment is supposed to be a deterrent, not punishment for punishment's sake.

No, it isn't.

The purpose of any punishment isn't to deter, per se.  The honest and moral people don't need such things to keep them on the straight and narrow, and the people that are liable to commit crimes generally don't think about the potential consequences of their actions in the first place.

Certainly, there is very little evidence that increased penalties lower crime rates via deterrence, and some evidence that they lower crime rates by removing those people who are predisposed to commit crimes from society for a longer period.

The purpose of all legal punishments, as least as far as incarceration goes, is to remove a dangerous person from society.   We make some effort to "rehabilitate" those who we feel can be rehabilitated, and sometimes it actually works for non-violent criminals (but rarely for the really violent ones), but that's a secondary consideration.

I don't know where this idea that a prison sentence or the death penalty is supposed to be a deterrent came from, but no matter what you feel the answer is, it's the wrong question in the first place.

Violent criminals (the type that get the death penalty), almost by definition, have poor impulse control.  They live in the moment.  They might plan a crime, but they don't look towards the future consequences of getting caught, going to trial, and being convicted and punished.

They just don't think that far ahead.

So the idea of any particular set of legal punishments being a deterrent to that sort of person is simply laughable when you actually *THINK* about it.


You are only talking about violent criminals that get caught.

The ones that don't get caught may be a lot different than the ones that end up in prison.
 
2014-01-28 02:33:21 PM
The context here is a lawsuit that the executed man's family is contemplating against the state of Ohio for violating his Eighth Amendment rights.

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2014/01/17/lawsuit-fil ed -over-execution.html

Sounds to me as if someone in the state government is trying to influence the prospective jury pool.  I for one doubt that the condemned man was even conscious after the first drug, midazolam, was pumped into him, and I don't think that he could have made a show of anything even if he had wanted to.
 
2014-01-28 02:34:47 PM

jaytkay: dittybopper: Mine is detailed, but I don't think cruel. In fact, it's as painless and quick as it could possibly be.

/Not really a fantasy, either.

You daydream about killing people. Think about that.


Hell, I think about all sorts of nefarious things.  *ALL* sorts of nefarious things.  And non-nefarious things, of course.

Doesn't mean anything, any more than it makes Stephen King a monster for using his imagination to come up with horrific novels.

And I don't *daydream*, I *THINK*.  Big difference.  In this case, at some time point years ago, my mind was set to thinking about efficient, painless ways of executing people.  Probably engendered by an online discussion such as this.  So I bounced a few ideas around in my head, did a little research as an intellectual exercise, and came up with the 'implode the head' method as the most humane possible method for the person being executed.

It's not like I salivate at the thought of setting such a thing off myself.  It's just given the parameters (a person to be executed), and the limitations imposed by society and the law (mustn't be cruel to the person being executed), I found a more optimal solution to the problem.
 
2014-01-28 02:41:51 PM

mcreadyblue: You are only talking about violent criminals that get caught.

The ones that don't get caught may be a lot different than the ones that end up in prison.


Generally, they mostly get caught.  The violent criminal who never gets caught has to be a very, very small fraction.

How do we know that?

Well, take murder:  Something like 75 to 90% of the people arrested on murder charges have an adult felony arrest record*.  The percent with juvenile arrests would probably push that over 90%, but those records are sealed and unavailable once the person is an adult.

They may not get immediately arrested for every crime they commit, but a person who is consistently violent is usually going to get caught at some point.


*Interestingly, so do most homicide victims.  The sort of people killing and dying on our streets are atypical of society in general
 
2014-01-28 02:43:11 PM

dittybopper: And I don't *daydream*, I *THINK*. Big difference. In this case, at some time point years ago, my mind was set to thinking about efficient, painless ways of executing people. Probably engendered by an online discussion such as this. So I bounced a few ideas around in my head, did a little research as an intellectual exercise, and came up with the 'implode the head' method as the most humane possible method for the person being executed.


Like you said though, implode the head is messy and doesn't allow for open casket funerals and whatnot.    Honestly, this current method of execution is amazingly humane.  You're not ever going to get better, there really is no better way to go.  He was not clinically dead for 15 minutes doesn't mean he was in pain for 15 minutes or suffering for 15 minutes.  He was passed out, head in the clouds, high on morphine.

The only reason this method of execution remains argued about is because if we all agree it is humane, that's one significant method of arguing against the constitutionality of the death penalty gone.  It's like pro-life people saying abortion clinics should keep up to hospital level standards.  They don't actually think that's necessary, but they'll pretend to think whatever you want if it gets them their way.
 
2014-01-28 02:48:01 PM
"He wants me to put on this big show in front of my kids, all right when I'm dying!" McGuire is reported as having told one guard. "I ain't gonna do this. It's about me and my kids, not him and his cause!"

I wonder if the raped pregnant woman was thinking this too as he murdered her. But no, he had to have his cause .getting off on raping someone and then killing her to hide the fact, or out of pure sickness.

People sort of don't care about the suffering of POSs like this guy.
 
2014-01-28 02:56:11 PM

Prof. Frink: zimbomba63: In the course of my duties, I discovered evidence of bribery and turned the said evidence over to the proper authorities, which lead to the disbarment of an attorney who was a buddy/pal of the then governor of my state.  That gave me a warm, tingly feeling all over.

That was the taser.


Oh, I guess that's why I woke up on the ground and bourbon wasn't involved.
 
2014-01-28 02:57:43 PM

lennavan: Like you said though, implode the head is messy and doesn't allow for open casket funerals and whatnot.


Well, yes.  And I certainly wouldn't want to be the guy who has to clean up afterwards.
 
2014-01-28 03:09:52 PM

zimbomba63: I find it odd that, where ethical suicide is allowed, they give the patient an overdose of barbiturates and they simply nod off, with their families around them.  But, when the same is done to these scumbags, it's inhumane torture.  Garbage like this needs to go, I don't care if it's a bullet to the back of the head.


I'm all for that. Except use one of these. There's not a chance of it not killing them.  There's nothing left above the neck.

img.fark.net

When we removed my mom from life support the DRs waaay upped her morphine drip. There was some gasping for a few seconds, but it was far more peaceful than anyone who had a heart attack and far more than I'd give to a man who raped and murdered a pregnant woman.

\I wonder if the DRs upped her morphine to levels that ensure a quick death. If that's the case, good. I'll never ask. Cancer is a cast iron biatch.
\\These people are getting deaths far more painless than the vast majority of the population get.
\\\I hope the original cocktail provider feels better that they're giving people more painful deaths because of their morals because they're not stopping any executions
 
2014-01-28 03:22:52 PM

lennavan: At this point, I have provided 3 citations to back my arguments


No, you didn't. Not one of those links attested to the efficacy of that drug cocktail for the purposes of execution. You've gotten yourself so twisted up in your own bullshiat you don't even know what we're talking about anymore. Maybe next time it would be in your interest to spend less time exercising your brain on inane insults and a little more time following the thread of the discussion.

lennavan: Wait, you want a citation now that the guy died?


I suppose you think that was very clever, hm?
 
2014-01-28 03:34:34 PM
It shouldn't take 25 years to kill someone. If we're gonna have a death penalty, then accept we will kill innocent people sometimes and get on with it. If that responsibility can't be accepted then, there should not be a death penalty.

/society should not be on the financial hook for criminals for decades and decades
 
2014-01-28 03:42:47 PM
Strangely unmoved. I wonder how long that fetus gasped for breath once it's mother died. I hope his death was as cruel as possible. It's not a deterrent; it's a punishment, and the ultimate deterrent to recidivism.
 
2014-01-28 03:47:38 PM

i.r.id10t: Oldiron_79: Silverstaff: Why don't we bring back firing squads?

No, seriously.

No arguing about drug cocktails and troubles with imports.  A high-powered rifle round will travel through the cranium faster than the nerve impulses in the brain, the trauma would destroy the brain before there was even conscious recognition of damage, they'll never even know they were dead.  Hard to be cruel when they die so fast they never even can realize they are being executed.

Is it that we try to make it clinical, medical, scientific?  We want our executions neat and clean and orderly.  Death isn't like that.

Long drop hanging, severs the brain stem between the base of the skull and C1, out like a light switch before you know you hit the bottom.

The only cruel and stressful part about hanging, head chopping, or even firing squad is the thoughts of "oh shiat i'm about to be killed".

My solution? After the lengthy process of appeals (there are no do-overs when someone is dead, gotta make 100% sure you've got the right guy) is complete, have the equivalent of ceiling cat open a tile and laser aim a small/medium caliber rifle/pistol at the head and shoot 'em in the middle of the night when they are asleep.  Be nice to the other prisoners and use something sub-sonic so it can be properly suppressed.  230grn 45 slug moving at 850 fps, use a single shot or a bolt gun so there is no gas escape and no noise once a *good* suppressor is fitted.

No notice of "sorry, appeals are up, you have a week".  That is a weeks worth of stress and anxiety out of the way.  No notice of "last meal, you got an hour".  Just "oh, another day in prison waiting to find out..." and then *pfft* in the middle of the night, call the medical examiner/mortician/funeral home in the morning.


Thats not too dissimilar to execution method in Russia before they did away with it. The death row cells had solid doors and one day when your food tray slot opened a pistol barrel came through instead of a food tray.
 
2014-01-28 03:48:08 PM

NickelP: I keep asking this and not getting an answer.  When you take your pet to the vet it takes about 15 seconds and they die with a smile and don't seem uncomfortable at all.  It took this dude 20 minutes+ to suffocate.  What are they teaching at vet school that these folks are ignoring?


From what I remember from another fark thread, the vet folks have access to better drugs, because the companies making them won't supply it to prisons.
 
2014-01-28 03:55:11 PM
PsiChick:
From what I remember from another fark thread, the vet folks have access to better drugs, because the companies making them won't supply it to prisons.

Can't say I blame them one bit.  What sporadic amounts prisons would order now and the don't even come close to comparing to the potential liability.  One "botched" execution and the ACLU has its lawyers pointed right at you.  For what?  A customer a few times a year?  Not worth it.
 
2014-01-28 04:04:16 PM

nekom: PsiChick:
From what I remember from another fark thread, the vet folks have access to better drugs, because the companies making them won't supply it to prisons.

Can't say I blame them one bit.  What sporadic amounts prisons would order now and the don't even come close to comparing to the potential liability.  One "botched" execution and the ACLU has its lawyers pointed right at you.  For what?  A customer a few times a year?  Not worth it.


Well, I figure it's at least partly the medical-ethics side of things...
 
2014-01-28 04:09:50 PM

PsiChick: nekom: PsiChick:
From what I remember from another fark thread, the vet folks have access to better drugs, because the companies making them won't supply it to prisons.

Can't say I blame them one bit.  What sporadic amounts prisons would order now and the don't even come close to comparing to the potential liability.  One "botched" execution and the ACLU has its lawyers pointed right at you.  For what?  A customer a few times a year?  Not worth it.

Well, I figure it's at least partly the medical-ethics side of things...



Pharmaceutical manufacturers don't have to take a Hippocratic oath; they may be PhD's, but not MD's.  Hell, I'm not even pro death-penalty, but if indemnified by the State from liability lawsuits, I'd whip them up a batch of Nembutal for the right price.

/ chemical engineer
// it's an easy & ancient synthesis that traces back to the 1800s, IIRC
 
2014-01-28 04:12:23 PM

jshine: PsiChick: nekom: PsiChick:
From what I remember from another fark thread, the vet folks have access to better drugs, because the companies making them won't supply it to prisons.

Can't say I blame them one bit.  What sporadic amounts prisons would order now and the don't even come close to comparing to the potential liability.  One "botched" execution and the ACLU has its lawyers pointed right at you.  For what?  A customer a few times a year?  Not worth it.

Well, I figure it's at least partly the medical-ethics side of things...


Pharmaceutical manufacturers don't have to take a Hippocratic oath; they may be PhD's, but not MD's.  Hell, I'm not even pro death-penalty, but if indemnified by the State from liability lawsuits, I'd whip them up a batch of Nembutal for the right price.

/ chemical engineer
// it's an easy & ancient synthesis that traces back to the 1800s, IIRC


No, but presumably you go into pharmacuetics with some idea of ethics. Plus, doctors might get pissed if you don't play nice.
 
2014-01-28 04:25:25 PM

lennavan: a particular individual: nekom: only the clearly guilty beyond any shadow of a doubt should be taken to the gallows and hanged immediately after that guilt is determined.

Every single person who has been released from death row for false conviction was found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

So the extensive, lengthy appeals process works?


If by "works," you mean it "gives Project Innocence time to do their job," yes. Barry Beach in Montana is back in prison after being released for 18 months to prepare a defense for a new trial. Everyone knows he's innocent, including the asshole prosecutor (who is now the governor of Montana). Of course, Bullock won't admit he screwed up, and still clings to the coerced confession as "proof" of Beach's "guilt." It doesn't help that the Tea Party managed to get a couple of right-wing zealots on the Supreme Court, which overturned the lower court's decision to release him.
 
2014-01-28 04:31:54 PM
PsiChick:
No, but presumably you go into pharmacuetics with some idea of ethics. Plus, doctors might get pissed if you don't play nice.

Pharmacists yes.  Chemical manufacturers?  Ask the people in Bhopal how much they value human life.  It's all about money.  Though most doctors won't participate in executions at all, not even to pronounce death and the AMA takes that stance as well IIRC.  But the people making the chemicals?  All about $$$
 
2014-01-28 04:40:03 PM

nekom: PsiChick:
No, but presumably you go into pharmacuetics with some idea of ethics. Plus, doctors might get pissed if you don't play nice.

Pharmacists yes.  Chemical manufacturers?  Ask the people in Bhopal how much they value human life.  It's all about money.  Though most doctors won't participate in executions at all, not even to pronounce death and the AMA takes that stance as well IIRC.  But the people making the chemicals?  All about $$$



Bhopal was a pesticide plant owned by Union Carbide (IIRC) and had nothing to do with pharmaceuticals.

/ it's a (rightly) infamous incident among chemical engineers
 
2014-01-28 04:42:53 PM

skozlaw: lennavan: At this point, I have provided 3 citations to back my arguments


No, you didn't.

Yes I did.  My claim:

lennavan: The drugs used are the same ones used during surgery


Your reply:

skozlaw: you supported absolutely none of your claims with citations


My citation:

lennavan: Midazolam is used to produce sleepiness or drowsiness and to relieve anxiety before surgery
http://www.mayoclinic.org/drugs-supplements/midazolam-injection-rout e/ description/drg-20064813


You dick.

skozlaw: You've gotten yourself so twisted up in your own bullshiat you don't even know what we're talking about anymore. Maybe next time it would be in your interest to spend less time exercising your brain on inane insults and a little more time following the thread of the discussion.


YOU STILL HAVENT PROVIDED A SINGLE CITATION YOURSELF.  But you keep biatching about mine not being good enough.

You dick.
 
2014-01-28 04:50:01 PM

a particular individual: lennavan: a particular individual: nekom: only the clearly guilty beyond any shadow of a doubt should be taken to the gallows and hanged immediately after that guilt is determined.

Every single person who has been released from death row for false conviction was found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

So the extensive, lengthy appeals process works?

If by "works," you mean it "gives Project Innocence time to do their job," yes. Barry Beach in Montana is back in prison after being released for 18 months to prepare a defense for a new trial. Everyone knows he's innocent, including the asshole prosecutor (who is now the governor of Montana). Of course, Bullock won't admit he screwed up, and still clings to the coerced confession as "proof" of Beach's "guilt." It doesn't help that the Tea Party managed to get a couple of right-wing zealots on the Supreme Court, which overturned the lower court's decision to release him.


I agree with what I assume your point is - the capital punishment system is flawed and capital punishment should be immediately ceased until significant reforms are enacted.  But what you replied to was a comment where you should have assumed he also wanted significant reforms to remove all possibility of doubt.  For instance, requiring actual video footage.  If we have actual video footage of the crime in question, which isn't so unreasonable in today's cell phones with video cameras age.

You want to use the people taken off death row as an example of how the initial stages of the process (the first trial) fail.  Perhaps, though keep in mind many of those cases are not "innocent" people but rather doubt has re-entered.  They still may be guilty.  But your evidence that the first stage is faulty could be my evidence that the entire process as a whole works.  See, look at all these people we release later when even the teensiest bit of doubt comes up!
 
2014-01-28 04:52:42 PM
I think there should be banjo music playing in the background of this thread.
 
2014-01-28 04:57:54 PM

lennavan: If we have actual video footage of the crime in question, which isn't so unreasonable in today's cell phones with video cameras age.


...or unreasonable not to fake with consumer priced video editing/motion graphics software.
 
2014-01-28 05:02:44 PM
I still think we should execute people by squishing them between flat steel plates, with the top one weighing many tons and dropped from a great height. It would be instantaneous and if you sedate the guy first he won't have to see it coming. As a bonus, Soylent Jam.
 
2014-01-28 05:06:59 PM
I didn't really care about his "suffering" when I first heard about the execution. I don't really care now.

And I'm not a big fan of capital punishment.

But I'm even less of a fan of rape and murder.

So I'm kinda hoping he actually did suffer.
 
2014-01-28 05:11:49 PM

lennavan: a particular individual: lennavan: a particular individual: nekom: only the clearly guilty beyond any shadow of a doubt should be taken to the gallows and hanged immediately after that guilt is determined.

Every single person who has been released from death row for false conviction was found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

So the extensive, lengthy appeals process works?

If by "works," you mean it "gives Project Innocence time to do their job," yes. Barry Beach in Montana is back in prison after being released for 18 months to prepare a defense for a new trial. Everyone knows he's innocent, including the asshole prosecutor (who is now the governor of Montana). Of course, Bullock won't admit he screwed up, and still clings to the coerced confession as "proof" of Beach's "guilt." It doesn't help that the Tea Party managed to get a couple of right-wing zealots on the Supreme Court, which overturned the lower court's decision to release him.

I agree with what I assume your point is - the capital punishment system is flawed and capital punishment should be immediately ceased until significant reforms are enacted.  But what you replied to was a comment where you should have assumed he also wanted significant reforms to remove all possibility of doubt.  For instance, requiring actual video footage.  If we have actual video footage of the crime in question, which isn't so unreasonable in today's cell phones with video cameras age.

You want to use the people taken off death row as an example of how the initial stages of the process (the first trial) fail.  Perhaps, though keep in mind many of those cases are not "innocent" people but rather doubt has re-entered.  They still may be guilty.  But your evidence that the first stage is faulty could be my evidence that the entire process as a whole works.  See, look at all these people we release later when even the teensiest bit of doubt comes up!


We're pretty much on the same page, but I've seen too many cases of the prosecution manufacturing evidence to ever trust those assholes. If they want someone on death row, they'll put them there. The only way to be sure is to abolish the death penalty entirely.

Some people don't deserve to live. I just don't think people are able to reliably sort the chaff from the wheat.
 
2014-01-28 05:24:13 PM

BizarreMan: RedPhoenix122: Theaetetus: dittybopper: Protected by attorney-client privilege, and in any case, "making a show of your death" as a way to protest capital punishment is protected political speech.

The whole thing is hearsay anyways.

Plus, even if this whole thing was true, we don't know how much was intentional theatrics and how much was actual writhing in pain.

If he can put on a show while dying, he's damn good.


THE ARISTOCRATS!
 
2014-01-28 06:35:49 PM
26 minutes? That's only four minutes for commercials. They've gotta get more efficient if they ever want to televise this.
 
2014-01-28 07:02:56 PM

lennavan: [temper tantrum]


Ahem.

skozlaw: Even if we accept your claims about the drugs at face value, your conclusions still cannot be accepted based solely on your provided reasoning.


You concluded that the drugs were suitable for an execution because they are used in surgery on the basis that at the surgery dosage they produce anesthesia, therefore they must have been anesthetic at the dosages and in the combinations used in the execution cocktail.

You'll note that I never actually asked you to cite your claims about them being used in surgery, I mocked you for making that statement without bothering to cite it in the very same post you complained about other people's empty claims. I then proceeded to disprove your claim about the suitability of drugs for one purpose at one dose implying suitability for the same purpose at higher doses by citing the example of alcohol and the principles underlying hormesis. If you don't know what those are, that's not my problem. I only need to offer the citation, I don't need to teach you what it means. In essence however, it's that a toxin can have a positive affect - such as anesthesia - at one controlled dosage while having a completely different or wildly escalated and uncontrolled effect at higher doses in a non-linear way. Alcohol is a perfect example. At a low dose it has some protective affects and produces a sensation of euphoria. At higher doses, neither the benefits nor the euphoria are increased linearly. The opposite of both occurs. It becomes rampantly destructive in the human body and produces deep depression instead.

Therefore, your claim that the drugs must have been anesthetic at those doses because they are anesthetic at lower doses is, inherently, baseless. They MIGHT be, but there's no valid reason for simply assuming it to be true and you did so only out of ignorance, not because you have some good reason to think you were correct.

Hope that cleared it all up for you. Again, I would suggest that in the future you spend a bit less of what appears to be your fairly limited intellectual capital on coming up with what you imagine to be clever insults and a little more time on trying to follow what's being said.
 
2014-01-28 07:28:55 PM
a particular individual:Some people don't deserve to live. I just don't think people are able to reliably sort the chaff from the wheat.

Nadal Hassan is one that comes to mind.  Caught in the act, tons of witnesses, a confession, everything you could want.  I see no reason to waste taxpayers dollars past the initial trial.  I don't care if he even wants to die.  Let him.  Don't make all of us pay to keep him around.  I'm all for the death penalty, but my standards of proof are about that high.  99.9% of murderers wouldn't qualify for my death penalty.  But the ones who do wouldn't need more than a month, because we all know damn well they are guilty.
 
2014-01-28 07:49:42 PM

a particular individual: We're pretty much on the same page, but I've seen too many cases of the prosecution manufacturing evidence to ever trust those assholes. If they want someone on death row, they'll put them there. The only way to be sure is to abolish the death penalty entirely.

Some people don't deserve to live. I just don't think people are able to reliably sort the chaff from the wheat.


Oh we're definitely on the same page then.  I'm still a hold out because every now and then there's a case like this that reminds me why I'm happy the death penalty exists.  But you're right, in my mind in theory there exists a way to apply the death penalty nationwide that prevents innocents from ever being executed.  In actual practice, I have serious reservations.

On a related note, I am in favor of punishing dirty cops/prosecutors double what the penalty their "criminal" would have gotten for gross negligence/manufacturing evidence/etc.  I'm a huge believer in the whole letting 10 guilty men go free before you risk convicting 1 guilty man sorta deal.  And I have heard/read far too many stories of shall we say "silly" police reports.  We can't be having the police/prosecutors be doing that shiat if we're gonna have any faith in our justice system at all.
 
2014-01-28 07:51:44 PM

skozlaw: lennavan: [temper tantrum]

Ahem.


Until you apologize for incorrectly attacking my citations, or provide 3 citations of your own, I have no choice but to assume you're trolling me.  Because all I see at this point is:

lennavan:  Claim X
skozlaw:  Citation?
lennavan:  Really?
skozlaw:  Yes
lennavna: fine: citation 1, citation 2 and citation 3.
skozlaw:  you didn't cite Claim Y!
 
2014-01-28 07:57:05 PM

Oldiron_79: i.r.id10t: Oldiron_79: Silverstaff: Why don't we bring back firing squads?

No, seriously.

No arguing about drug cocktails and troubles with imports.  A high-powered rifle round will travel through the cranium faster than the nerve impulses in the brain, the trauma would destroy the brain before there was even conscious recognition of damage, they'll never even know they were dead.  Hard to be cruel when they die so fast they never even can realize they are being executed.

Is it that we try to make it clinical, medical, scientific?  We want our executions neat and clean and orderly.  Death isn't like that.

Long drop hanging, severs the brain stem between the base of the skull and C1, out like a light switch before you know you hit the bottom.

The only cruel and stressful part about hanging, head chopping, or even firing squad is the thoughts of "oh shiat i'm about to be killed".

My solution? After the lengthy process of appeals (there are no do-overs when someone is dead, gotta make 100% sure you've got the right guy) is complete, have the equivalent of ceiling cat open a tile and laser aim a small/medium caliber rifle/pistol at the head and shoot 'em in the middle of the night when they are asleep.  Be nice to the other prisoners and use something sub-sonic so it can be properly suppressed.  230grn 45 slug moving at 850 fps, use a single shot or a bolt gun so there is no gas escape and no noise once a *good* suppressor is fitted.

No notice of "sorry, appeals are up, you have a week".  That is a weeks worth of stress and anxiety out of the way.  No notice of "last meal, you got an hour".  Just "oh, another day in prison waiting to find out..." and then *pfft* in the middle of the night, call the medical examiner/mortician/funeral home in the morning.

Thats not too dissimilar to execution method in Russia before they did away with it. The death row cells had solid doors and one day when your food tray slot opened a pistol barrel came through instead of a food tray.


Actually, as I recall from reading about the Gulag, what would happen is that you'd taken from your cell to write a personal appeal to the Premier, and on the way back they'd take you back down a different hallway and someone would come out from some hidden alcove and put a Tokarev to the back of your head and pull the trigger.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-01-28 08:05:30 PM

cptjeff: gja: Last I checked Max/Super-max incarceration if exorbitantly expensive for us taxpayers.

It is, but the death penalty is far MORE expensive. Because not only are you paying for the prisons, you have to pay for an army of lawyers on top of it because of all the mandatory appeals, which we have because innocent people keep getting executed.


Admittedly when you take ALL of it into account it costs more. I was, of course, merely pointing to the final act of it. Not to the long road leading up to it.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-01-28 08:27:28 PM

Magorn: gja: Magorn: dittybopper: Magorn: It serves no financial, or legal, or even deterrent purpose, and is nothing more than revenge.

It does do one thing really well:  It prevents the person from ever committing another heinous crime.

which can be accomplished just as well, and for far less money, if you merely imprison the person for the rest of his life too

But if they are unapologetic, unprepentant, remorseless, and intent hurting others and on doing so at any possible chance, jail just contains the problem to smaller confines. Why should the poor asshole who stupidly smuggled drugs but never really committed a violent crime have to get thrown in with the guy whos' answer to "Why did you kill everyone in the house?" is "They were home".

And why should society pay for all this? Last I checked Max/Super-max incarceration if exorbitantly expensive for us taxpayers.

Nowhere near as expensive as a death penalty case.  Seriously.  The numbers don't lie.  Executing a prisoner is roughly double what keeping him locked up for the rest of his life costs.  Why? Because, and I think you as a decent person would agree with this, we have to be absolutely certain that the accused is guilty*, got the fairest trial possible, and truly deserves the death penalty (that there are no hidden mitigating factors, mental illness etc).   That takes time, it takes extensive appeals, expensive specialty lawyers etc.  When it is all added up, it costs more than simply putting them in jail for life.


So why do we persist in a death penalty? IMHO because we are desperately trying to feed an illusion most of us NEED to get through the day.  We need to believe that there is some form of justice, either in this world or the next, depending on your philosophical outlook.  The reason we keep the death penalty is the same reason so many religions have invented a concept of hell.  The idea that bad people could do bad things and face no retribution equal to the evil they did is simply unacceptable ...


Therein is the quandary. MOST of us prefer to live in a civilized society, some delight in ignoring the boundaries and merely taking whatever strikes their fancy at the moment, damned-be-all. I'm not sure about the illusion of justice. Society NEEDS to have places and limits. Some limits have to be firm enough that violating them is known to result in awful and terrible retribution. Screw justice. It's a word used to make us feel good about having to do unto others that which we pray/hope/wish shall never happen to us.
In the most words.......FEAR.
Fear of something dark enough to strike a resonant chord in the mind or soul of those who dare to violate the laws (limits) that society has placed at the outer fringes of the worst acts.

I admit to be christian, so I am supposed to fear hell. Hell? Try sorting through rubble to find body parts for 36 hour shifts.
Hell would be like club med.
My christianity also whispers in my mind (along with the voice of my mom as she says to me "don't let hate get a foothold, remember none of us are perfect") to not judge others too harshly.
Miscreants such as this make it a difficult line to toe. There are those without compunction, without fear, without feeling for themselves or others.
Locking them up satisfies the need to remove them from society, but society still pays a price for their existence.
At some point transgressions reach a point an example needs to made of such heinous acts. Killing them offends my soul, but satisfies my coldly logical animal mind (and we are all animals like it or not) that they will now surely never repeat their acts.

In any case, the suffering of this trash finds a deaf ear and and no sympathy in me. I will still pray for him, though. Isn't that odd?
 
2014-01-28 09:43:48 PM
Libs don't care. They would rather we treat murderers and rapists with respect.
 
2014-01-28 10:25:36 PM

lennavan: a particular individual: We're pretty much on the same page, but I've seen too many cases of the prosecution manufacturing evidence to ever trust those assholes. If they want someone on death row, they'll put them there. The only way to be sure is to abolish the death penalty entirely.

Some people don't deserve to live. I just don't think people are able to reliably sort the chaff from the wheat.

Oh we're definitely on the same page then.  I'm still a hold out because every now and then there's a case like this that reminds me why I'm happy the death penalty exists.  But you're right, in my mind in theory there exists a way to apply the death penalty nationwide that prevents innocents from ever being executed.  In actual practice, I have serious reservations.

On a related note, I am in favor of punishing dirty cops/prosecutors double what the penalty their "criminal" would have gotten for gross negligence/manufacturing evidence/etc.  I'm a huge believer in the whole letting 10 guilty men go free before you risk convicting 1 guilty man sorta deal.  And I have heard/read far too many stories of shall we say "silly" police reports.  We can't be having the police/prosecutors be doing that shiat if we're gonna have any faith in our justice system at all.


We park our cars in the same garage.
 
2014-01-29 12:17:04 AM

dittybopper: A few minutes of painful existence before you actually die?  No different than many heart attack victims.  Doesn't seem particularly cruel or unusual.


The difference being that a heart attack is either due to old age or ill health.

No state has ever forced medical conditions upon people.

And, given the 8th Amendment, it's kind of mind-boggling that capital punishment is even practised in the US.
 
2014-01-29 01:13:05 AM

Magorn: dittybopper: Protected by attorney-client privilege, and in any case, "making a show of your death" as a way to protest capital punishment is protected political speech.

Agreed. and the investigation has already closed for lack of evidence that actually happened

furthermore not sure how the inmate who was supposed to be paralyzed and completely sedated by the fatal drugs could have "made a show" of anything.

 IF watching the man die bothers somebody, maybe they should reconsider their stance on the Death penalty .  In my opinion, backed up by DP cases I have helped handle,Capital Punishment is nothing more than a fancy name for killing another human being deliberately cause it made you feel good.  It serves no financial, or legal, or even deterrent purpose, and is nothing more than revenge.


And in this respect penal policy in the US is at least 50 years behind the rest of the civilised world.
 
2014-01-29 03:28:09 AM
I'm doubting a prisoner on the death gurney would really have the presence of mind (what with the anesthetic and all) to embellish their reaction to the toxins. I mean, I'd figure they'd be preoccupied, ya know?
 
2014-01-29 11:31:06 AM

iron de havilland: dittybopper: A few minutes of painful existence before you actually die?  No different than many heart attack victims.  Doesn't seem particularly cruel or unusual.

The difference being that a heart attack is either due to old age or ill health.

No state has ever forced medical conditions upon people.

And, given the 8th Amendment, it's kind of mind-boggling that capital punishment is even practised in the US.


It's because we have a 5th Amendment.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Clearly, the 5th Amendment says that a person CAN be executed, you just have to go about it with due process.
 
2014-01-29 06:04:50 PM

devildog123: iron de havilland: dittybopper: A few minutes of painful existence before you actually die?  No different than many heart attack victims.  Doesn't seem particularly cruel or unusual.

The difference being that a heart attack is either due to old age or ill health.

No state has ever forced medical conditions upon people.

And, given the 8th Amendment, it's kind of mind-boggling that capital punishment is even practised in the US.

It's because we have a 5th Amendment.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Clearly, the 5th Amendment says that a person CAN be executed, you just have to go about it with due process.


But that conflicts with the eighth, forbidding cruel and unusual punishment.

And, the second amendment clearly states that a well regulated militia has the right to bear arms, but says nothing of the rights of the individual.

It's almost as if documents written in the 17th and 18th century don't have much relevance in the 21st century.
 
Displayed 221 of 221 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report