Well sure, it may not deter crimes, but surely it stops them from murdering again once they are dead. Sociopath or not, they can't murder anymore if they're dead.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Lawyer says Ohio killer's execution botched; took over 20 minutes for man to die
- Thread starter XiaNaphryz
- Start date
- Status
Well sure, it may not deter crimes, but surely it stops them from murdering again once they are dead. Sociopath or not, they can't murder anymore if they're dead.
I don't think the drugs stopped cognition. They stopped his body's ability to draw breath. He was probably fully conscious until near the end. But he is dead.
I think the story says the family forgave him and he has since repented and sought forgiveness through religion, which explains the whole "I'll see you when you get there" speech.
The company took the drugs off of the market after a change of heart in reference to the death penalty, I believe. The US doesn't have the right to make the chemical on their own, they used to have a stockpile..used that up, and then certain jurisdictions around the country made a stink over being forced to find an alternative. 'How dare those uppity cretins from the European Union refuse to sell us these drugs if we're going to use them to kill? We have our freedome, etc.'
I think the story says the family forgave him and he has since repented and sought forgiveness through religion, which explains the whole "I'll see you when you get there" speech.
The company took the drugs off of the market after a change of heart in reference to the death penalty, I believe. The US doesn't have the right to make the chemical on their own, they used to have a stockpile..used that up, and then certain jurisdictions around the country made a stink over being forced to find an alternative. 'How dare those uppity cretins from the European Union refuse to sell us these drugs if we're going to use them to kill? We have our freedome, etc.'
DietRob
i've been begging for over 5 years.
With thoughts like these I'm not sure our definition of 'sane' is the same.
Are you are seriously saying that the state should function on the same level as sociopaths?
Also people seriously talking about eugenics itt. I think I'm out boys.
They're considering it.
"I don't know". What a strong foundation to base killing another human being on.
Also, evidence can be planted/faked and fake confessions can be forced.
well me and the state happen to agree on this. sucks if you dont like it.
BloodMoney
Banned
False
The company that makes the usual drug is European and refused to sell the drug to the US if it was going to be used for executions. It's an important drug for surgeries though so the US had to agree to stop using it to kill.
I agree with the above two quotes. I just have no sympathy in this guy's case. The fact that he believes he will go to heaven (and according to a lot of Christianity he will) just made me even madder. Yes, it's petty but I can't help but imagine what that woman went through. And no, I don't really care if it's not a painless death for him.
This is usually my concern with the death penalty but in his case, he had DNA evidence linking him to the crime and an eventual confession. He's guilty. And a POS since he lied about it and tried to tie his brother-in-law to the crime to help himself.
It's a good thing for generally everyone that you have no power.
biggersmaller
Banned
I am against capital punishment for one reason alone: innocent people have and will continue to be put to death.
So I disagree with his sentence on principal. However, I find nothing "regrettable," nothing "appalling," and nothing "shameful" about event described in this article.
Outside of this:
His death will not bring me to protest.
So I disagree with his sentence on principal. However, I find nothing "regrettable," nothing "appalling," and nothing "shameful" about event described in this article.
Outside of this:
His death will not bring me to protest.
rokkerkory
Member
That is just bad, tsk tsk
Law suit incoming
Law suit incoming
Interesting, where are you drawing that conclusion from?
I'm saying the whole "we're supposed to be better than that" line of thinking is astoundingly naive and also selfish, considering the person who posted it was not personally affected by the killer's actions.
You go up to somebody who lost a spouse to murder and see how they react to that kind of statement.
Ohio murder numbers since 1960.
http://drc.ohio.gov/Public/capital.htm
The number of murders in Ohio were a lot higher when the death penalty was not enforced with the numbers going to a high of 952 murders in 1974. Also, the number of murders seemed to hover around 800 per year in the 70s where there was no death penalty enforced and appear to be in the range of 550-650 murders per year in 1980s where no death penalties were enforced either.
The numbers remained pretty high into the early 1990s. The first execution did not happen until 1999, which coincides with an all time low for murders in Ohio at 397.
In the decade afterwards, the average number for murders in Ohio appear to float around 520 murders per year with the high being 590 murders in 2005.
Now I'm not saying that the death penalty reduces the number of murders, but what you're stating doesn't seem to be the case in Ohio. Do you have any research or articles that show your point?
Given that this is impossible for every case, is it not a moral imperative to then get rid of capital punishment?
Even with the rational actor assumption you have to deal with the fact that the chance of being caught plays more important role in the cost-benefit analysis, in particular if we are talking about marginal deterrence (comparing changes in the level or form of punishment). Furthermore, it is their own subjective evaluation of the risk, which is generally much lower than the objective risk. Given that theory and empirical evidence indicate that harsher punishment does not achieve the stated policy goals, other considerations, such as how this proposed torture would reflect on the society as whole, should be given more weight.
This is interesting to me as a fellow sane person, because what stops me from killing or harming someone isn't knowing what the outcome is, but the fact that I'm going to be killing or harming someone.
Baldwin_the_First
Member
Now imagine these states getting rid of it, when even with it, there's this much shit going down. You might say it doesn't work, but what's to say it won't go even more to shit when consequences for murderers and rapists are basicaly just a go to jail card where you get food 2-3 times a day and a roof over your head.
Professor Beef
Banned
Sometimes I imagine that when people do really despicable crimes, but find repentance through religion, they do get to Heaven. But then God or whoever is in front of the gates looks through the records and is like "well...you did some bad shit while you were down there, but you ended up finding religion. I guess we can place you over there in the back."
Convenient assumption.
redundant observation.
Yeah, there's no predicting how someone who could perform these sorts of acts thinks. I don't think anyone with a respect/fear of the law could consider doing something that monstrous to another human.
It's a bit like deciding to believe in God just because you'd rather not burn in hell for an eternity, isn't it?
Davis_McGee
Member
The US also has the highest incarceration rate in the world. More than 1% of the US adult population is imprisoned, despite record-low crime levels.
Can't murder anyone if theyre locked in a room, either. What's your point?
Murder rates are down in general in the US from where they were at in the 70s and 80s.
Professor Beef
Banned
Struggling to breath is painful, yes.
go on.
Just looking at the effects of the drugs. One causes extreme pulmonary and circulatory depression in high doses (Hydromorphone), and the other (Midazolam) causes a whole host of issues, confusion, impaired motor functions, difficulty to stay awake. I don't think it's a certainty that he was unconscious and felt no pain.
shinobi602
Member
I think it should be removed as an option only for those cases where someone hasn't been proven guilty beyond a doubt.
"Cruel and Unusual Punishment" under the Eighth Amendment does not mean painful. It has to do with the method and amount that of the punishment. For example, if you denationalize someone for shoplifting a candy bar. The punishment has to fit the crime. It will be "cruel and unusual punishment" when it is so far from the normal sentencing. It all comes down to what society sees as decent and that the punishment fits the crime. It has nothing to do with the pain a person feels. The pain a person may feel when their citizenship has been taken away could be far worse than the pain of death.
To be guilty of a crime, you have to be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Unless you're out cold.
I'm not a doctor, so I have no idea what those drugs do in whatever doses they gave him.
*Because* it's unacceptable, as you said?
Is the standard of conduct you desire from the state really to be just marginally better than the worst of humanity?
Sucks that proper injections were not present but if the daughter wanted to be there, thats on her.
Daughter's fault now... Okay got it.
Because the (European?) company who produces the drugs doesn't want them to be used in that way so they create artificial shortages/stop production forcing the US to come up with an alternative preferably homegrown.
At least that's what I read.
Davis_McGee
Member
No one is convicted unless convicted beyond doubt.
That is the point.
The EU bans the exports of all materials used for torture. This includes drugs destined for lethal injections. It is not economical to produce these drugs in the US when they're only going to be bought for the purpose of state-sanctioned murder.
I'm only arguing that with the passing of time, your perspective changes. Many on GAF enjoy attempting to place themselves in the shoes of others, but forgot this point. The murderer even sent a letter to the family, and may have been in contact with them before that also.
Read his other posts in the topic.
Fotheringay
Member
Everyone knows the grown-up thing to do is drive-by snark post! Come on man, there's a world of difference between having no compassion for someone who's committed such a heinous crime, and internet e-thugging.
DNA evidence isn't the magic sword it's made out to be.
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jul/20/local/me-dna20
So it looks like we're back to where we were: an imperfect system that's still potentially capable of convicting an innocent person.
First of all, who cares, dude definitely earned it. Secondly, could someone explain to me why we even bother with these elaborate and expensive attempts at humane executions? Hang or shoot them, bullets and rope are dirt cheap. This has to be due to the whole prison-industrial complex, private companies coming up with the most expensive possible way to kill a person while the tax payer foots the bill.
So you're aware of your breathing after you fall asleep at night?
Are you actively controlling yourself when you snore in the middle of the night?
Incredible amount of people ITT with a lack of understanding of basic human biology. Breathing and even gasping for air can be involuntary, in no way whatsoever do they guarantee pain.
Man, GAF is so weird.
Liberal liberal liberal.
Soon as it comes to death penalty we might as well be in the deep south stumming our bangos.
shinobi602
Member
Thus going back to my original point that the crime investigation/evidence system is flawed due to people being found guilty 'beyond a doubt' numerous times in the past when they were in fact innocent. That is where the problem lies.
never said that.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked