Asymmetrical Information

They ended up dead. How is that screwing up? The silly attempts to make death 'painless' are ridiculous, although I could think of several. Of course, most of those would also be 'messy', which would offend our squeamish sensibilities.

Two stylistic points struck me.

(1) the use of the phrase "modestly considered proposal." If the allusion was deliberate, it was a smartly deployed one.

(2) the image of the warden in the execution chamber grabbing the inmate by the shoulders, shaking him like a rag doll, and shouting, "Annie, Annie, are you O. K.?"

The Morales case is huge talk radio fodder in SoCal. From a legal standpoint, it looks like the lawyers have just thrown twenty tons of horse crap against the wall and worked with what stuck. Politically though, I see these legal arguments strengthening support for the death penalty. It's one thing to call into question the finality of death vs. the certainty of the guilt of a perpetrator. It's entirely another to argue that a guy who shot a cop full of lead or raped and strangled and buried a little girl deserves a perfectly executed (uhem), sterile execution. Until you can come up with a punishment that is worth than death for the most heinous of criminals, and we can conduct the punishment without serious question of it being cruel or unusual, the death penalty will persist. If you oppose it and attack it the wrong way, support for it will increase.

So, to appease the tastes of people who oppose the death penalty anyway, we have moved from quick, reliable methods like long-drop hanging, guillotine, and firing squad to methods like lethal injection that are less reliable and probably more painful for the condemned simply because they're more pleasant to look at?

You are saying that other than this, the prisons are well-administered? Because otherwise you have made an argument against any form of punishment.

"So, to appease the tastes of people who oppose the death penalty anyway, we have moved from quick, reliable methods like long-drop hanging, guillotine, and firing squad to methods like lethal injection that are less reliable and probably more painful for the condemned simply because they're more pleasant to look at?"

Yes.

The least painful way to execute someone is to strap him to a cannon and....

That convicted murderers might suffer a bit during their executions doesn't worry me much. If this is the main objection, why not go back to the gas chamber, using carbon monoxide ? This would seem to be the most painless method of execution possible.

I don't have a moral problem with the death penalty itself; I believe that at some point, when you have committed completely amoral, sociopathic acts against other human beings, that you just lose your right to continued existence. Where exactly to draw the line on those acts is a harder question.

I do have a big problem with executing the innocent.

I'd be happy to abolish the death penalty only if it was possible to sentence someone to life in prison without parole, and HAVE THEM STAY THERE. I don't ever want to see another story like this:

http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/mld/ledgerenquirer/news/nation/16586032.htm

There is also the Saddam argument, which I have not seen discussed much: You will not see any terrorists holding a bus full of school children hostage demanding his release.

I'd think the most humane possible method of execution is a heavy caliber hollow-point bullet in the back of the head, leaving no brain to feel pain. This is pretty close (considering the anatomical differences) to how modern slaughterhouses kill cows with a bolt-gun between the eyes, and that's supposed to be as humane as possible. But it's messy - brains spray everywhere. The guillotine was almost as humane, but blood sprays all over. (That's what makes it humane - the sudden loss of blood pressure knocks out the brain almost instantly.) Hanging may be pretty humane when it's done properly, but it's not that clear to me how snapping the neck would stop the brain from feeling pain, and it's also rather difficult for an inexperienced hangman to calculat the drop properly from the subject's weight and neck strength. (Too much drop and the head comes off, too little and the subject strangles slowly. Do enough hangings and you'll learn how to estimate neck strength, but no state does that many executions anymore...)

So, yes, we're using lethal injection from squeamishness rather than an impulse to be humane, but there's a long history of squeamishness affecting this area. Otherwise, the English and Americans would never have replaced the headsman's axe (as good as the guillotine, aside from very rare incidents of bad aim) with hanging - a punishment that originally was reserved for those too lowly for beheading and not criminal enough for such embellishments as drawing and quartering.

Why not just revert to a perfectly acceptable technique: Perforate the top of the skull with scissors and suck their brains out.

As a practical matter it is irrelevant what method is devised and used: opponents of the death penalty will always claim that it is inhumane and causes pain. The goal is not to find a painless method (guillotine is probably the most sure and painless method), but to abolish the death penalty altogether.

Book Recommendation - This book changed my views about the Death Penalty and is a heartfelt story. "Journey Toward Justice" Now on Amazon.com as Top Seller, Published by Seven Locks Press 2006 by Dennis Fritz is a memoir and John Grisham calls Compelling and Fascinating. Dennis Fritz is the real character in John's Grisham's Book The Innocent Man. The Innocent Man mostly is about his co-defendant Ronnie Williamson who was sentenced to death. Dennis Fritz who was sentenced to life behind bars and Ronnie Williamson were exonerated in 1999 after 12 desperate and tortuous years in prison, Ronnie Williamson passed away a few years later.. Thanks to The Innocence Project and Barry Scheck who were helpful in getting DNA testing needed that proved Fritz was innocent after serving 12 years in prison.. Dennis Fritz does not want only to be known as the man who was wrongly imprisoned for a murder with NO evidence against him. This story would interest everyone who has, are going to have a career in Law.
There is much more to his story never told before in his book. He says he witnessed miracles and actually heard God's voice telling him "TRUST ME". He solely relied on faith in God to make it through. This Book will make you think, This can happen to anyone of us. A Great book showing what Faith, Love and Hope can do.. .. Miracles.
Please visit me at http://barbarasblogspot.blogspot.com/

Well, Yancey, as a practical matter the death penalty is inhumane. Lethal injection is less barbaric than guillotine or any of the other methods described by the enlightened posters above, but it is still horribly barbaric.

Not to mention that innocent people are killed, or the questions about whether or not the state has the right to kill you, or how the death penalty is usually more expensive than life in prison...

Well, Yancey, as a practical matter the death penalty is inhumane. Lethal injection is less barbaric than guillotine or any of the other methods described by the enlightened posters above, but it is still horribly barbaric.

This proves my points exactly.

The fact that the prisoner suffers pain or even catches fire for a minute or so (as happened in Florida) doesn't bother me in the least.

The loss of my liberty for 40, 50 or 60 years is more cruel and inhumane than any method of execution the US employs. Add to that the beatings and rapes that occur so frequently in prison and I'll take lethal injection any day.

undue suffering reminds me of the old saying about putting lipstick on a pig, it is a waste of lipstick and annoys the pig. All these questions about the death penalty seem to me to be legislation by trial. If we want to eliminate the death penalty pass a law, if you can't pass the law maybe we don't want it eliminated. The whole point of the death penalty is not to rehabilitate the felon, it is to convince future violators not to try.

The whole point of the death penalty is not to rehabilitate the felon, it is to convince future violators not to try.

Well that and it’s the only guaranteed way to prevent recidivism in the individual criminal.

I agree with others above who aren't worried about how the condemned are executed. If someone truly deserves to be executed, I really don't care how it's done. I'd rather not use a deliberately cruel method as that's probably psychologically damaging to the executioner. But I'm not worried about going out of our way to make it pleasent for the condemned.

That's all assuming we are going to execute someone. I'm much more worried about executing the innocent... there's no good way to execute the wrong person and no bad way to execute the right person.

EI

I agree with others above who aren't worried about how the condemned are executed. If someone truly deserves to be executed, I really don't care how it's done. I'd rather not use a deliberately cruel method as that's probably psychologically damaging to the executioner. But I'm not worried about going out of our way to make it pleasent for the condemned.

Agreed, I’m not sure why our hostess posted this then. Did she think that people who were otherwise in support of capital punishment, wavering in their support, or undecided about it would find this to be the tipping point?

Adding this to otherwise legitimate arguments – concerns about executing the innocent and cost-benefit analysis of executions – doesn’t “add” to their weight. If anything, it reinforces the belief that those who oppose capital punishment will throw anything and everything at the wall until they find something that sticks.

Look how long it took them to finaly exicute ROBERT ALTON HARRIS and TOOKIE WILLIAMS i mean it time to put a end to all those rediclous appeals

Consider this another vote for firing squad. Four bullets in the heart is a pretty quick death, and involves far less pain than the inmate inflicted on others.

If this report is accurate (that there is the potential for substantial suffering with lethal injection), then I'd be all for banning it IF it were replaced with something more reliable, like the firing squad..

And yes, I'd volunteer to pull the trigger if called upon.

"That convicted murderers might suffer a bit during their executions doesn't worry me much. If this is the main objection, why not go back to the gas chamber, using carbon monoxide ? This would seem to be the most painless method of execution possible.

I don't have a moral problem with the death penalty itself; I believe that at some point, when you have committed completely amoral, sociopathic acts against other human beings, that you just lose your right to continued existence. Where exactly to draw the line on those acts is a harder question.

I do have a big problem with executing the innocent."

CO poisoning causes headaches and they are pretty severe headaches. A few years ago, the heat exchanger in our furnace rusted through mid-season. My wife and I started getting headaches before our CO detector alerted us to the problem.

Using an inert gas is probably a reasonable way to conduct executions. Xenon, or a mix of nitrogen and nitrous oxide might be the most humane ways to implement it. Xenon has an anesthetic effect, so the condemned will lose consciousness well before any pain is perceived.

I'm much more concerned about our system's inability to reliably acquit the factually innocent than I am about the problems with our lack of execution protocols. Which is not to say that I'm unconcerned about the lack of execution protocols.

"http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/mld/ledgerenquirer/news/nation/16586032.htm"

Sad story. My aunt is a boilerplate liberal, and our discussion of this topic ended with my comment similar to many others above. I'm for the death penalty because I know that at some point in the future someone like her is going to decide if that person stays in prison. All current circumstances (such as life "without parole" for example) are subject to future change.

Cost arguments are similarly ineffective in my opinion. DP cases are largely costly due to the extreme lengths interested litigants will go to on the related cases. Does anyone really believe those litigants will disppear? If the DP is ever found unconstitutional it will take 5 minutes for the anti-legal system cottage industry to decide life without parole should be unconstitutional.

To the point, though, rape is beyond acceptable. Maybe if we weren't overcrowding our prisons with drug offenders our system would be able to manage.

Execute child murderers. It's for the children.

I've always wanted to turn that around.

It is never right to kill someone who is not in a position to harm you. The death penalty is wrong; there is no discussion to be had.

Its difficult to communicate just how barbaric this discussion sounds to a non-american like me, but I suppose it would be like listening to people discussing how slavery is ok because black people are lazy and stupid and just not worth as much as white people; or perhaps its like listening to an islamofascist discussing how its ok to kill infidels. That's how barbaric and uncivilized people justifiying the death penalty sound to me. And I'm right - it is uncivilized and barbaric.

It is never right to kill someone who is not in a position to harm you. The death penalty is wrong; there is no discussion to be had.

Well, at least you're reasonably honest about the fact that your position is premised entirely upon a statement of beliefs. However, whatever facts you base those beliefs upon are subject to different interpretations by others who do not share your beliefs.

Its difficult to communicate just how barbaric this discussion sounds to a non-american like me, but I suppose it would be like listening to people discussing how slavery is ok because black people are lazy and stupid and just not worth as much as white people; or perhaps its like listening to an islamofascist discussing how its ok to kill infidels.

That is not an issue with "non-americans", it is an issue with your particular belief system (which some Americans share, incidentally). It is also evident at a glance that the underlying facts of your analogies are highly discrepant. Keep in mind that the death penalty is not being idscussed as a penalty for "people I don't like" or "people who believe differently than I do"; it is a method for criminal justice involving persons who have committed acts of extreme violence.

If you cannot at least make that distinction and understand why others might interpret the action differently on that basis, at least have the courtesy to diqualify yourself from the conversation rather than making ex cathedra pronouncements about barbarism.

That's how barbaric and uncivilized people justifiying the death penalty sound to me. And I'm right - it is uncivilized and barbaric.

More correctly stated, you're remarkably arrogant.

Don't be so sure. Remember the usual libertarian reason for conceding that the police, courts and military should probably remain in government hands:
It's because the only things government has ever shown it can do better than the private sector, are killing and imprisoning people.