The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Kentucky lethal injection upheld by Supreme Court
Medopine
__BANNED USERS regular
__BANNED USERS regular
So the Supreme Court of the US came down with an opinion yesterday which denied a claim from Kentucky inmates that the state's lethal injection procedures violation the Constitution.
Blurb from Scotusblog.com:
Here is the full article
Opinion is here in pdf form
This looks quite messy as seven justices wrote opinions. Yay pluralities!
The court did NOT consider the question of whether the death penalty itself was unconstitional. This case was about lethal injection only.
EDIT: Here is a link to a site with information about lethal injection (they don't seem to have updated their news section to reflect this new opinion yet but there are some good links).
I haven't read the opinion yet but I'll be doing so shortly. Anyone read it yet, and have opinions about it or the practice of lethal injection in general?
Blurb from Scotusblog.com:
In a widely splintered decision, the Supreme Court on Wednesday cleared the way for death-row executions to resume across the country, concluding that the most common method of lethal injection does not violate the Constitution. The final vote was 7-2 in Baze v. Rees (07-5439), although there was no opinion that spoke for five or more Justices. The Court’s plurality adopted as a standard for assessing the validity of an execution method whether it poses a “substantial risk of serious harm.” It rejected the death row inmate’s proposal that the standard be “unnecessary risk.”
Three Justices definitely supported the new standard, but four disagreed with it, in whole or in part. One Justice was silent on the point, and the other said the key issue was not one standard or another, but “facts and evidence” about a given state’s execution method. The case was decided with seven opinions — only two Justices failed to write on their own.
Here is the full article
Opinion is here in pdf form
This looks quite messy as seven justices wrote opinions. Yay pluralities!
The court did NOT consider the question of whether the death penalty itself was unconstitional. This case was about lethal injection only.
EDIT: Here is a link to a site with information about lethal injection (they don't seem to have updated their news section to reflect this new opinion yet but there are some good links).
I haven't read the opinion yet but I'll be doing so shortly. Anyone read it yet, and have opinions about it or the practice of lethal injection in general?
Medopine on
0
Posts
This bothers me most because I wanted to believe we, as a country, were at least at the apex of the swing right towards these sorts of conservative values, and that if it hadn't already started, would soon begin swinging left. The death penalty itself bothers me, but doing it by lethal injection, and upholding that tradition, seems beyond simply believing someone is worth killing or beyond saving.
As a matter of fact, this is still my desktop.
Do you know what plurality means?
Only 5 of those 7 agreed on a standard. 7 different justices felt the need to write their own opinion instead of joining on to one majority opinion.
EDIT: actually I've got that wrong. Only three agreed fully on the standard, and four disagreed with it in whole or in part.
Well, actually we know what it does internally, and that process sounds anything but painless. Which is why I say it's only really painless for the audience.
I'm not sure if that's supposed to be directed at me or not.
Now with the sodium thiopental consciousness can return in as little as 5 minutes, and in some cases can result in anesthetic awareness, where the person is fully awake but unable to express any pain (enhanced by the paralyzing effects of the pancuronium), which is quite considerable in a potassium chloride induced heart attack. There is also controversy in terms of proper technique for the administration of the different compounds. There have been reports of botched lethal injection executions, and it is thought that if not done properly the person being executed slowly asphyxiates while feeling like they are burning from the inside due to the potassium chloride.
Many doctors feel that to administer the drugs goes against medical ethics, so proper administration is always available.
What about electrodes on a person's head showing brain readings to identify consciousness?
If this is the same article that was up yesterday then they mention that there is a single shot barbituate, but there can also be complications with that.
You are aware of the Eighth Amendment, right?
Why the rush?
The issue comes when it is not done properly, which is part of the reason why this is brought up (along with the legality of state sanctioned execution as a whole, but that's a different topic).
I find the current practice neither cruel nor unusual.
Here, I've got a needle for you.
I meant overdose on thiopental alone, without the other two drugs stopping respiratory and vascular functions. Why not overdose on anesthetic. What are the possible things that would go wrong then? Not extreme pain I hope?
And the interaction of these drugs causes your veins to feel like they are on fire if they are not administered properly.
but they're listening to every word I say
The Eighth Amendment prohibits punishments that are both cruel and unusual. Considering that this case wasn't about the actually death penalty, what I want to know is if there is a better way to kill some one than lethal injection as if there isn't then the punishment can't really be cruel (as far as death penalty methods are concerned).
To kill someone with a procedure that risks agony before death is cruel, to me.
I'll be fine, just give me a minute, a man's got a limit, I can't get a life if my heart's not in it.
Well, this went downhill quick.
"Here, I've got [insert punishment here] for you. You wouldn't voluntarily accept it? Clearly it's too cruel a punishment for [crime]."
You're smarter than that. Try again.
Supposedly they are supervised by a doctor. This does not always happen though.
but they're listening to every word I say
I've always wondered that as well. Or at the very least, why not give them a stonking great dose of whatever anaesthetic they're using and make damn sure they're not going to feel anything?
Obviously, different people will respond in different ways to the same dosage, but if you up the dosage to "an utter fuckload," I wouldn't have thought that would be a problem.
I don't see why we should have to treat the wicked as we would our fellows.
Indeed, no innocent has ever been executed.
Nor the wicked accidenatlly spared and allowed to become repeat offenders.
That's no justification for killing innocent people by state-sponsored execution.
I don't know where you grew up, but I recall learning as a kid that it's better to let 100 guilty men go free than to imprison one innocent man.
Is the customer always right too? I try not to put too much stock in cliches.
No, but it is justification for execution of the guilty for harsh crimes.
My thoughts exactly. Use massive overdoses(cost is insignificant compared to ad litem lawyer fees) of whatever drug works best.
I would think a shotgun blast to the head would be as high a success rate of a painless death as you can possibly get.
But aside from the problem of being traumatic for the people viewing it, it's also going to create religious/emotional issues like having an open casket.
Edit: Can we stick to lethal injection/method of execution here and not the rightness of capital punishment?