Death penalty

LongLensPhotography

LongLensPhotography

Th..th..that's all folks!
Suspended / Banned
Messages
18,695
Name
LongLensPhotography
Edit My Images
No
I am obviously against death penalty as it not a christian way of dealing with the scum (they should suffer long years behind the bars). However seeing this http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-28355466 and many other recent cases makes me really wonder:

a) why they have to use untested, cruel methods or fancy but not so instant electric chairs
b) why not just use $1 9mm and be done in a fraction of a second, if they really must continue with this barbaric relic of their legal system?
c) do they actually want the convicts to really suffer until their last gasp?
 
How exactly is suffer long years in prison a Christian mentality, I was under the impression that Christians practiced forgiveness!
 
I too have concerns about the death penalty.
1. Why do they keep he prisoners alive so long before they actually carry out the sentence? This does not mean that I agree they should be killed but in the UK most would have served their term and be free long before the event.
2. Why are the drugs used in lethal injection so complicated? I have, in the past, had to have my dog put down and it was one simple jab and they go to sleep peacefully, I hope. Or does it mean that my dog suffered horrifically?
3. If you are going to execute someone why not use hanging? It is said that Albert Pierrepoint, Britains last hangman, took at most 11 seconds from the death cell to the death. I am aware also that he, eventually, was against hanging.
 
MWHCVT said:
How exactly is suffer long years in prison a Christian mentality, I was under the impression that Christians practiced forgiveness!
Click to expand...
An major tenet of Christianity that is one of the first principles to be discarded, along with the one about rich men, eye of a needle & camels. Especially so in the so called land of the free.
 
MWHCVT said:
How exactly is suffer long years in prison a Christian mentality, I was under the impression that Christians practiced forgiveness!
Click to expand...

let me paraphrase - protection of the society of by the isolation of dangerous individuals and their re-education. Does that sound any better?
 
I'm not against the death penalty in principle, there is a sense that it is a natural form of punishment. What I object to is the politicization and the institutionalisation of it. Again this is especially so in the US but to be fair it was similar here when we had it. Bentley springs to mind. There are those who kill that deserve to die and there are those that kill who do not but those lines are often blurred in the rush to be seen as the one who can execute the most murderers, I would hate to see something similar here.
 
It is surprising how the US authorities with all the "expertise" in killing people could not deal with the execution in a humane, (if killing someone can ever be called that), manner.
 
Last edited:
jakeblu said:
An major tenet of Christianity that is one of the first principles to be discarded, along with the one about rich men, eye of a needle & camels. Especially so in the so called land of the free.
Click to expand...

A senior Churchman once explained to me during a very boozy dinner, "It's easy for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle ... you curry it!!" :LOL:
 
Yves Geza said:
A senior Churchman once explained to me during a very boozy dinner, "It's easy for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle ... you curry it!!" :LOL:
Click to expand...
:lol:
 
ChasG said:
2. Why are the drugs used in lethal injection so complicated? I have, in the past, had to have my dog put down and it was one simple jab and they go to sleep peacefully, I hope. Or does it mean that my dog suffered horrifically?
Click to expand...

The problem unlike with animals is actually getting the drugs used for the lethal injection. For most veterinary uses they use something like Euthanal (which is the barbiturate pentobarbitone) and this causes rapid deep sedation and respiratory depression almost immediately after intravenous injection, which very quickly leads to death. Quite high doses are needed though in comparison to invoking just sedation (in case anyone is wondering why I know this sort of stuff, I did a Pharmacology degree recently which covered the actions, side effects etc of most major drug classes).

The main problem is that most manufacturers of pentobarbitone, sodium thiopental and similar drugs will not allow their supply for use in executions which is why their having to use various different protocols to try to get around the supply shortages - in theory it doesn't really matter as any anaesthetic agent will eventually lead to death in overdose, but as to the length of time etc it's debatable as you obviously can't test it on humans, and I seriously doubt that any ethical review board would pass an in-vivo experiment on primates or similar.

Traditionally a 3 drug cocktail of a barbiturate, a muscle relaxant and potassium chloride are used, mainly to ensure a "painless" and rapid death as all three of them cause symptoms which will lead to death (by sedation/respiratory depression, respiratory depression [by paralysis of the chest muscles - plus the agent also stops involuntary spasms prior to death] and stopping the heart respectively). Some states have been switching over to using a single barbiturate or benzodiazepine type agent, but then there is the danger of the agent not working satisfactorily due to tolerance etc (which there is a much greater chance of in those who may have abused drugs in the past), which is part of the reason for the uproar that's currently going on as some of the newer protocols don't perhaps work quite as planned.

As to whether I support the death penalty or not, to be honest I'm not sure. Part of me says "hang em' high!" for the most dangerous, sadistic criminals, but the other part says that imprisonment is more of a punishment and there's always the danger of miscarriages of justice (plus the expense of the government being possibly being sued over executions).
 
I have to disagree, the death penalty has its place for the most serious and planned murders. However, part of me thinks like @s162216 the ramifications of a miscarriage of justice are even more colossal.

In Taiwan a firing range is used, 9 marks men, 1 live bullet 8 banks so none of them know which one fires. IIRC but I could be wrong but this would be a better method. Cheaper too.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for this info, Samuel. It is very interesting and explains why there are readily available drugs which will easily sedate an elephant but execution by injection is not that simple. Interesting too, to see there is a line that drug manufacturers will not cross. Have to say I'm surprised, rather cynically I thought drug companies had few scruples. I wonder if there are any rope makers that won;t provide rope for hangings.

I too am concerned about miscarriages of justice but I would want a life sentence to mean 'life'.

Dave
 
Tringa said:
..... Interesting too, to see there is a line that drug manufacturers will not cross. Have to say I'm surprised, rather cynically I thought drug companies had few scruples. I wonder if there are any rope makers that won;t provide rope for hangings.

I too am concerned about miscarriages of justice but I would want a life sentence to mean 'life'.

Dave
Click to expand...
I am not so sure that its principles but rather customers and shareholders.
 
Tringa said:
Thanks for this info, Samuel. It is very interesting and explains why there are readily available drugs which will easily sedate an elephant but execution by injection is not that simple. Interesting too, to see there is a line that drug manufacturers will not cross. Have to say I'm surprised, rather cynically I thought drug companies had few scruples.
Dave
Click to expand...

The main reasons why drug companies will not supply are that a) a lot of the manufacturers are European (or the agents are manufactured in Europe), and there is an EU export ban on certain drugs and equipment to agencies like prisons that could use them in executions, and b) even if there was no export ban a lot of them (even some US ones) have made a moral judgement themselves not to sell (before the ban some of the European firms even had legally binding contracts with their US distributors to dis-allow their sale to prisons etc) - it's not exactly good publicity to say "yes our drugs are used in executions".
 
s162216 said:
The main reasons why drug companies will not supply are that a) a lot of the manufacturers are European (or the agents are manufactured in Europe), and there is an EU export ban on certain drugs and equipment to agencies like prisons that could use them in executions, and b) even if there was no export ban a lot of them (even some US ones) have made a moral judgement themselves not to sell (before the ban some of the European firms even had legally binding contracts with their US distributors to dis-allow their sale to prisons etc) - it's not exactly good publicity to say "yes our drugs are used in executions".
Click to expand...

It is quite surprising that the US cannot produce their own, presumably it is a known chemical formula

as I said earlier they seem quite expert in producing and selling lethal weapons, (as Europe is)
 
Last edited:
BillN_33 said:
It is quite surprising that the US cannot produce their own, presumably it is a known chemical formula
Click to expand...

That's why their getting anonymous compounding pharmacies to make the drugs for them now, but obviously that increases the cost massively compared to just getting an off the shelf version.

The medical use of barbiturates especially has been declining for years - mostly because of the introduction of replacement benzodiazepines in about 1960 - 1970 which are much safer, plus thiopental has been largely replaced as an induction anaesthetic over the past 30 years with propofol which has a much better recovery profile, but with similar rapid induction - which is why there's only a few suppliers worldwide.
 
Yves Geza said:
A senior Churchman once explained to me during a very boozy dinner, "It's easy for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle ... you curry it!!" :LOL:
Click to expand...

From a Rowan Atkinson one man show -

"It is easier for a rich man to pass through the eye of a needle than it for a camel to........ Than it is for a camel to"


Steve.
 
norters said:
The death penalty is only carried out by savage, uncivilised nations. We were one but thankfully are not anymore and we can rightly condemn those that still are.
Click to expand...

I honestly think that is a little general. There are death penalties for silly things like Sudanese case of a woman not marrying a Muslim or something daft but in the case of the US, it is used relatively sparingly for the most serious of crimes.

I can think of certain cases it would be appropriate in the UK for folk like Ian Watkins, Harold Shipman, Fred West, Michael Adebowale. Only the most heinous and depraved crimes would see it but I personally have no issue with it.
 
Personally I think that some criminals ( in certain cases) are given far too many rights. The moment someone deliberately takes or ruins a life, then IMO they have given up their own rights to be treated humanely.

If someone has done something bad enough to deserve the death penalty then what is the issue with them suffering?

I'm not condoning prolonged torture or anything, but it seems to me that society spends far too much time worrying about the guilty and not enough time caring for the victims.
 
EspressoJunkie said:
Personally I think that some criminals ( in certain cases) are given far too many rights. The moment someone deliberately takes or ruins a life, then IMO they have given up their own rights to be treated humanely.
.
Click to expand...

It is the deliberate and pre meditated part of the crime that warrants the death sentence, hence people like "Ian Watkins, Harold Shipman, Fred West, Michael Adebowale" are ripe for the firing range.
 
EspressoJunkie said:
Personally I think that some criminals ( in certain cases) are given far too many rights. The moment someone deliberately takes or ruins a life, then IMO they have given up their own rights to be treated humanely.

If someone has done something bad enough to deserve the death penalty then what is the issue with them suffering?

I'm not condoning prolonged torture or anything, but it seems to me that society spends far too much time worrying about the guilty and not enough time caring for the victims.
Click to expand...
surely inhumane treatment is a form of torture and that the loss of liberty is the actual intended method of punishment.
 
Surely an easy way is to set up some grenades below someone. Instant.
 
ST4 said:
I have to disagree, the death penalty has its place for the most serious and planned murders. However, part of me thinks like @s162216 the ramifications of a miscarriage of justice are even more colossal.

In Taiwan a firing range is used, 9 marks men, 1 live bullet 8 banks so none of them know which one fires. IIRC but I could be wrong but this would be a better method. Cheaper too.
Click to expand...

not according to wikki itmustberightitsonthenet
anyway anyone who dosent know the difference between firing a blank round and a live one shouldnt be let anywhere near a gun

"In Taiwan, the customary method is a single shot aimed at the heart (or at the brain stem, if the prisoner consents to organ donation). Prior to the execution, the prisoner is injected with strong anaesthetic to leave them completely senseless. (See Capital punishment in Taiwan)"
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
It strikes me that every day, thousands of pets are euthanized quickly and painlessly.
I'm not anti-capital punishment, but why does it seem impossible to carry that out the same way?
Just wondering.

Oh, and it takes so long to carry out a death penalty in the US because of their ridiculous appeals process.
What we don't hear, however are the convicts who have entered a guilty plea, been convicted and sentenced, and executed in months because they refuse appeals. Those don't make the news because they're not "sexy".
 
s162216 said:
The problem unlike with animals is actually getting the drugs used for the lethal injection. For most veterinary uses they use something like Euthanal (which is the barbiturate pentobarbitone) and this causes rapid deep sedation and respiratory depression almost immediately after intravenous injection, which very quickly leads to death. Quite high doses are needed though in comparison to invoking just sedation (in case anyone is wondering why I know this sort of stuff, I did a Pharmacology degree recently which covered the actions, side effects etc of most major drug classes).

The main problem is that most manufacturers of pentobarbitone, sodium thiopental and similar drugs will not allow their supply for use in executions which is why their having to use various different protocols to try to get around the supply shortages - in theory it doesn't really matter as any anaesthetic agent will eventually lead to death in overdose, but as to the length of time etc it's debatable as you obviously can't test it on humans, and I seriously doubt that any ethical review board would pass an in-vivo experiment on primates or similar.

Traditionally a 3 drug cocktail of a barbiturate, a muscle relaxant and potassium chloride are used, mainly to ensure a "painless" and rapid death as all three of them cause symptoms which will lead to death (by sedation/respiratory depression, respiratory depression [by paralysis of the chest muscles - plus the agent also stops involuntary spasms prior to death] and stopping the heart respectively). Some states have been switching over to using a single barbiturate or benzodiazepine type agent, but then there is the danger of the agent not working satisfactorily due to tolerance etc (which there is a much greater chance of in those who may have abused drugs in the past), which is part of the reason for the uproar that's currently going on as some of the newer protocols don't perhaps work quite as planned.

As to whether I support the death penalty or not, to be honest I'm not sure. Part of me says "hang em' high!" for the most dangerous, sadistic criminals, but the other part says that imprisonment is more of a punishment and there's always the danger of miscarriages of justice (plus the expense of the government being possibly being sued over executions).
Click to expand...

Lethal injection it was claimed is a painless and humane way, but how can it be when you look at the chemicals used ? The three chemicals used are a Muscle relaxant, a sodium solution ( salt ) and a chemical to collapse the lungs. So in short, the condemned person is frozen with the muscle relaxant and can't scream out in pain, when the sodium is pumped into the body. Then when the other chemical is administered, they are suffocating when their lungs collapse.

They should at least tell the truth, when saying it's a painless death. Can't recall who it was, but a US politician said they had no right, to a painless death.
 
Perhaps a large injection of pure heroin would do the job.
 
jonbeeza said:
Lethal injection it was claimed is a painless and humane way, but how can it be when you look at the chemicals used ? The three chemicals used are a Muscle relaxant, a sodium solution ( salt ) and a chemical to collapse the lungs. So in short, the condemned person is frozen with the muscle relaxant and can't scream out in pain, when the sodium is pumped into the body. Then when the other chemical is administered, they are suffocating when their lungs collapse.

They should at least tell the truth, when saying it's a painless death. Can't recall who it was, but a US politician said they had no right, to a painless death.
Click to expand...

That's the reason for the initial barbiturate (thiopental or pentobarbitone): it causes rapid deep sedation which means they will be deeply unconscious when the muscle relaxant (usually Pancuronium bromide) paralyses the chest wall and the potassium chloride stops the heart.

Thiopental and a muscle relaxant used to be a very common combination for induction of general anaesthesia (the muscle relaxant to prevent involuntary movement during surgery), although propofol is now tended to be used instead of thiopental as it isn't sequestered in body fat which rapidly increases the recovery time (as the "hangover" effect is reduced) and it can be given as a continuous infusion (which avoids the need for an inhalation anaesthetic to maintain anaesthesia). The version used in lethal injection is simply massively increased in doses so to guarantee death.

ChasG said:
Perhaps a large injection of pure heroin would do the job.
Click to expand...

Thats actually what some States in the US are experimenting with, using Hydromorphone (more commoly known as "Dilaudid") which is a semi-synthetic opoid several times more powerful than diamorphine (heroin). It's use combined with the benzodiazepine Midzolam is part of the reason for the recent outcry in the US as it took a prisoner 2 hours to die with the combination despite being in a heavy state of anaesthesia.
 
Hmm. Going out on a high.
 
I am not against the death penalty the report of the American 2 hours for death issue brings my mind for the House of Lords that many think people suffering for terminally ill in some instances for months must be not allowed to die.

I also can not help but think if a son or daughter was murdered and evidence was available from witness's cameras etc would everyone feel a few years in prison was good enough.

In one other instance if your wife husband needed £30k for an operation would you prefer the £30k for a years prison cost or your loved one who has committed no crime to have a chance of life

Should cost never be an issue even if the state can only afford one or the other

The only thing that concerns me with the death penalty is criminals would be more likely to fight if cornered and other innocent people may be killed or injured
 
jonbeeza said:
They should at least tell the truth, when saying it's a painless death. Can't recall who it was, but a US politician said they had no right, to a painless death.
Click to expand...
The reason they make it a painless death, or at least try, is their constitution, specifically the eighth amendment (which is copied word for word from our Bill of Rights)

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top