I’m not losing sleep over this but the fact is that the constitution prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. A way needs to be found to kill someone quickly and without pain. I know from watching people die that the human body does not want to die. There is a huge fight. Sleep, paralyzation, stop heart. Sounded good. It failed with the delivery system. And it doesn’t seem to me to matter if it takes 5 minutes or an hour. Put him to sleep, check his vitals. Then administer the drug that paralyzes (not real sure why that’s important) and wait and check vitals to make sure that the IV hasn’t slipped. Then do a needle directly into the heart. Done.
The Constitution does not forbid painful punishment. By definition, all punishment is painful in one way or another. The constitutional prohibition is against CRUEL punishment — I.e., torture or sadistic infliction of pain for its own ends. Execution in and of itself is not painful; no one who has been successfully executed has ever complained of the pain.
No medicalized execution. It perverts both medicine and the death penalty.
A bullet to the brainstem is swift and painless - it is also too up close and personal for Western sensibilities.
A firing squad is swift and the pain is relatively brief. Banning cruel and unusual punishment does not mean banning any pain at all, and I suspect that fear and anticipation are worse than the pain in most cases.
Quickly and without pain?
Bring back the long drop.