Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

States Consider Firing Squad as Alternative to Lethal Injection
Wall Street Journal ^ | Jan 28, 2014 | Jacob Gershman

Posted on 01/28/2014 12:56:48 PM PST by Second Amendment First

As death penalty states struggle to obtain drugs suitable for lethal injections, more old-fashioned methods of executing prisoners are getting another look.

Lawmakers in Missouri and Wyoming have introduced measures this month that would give their states an option to use firing squads — instead of lethal drugs — to carry out executions. Another bill proposed by a Virginia lawmaker would authorize death by electrocution if lethal injection isn’t possible.

The measures have surfaced as a number of pharmaceutical firms have barred corrections departments from buying drugs that could be used in executions, forcing states to scramble for other suppliers and to experiment with alternative drugs.

The botched, 26-minute execution of an Ohio inmate earlier this month — using a cocktail of chemicals never before used in a U.S. execution — underscored the problem.

“This isn’t an attempt to time-warp back into the 1850s or the wild, wild West or anything like that,” Missouri state Rep. Rick Brattin, who sponsored the fire squad legislation, told the Associated Press, which reported on the bills. “It’s just that I foresee a problem, and I’m trying to come up with a solution that will be the most humane yet most economical for our state.”

(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.wsj.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: banglist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 141-154 next last
To: OneWingedShark
their debt to society can never be repaid

Has yours been repaid?

it is also unjust to make a man forever pay for his crime (like denying him all the rights, privileges, and responsibilities of a citizen) even after serving his sentence...The only right way to do it is to make the death one of relative speed and some dignity

Now that's a new one I haven't seen before. Interesting and creative but I'm pretty sure there's nothing in criminal law that states that as a reason for capital punishment. No, but that's an argument similar to taking the life of a baby, elderly, or infirmed because someone in their manifest great wisdom has decreed it's better for them to die. God has given individuals the right to life, which is sacred.

81 posted on 01/28/2014 2:20:29 PM PST by PapaNew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: pfflier

What a great argument.


82 posted on 01/28/2014 2:21:18 PM PST by PapaNew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Second Amendment First

I kind of like how they do it in Japan. Warden walks past the condemned, every day, sometimes for years, and one day says “today”.

“..death row inmates are only notified of their execution a matter of hours before it is to take place. They live like this for years, terrified that each day could be their last and that today they will be hanged.”

No time for protests, either, the world finds out, when the family is told to collect the remains.


83 posted on 01/28/2014 2:22:31 PM PST by jttpwalsh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ImJustAnotherOkie
The inmate can choose the animal that eats them. I’d pick a Liger.

I'd pick a duck.

84 posted on 01/28/2014 2:32:19 PM PST by Mr Ramsbotham (Laws against sodomy are honored in the breech.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: jttpwalsh

I did not even know that Japan still had capital punishment. I looked it up on Wikipedia. Yup, much like you said by hanging. It is very rare though.


85 posted on 01/28/2014 2:38:25 PM PST by 3Fingas (Sons and Daughters for Freedom and Rededication to the Principles of the U.S. Constitution...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: 3Fingas

You are correct, I suspect largely because the crime rate is rather low. People there have this notion of honor, and respect, unlike too many folks here :(


86 posted on 01/28/2014 2:42:45 PM PST by jttpwalsh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Dan(9698)
They could easily use laughing gas that dentists use now. Just keep increasing the mixture until it is 100%. They would just go to sleep.

They could have a stand up comic there telling jokes...

They would die laughing.

87 posted on 01/28/2014 2:45:51 PM PST by ROCKLOBSTER (Celebrate "Republicans Freed the Slaves" Month.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Argus

It is perhaps the least painful way, but sort of like killing chickens, it is pretty bloody.


88 posted on 01/28/2014 2:54:11 PM PST by RobbyS (quotes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: CorporateStepsister
But for the grace and mercy of God go you and I. Many if not most of the time these criminals were themselves victims in their early life. But let's not bother ourselves with such trivialities. These should be reasons to pause, but are not the most dispositive, definitive reasons to cease unjust capital punishment.

- You think the death penalty serves justice because it's an "eye for an eye." Fair enough except for one problem: Somebody has already paid "an eye for an eye" for those criminals and their heinous acts, so unjust double jeopardy is in play here.
- What about the victims and their family? Countless personal and professional examples testify to the fact that there is only one way victims of savagery can recover from the hurt and angst of victimization: forgiveness. Revenge feels good for awhile but does not relieve the pain.
- What about society? You lock up dangerous criminals to protect society.
- What about the cost? Oh, OK well I guess there is such thing as killing for convenience, but let's take another tack which hits directly at our medieval penal system: prisoners should be productive and at least pay their way in prison.

89 posted on 01/28/2014 2:54:20 PM PST by PapaNew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: PapaNew
>> You think the death penalty serves justice because it's an "eye for an eye." Fair enough except for one problem: Somebody has already paid "an eye for an eye" for those criminals and their heinous acts, so unjust double jeopardy is in play here.

Your argument here precludes any punishment for any crime. It precludes arrest and trial for any crimes, and probably even precludes self-defense.

Maybe you're OK with that.

90 posted on 01/28/2014 2:57:48 PM PST by NorthMountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Second Amendment First
Can we use Le Guillotine?
91 posted on 01/28/2014 3:08:04 PM PST by SandRat (Duty - Honor - Country! What else needs said?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Second Amendment First

Sign me up. Happy to do it for free. No need for more than one guy firing, unless of course all of us will be using live ammo (just in case someone misses).


92 posted on 01/28/2014 3:08:31 PM PST by Jumper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PapaNew

Thank you. I’m glad you can see down here from your soap box.


93 posted on 01/28/2014 3:09:01 PM PST by pfflier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: PapaNew

Intentions matter, but actions more. The state executes people to keep private citizens from exacting revenge. Due process allows the accused to defend himself, but the very process has become so corrupted that it is in too many cases, justice denied.


94 posted on 01/28/2014 3:17:39 PM PST by RobbyS (quotes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: NorthMountain
Your argument here precludes any punishment for any crime.

You're right. Your "crimes", my "crimes", and criminals crimes have already been punished and paid for, so forcing payment again is unjust - it is double jeopardy.

precludes arrest and trial for any crimes, and probably even precludes self-defense.

Au contraire mon FR-ami. It is the duty of government to protect the life, liberty and free pursuits of individuals and to keep society safe from without and within. So there should be due process in dealing with the accused, but the sentence for criminals found guilty of heinous crimes and deemed dangerous to others should be incarceration, not for punishment, but for the protection of society.

95 posted on 01/28/2014 3:22:17 PM PST by PapaNew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
The state executes people to keep private citizens from exacting revenge.

Never heard that one either. I don't think that's a known reason in criminal law for capital punishment, but I think it's imaginative and creative. But it fails because the same facilities that keep a dangerous criminal separated from society also keep revenge seekers on the outside from getting to the convict. How these matters are handled within the prison system is a whole other discussion.

96 posted on 01/28/2014 3:29:31 PM PST by PapaNew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
The state executes people to keep private citizens from exacting revenge.

That's the exact opposite of what should happen. Once the court has sentenced them, they should turn them over to the appropriate civilians for punishment.

97 posted on 01/28/2014 3:33:21 PM PST by ROCKLOBSTER (Celebrate "Republicans Freed the Slaves" Month.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
Or just go “North Korean” and fire mortars at ‘em.

I thought they just fed them to the dogs there.

98 posted on 01/28/2014 3:34:50 PM PST by Mark17 (Chicago Blackhawks: Stanley Cup champions 2010, 2013. Vietnam Vet 70-71 Msgt US Air Force, retired)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Second Amendment First
The state had intended to use propofol, a drug that has never been used for capital punishment

Well, It worked for Michael Jackson.

99 posted on 01/28/2014 3:34:59 PM PST by socal_parrot (I hate to say I told you so, but...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: PapaNew
Your definition of a lib is someone you disagree with?

No, although I disagree with you here.

Sadness.

Hippy?

the substantive point

When a literary device substitutes for an argument, that's not substantive.

100 posted on 01/28/2014 3:39:57 PM PST by xone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 141-154 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson