Posted on 05/01/2014 11:56:15 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
US states may go back to electric chair and firing squads
Shortage of drugs for lethal injections leads states to consider alternative methods of executing prisoners
By Raf Sanchez, Washington
6:42PM BST 01 May 2014
US states may revert to killing their death row inmates with electric chairs, firing squads and gas chambers as it becomes increasingly difficult to source chemicals for lethal injections.
The EU has banned the export of one of the most common sedatives used in lethal injections, forcing US states to experiment with new "cocktails" of drugs for executions.
One such experimental recipe was used in the botched execution of an Oklahoma prisoner on Tuesday, leaving him to writhe in pain and die of a massive heart attack 43 minutes after being injected.
The shortage of execution drugs, coupled with fears the courts may intervene to ban experimental methods of lethal injection, have prompted states to look at alternative ways to kill prisoners.
Tennessee's legislature has passed a bill that would reintroduce the electric chair if the state was unable to find drugs for lethal injections.
The state's Republican governor is still weighing whether to sign it into law.
Missouri is considering a proposal to reintroduce both firing squads and gas chambers if it becomes impossible to carry out a lethal injection.
Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Centre, said the laws were intended as symbols by conservative politicians of their commitment to the death penalty.
"It's about being even more blatant than the anti-death penalty side. To see this as a rational process is to miss the harshly divisive political atmosphere that produces these things," he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
"Thank you for using stop'n'drop. Americas favorite suicide booth since 2008. Choose between quick and painless and slow and horrible."
"I'm sorry we are out of quick and painless. Please select another option."
As far as God is concerned, yes. But society still needs to be protected from dangerous people and the penal code needs to be brought up to date from the dark ages - prisoners should be productive and pay for their stay in the Big House as well as pay back those they've robbed what can be reasonably repaid.
You are my new hero. Thanks for that.
Just answering questions folks are asking me.
Okay.
And there you just negated your own argument.
You see when you stick people who are capable of shooting an innocent person twice and then burying her alive so she would slowly die a horrible death in jail you place everyone who is in that jail in danger.
People like that do murder again. They murder guards and other inmates. They break out and murder other innocent people who were suppose to have been protected from that dangerous person.
On the other hand there is zero danger from an executed murderer.
Your analogy does not involve murder, sir-we do not stone women for adultery in this country-I’m a Catholic, and I do not see that even Jesus expects us to forgive the most heinous crime-wantonly taking the life of a fellow human outside the context of war or unwarranted attack-and keeping the perpetrator alive in a comfortable, if confined environment.
The murderer whose execution went wrong raped a young woman, shot her in the head, then tortured her by burying her alive to suffocate, just for the sake of cruelty.
Anyone who does such a thing needs killing...
Acts 25:11
King James Version (KJV)
11 For if I be an offender, or have committed any thing worthy of death, I refuse not to die: but if there be none of these things whereof these accuse me, no man may deliver me unto them. I appeal unto Caesar.
The scribes and Pharisees sought to find something against Jesus. Their method of operation was to ask a question or present a problem in which either solution would hurt Jesus (see several instances in Matthew 23). In this case, they presented the woman taken in adultery and reminded Jesus, “Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?” (v.5). If He upheld the law, the meek and lowly Jesus would be portrayed as cruel. If He made an exception to the law, He would be in favor of breaking the law. In either case, His bond with the people would be broken.
However, Jesus did the unexpected. He stooped down and wrote with His finger on the ground. What He wrote, we are not told. When the Pharisees insisted on an answer, He said, “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her” (v.7) and continued writing.
One interesting fact about this story: only the woman was brought. No man was accused. Yet, adultery is definitely a two-person sin. Is it possible that Jesus wrote Leviticus 20:10
on the ground? It says, “And the man that committeth adultery with another man’s wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.” Notice, both the adulterer and the adulteress are to be put to death. Not one, but both.
At any rate, the consciences of the accusers began to accuse their own hearts. One by one, beginning with the eldest, they slipped away until no man was there to accuse the woman. With no accusers, there was no required penalty. Jesus had used the occasion to point out the hypocrisy of the scribes and Pharisees while at the same time showing His love to the unloved. He told the woman to go and sin no more.
When He returns to the earth the next time, He will come as judge and will be executing the death penalty (see Revelation 19:11-15
).
In Romans, the government is mentioned as an executor of the law, using the sword of wrath. You do not imprison or coddle someone using a sword.
Good post.
In the film How The West Was Won, Karl Malden played Zeb Prescott, a character that had a memorable bit of dialogue. After he and some family members survived a battle with murderous outlaws, he prayed:
"O Lord, without consulting with Thee, we have sent thy way some souls whose evil ways passeth all understanding. We ask Thee humbly to receive them... whether you want them or not! Amen."
Dog (animal) pounds used to use vacuum chambers; not good.
Yes it is. But a reason used for CP is the personal benefit to the families of the victim. That's my argument about forgiveness comes in.
The state exists to do justice on our behalf, and part of that is vengeance.
Well, vengeance has been shown to not be very helpful. The state should not be in business of vengeance but PROTECTION of our lives and freedoms from any source including criminals. So secure incarceration for that reason, IMO, is a valid function of the state.
Instead of electric chair how about electric benches to seat lets say 5 at a time. Or lining up there heads in a line so one bullet lets say 50 cal. would get 10 at a time.
You argue against yourself here. The traditional penalty for murder in Jesus' time and until recently is death. That is the civil penalty. The laws requiring death in the Old Testament came from the People's demand for a civil law. The debt paid for on the cross was for the ultimate penalty, not for a civil, earthly one.
Would you kill someone in self defense, or would you allow yourself to be killed by an attacker?
There's a third position re the death penalty other than to be steadfastly for or against it. I'm for it where it is deserved but I don't relish it or want it to be torturous or prolonged. The penalty is death, so no matter how humanely accomplished, the sentence was carried out.
The state’s role is punishment for crimes. Vengeance, protection, rehabilitation, etc are only the excuses used by society to justify punishment.
Up above, you commented that vengeance felt good for a while, but that ultimately, only forgiveness would soothe the victims' families.
Since vengeance does therefore seem to be of some benefit, the murder victims' loved ones would be best served by first seeing the killers executed, then forgiving them in time.
OK then; we just execute them the same way they killed their victims.
The murderers found their own methods acceptable when they committed their crimes, so lets just apply the same methodology they used.
Probably a lot of things including punishment, prison, and possibly death. But I think the record shows that CP hasn't really dissuaded people from CP crimes.
The focus of the state IMO, is to bring the whole penal code out of the dark ages, clean up the prisons, make prisoners productive and pay for their stay in the Big House, and fix the parole process so society is protected from dangerous criminals. IMO, false solutions like CP create an illusion of remedy while these real problems continue to go unresolved.
I do not agree. You could make the same argument that since all crimes continue to happen, no punishment for any crime is effective. Reality is it does reduce crime, just not eliminate it.
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.