The Death Penality and Pagans

[Shearaha]

Brass Bell Doll

Shearaha

Lethal injection. While I'm not sure about other states it's the primary (i.e. only) form of execution used in my state. The condemned are give an IV anesthetic that puts them into a deep surgical plane of anesthesia and then a lethal dose of the same or another IV anesthetic is given after the condemned is asleep. It's really no different than how pet dogs and cats are euthanized.

My concern with this is that sodium thiopental will render a person unconscious, but that does not mean that there is no sense of pain upon the delivery of the pancuronium and potassium chloride. It does however mean that the pain experienced by the person dying will not be expressed as violently, especially since it is standard procedure to administer the muscle relaxant first.

I have not seen anything to show that there is no pain registering in the brain during the execution.

I admit that I haven't read any studies on brain activity during execution by lethal injection. I really can only go on what have seen with this method when used in animals.

I've also got to point out that people will bang their arms and legs against thing while in deep sleep and not notice the pain until waking in the morning. I know I have. Who's to say that the registering of pain in this case is any different.

The condemned are also being placed into a surgical plane of anesthesia. The same type of sleep that doctors perform heart surgery under. I really think that if the pain of heart surgery is not felt during the procedure then lethal injection wouldn't be felt either.

Brass Bell Doll

Shearaha

Because the prison system is not really secure. While they have been removed from the populace at large they are still a threat to other inmates and guards. Contraband is a huge problem in prisons and make shift weapons can be made from just about anything, including items that our system is required to provide to the inmates.

While this is true, I would point out that by those standards, there is no such thing as security at all. It is possible that a complete stranger who has never committed an offense may do so tomorrow. For that matter, in traditions that believe in reincarnation, it would not eliminate the long term possibility that they could reincarnate and kill again in the future.

Please understand this is not sarcasm, but merely an illustration that absolute security does not exist, so I feel it is not a supportive argument. It also means that if we accept that locking a criminal away does not make us secure, then we would have to resort to executing everyone- because specific crimes do not negate the dangers of a prison dynamic.
It's also a permanent solution, once a perpetrator is dead they can't physically hurt anyone anymore.

I know that absolute security doesn't exist, that's why we have people like police officers and firemen and prison guards. I could get mugged or raped on my way home from work every day. I could get killed in my own home. Security is an illusion, but if a known danger can be removed it does slightly increase that security.

I do believe in reincarnation, but for me part of that is a resting time. That time can be long or short by how we measure time, but where we come back into time is not always "after" we left it. We're also not the same person who left. Some things may be the same, but not all. An individual who in one lifetime was a danger to society may be an asset in another.

I wouldn't want a known murderer living next door any more then I would want to live next door to an aggressive, ill contained dog.

Brass Bell Doll

Shearaha

Really I don't see the killing of convicted murders any different than the killing of vicious dogs, or man-killer lions. A vicious dog can be caged, but it's still a danger to the people who have to provide it food water and clean housing. It can still escape and cause more damage, injuries and possible loss of life.

I agree that there is not a difference when it comes to the fundamental threat present, but then, I'm not convinced that "vicious" animals always deserved to be killed, so I am not in a position to accept that as an argument at face value either.

I'm not convinced that they need to be killed either. At least not all of them. Case in point. A few months ago an elderly woman was found in her driveway dead with bite marks on her arms and shoulders and the family dog standing next to her. Everyone assumed because of the breed of the dog that the dog killed her. After the dog was put down the coroner’s report shown that the bite marks were wounds from dragging, the dog was trying to get the woman, who died of a heart attack, back to the house where the rest of the family was. This dog was labeled as vicious when it wouldn't let paramedics and police near the woman’s body.

River_Moonwolf

Annnnd here's the problem, in a nutshell. In the American system, defendants don't have to prove ANYTHING. It's the whole "innocent until proven guilty" bit. Of course, this never works, thanks to the media. Not trying to be pissy, it's just I hear that so freakin' much it annoys the hell outta me. I work in afield where that attitude has seriously damaged some folks for life.

Very true. Then you've also got people who did the crimes getting off scot free. Our justice system is a mess, its better than some places, but still a mess.

I only support the death penalty in those who show no remorse and fully admit to what they did. Like Cu said there are Sociopaths who cannot live in society.  

[Brass Bell Doll]

Shearaha

I've also got to point out that people will bang their arms and legs against thing while in deep sleep and not notice the pain until waking in the morning. I know I have. Who's to say that the registering of pain in this case is any different.

I feel it is important to point out that responding to pain and experiencing pain do not always coincide.

Shearaha

The condemned are also being placed into a surgical plane of anesthesia. The same type of sleep that doctors perform heart surgery under. I really think that if the pain of heart surgery is not felt during the procedure then lethal injection wouldn't be felt either.

My understanding of the procedure is that it is not the same dosage used in surgery.

I feel that when there are claims about the executed prisoner's departure being "peaceful", it should be supported by something more- especially when autopsy studies published in peer reviewed medical journals like The Lancet have shown post-mortum that the prisoner was likely not unconscious at the time of their execution.

My understanding is that this is the current source of a challenge regarding the Constitutional validity of Lethal Injection executions.

Shearaha

I know that absolute security doesn't exist, that's why we have people like police officers and firemen and prison guards. I could get mugged or raped on my way home from work every day. I could get killed in my own home. Security is an illusion, but if a known danger can be removed it does slightly increase that security.

Does it truly increase security or does it increase our comfort by deceiving ourselves into a false sense of security?

Shearaha

I do believe in reincarnation, but for me part of that is a resting time. That time can be long or short by how we measure time, but where we come back into time is not always "after" we left it. We're also not the same person who left. Some things may be the same, but not all. An individual who in one lifetime was a danger to society may be an asset in another.

It is also possible that Jack the Ripper was reincarnated as Hitler.

Since there is no means to verify the claims one way or the other, I would suggest that they could not reasonably be used as an argument.

Shearaha

I wouldn't want a known murderer living next door any more then I would want to live next door to an aggressive, ill contained dog.

If you do not wish to live along side them, then that is your choice of course. That would not negate their right in and of itself however and in the same sense that you do not have the right to execute an obnoxious animal based on your desire to remove the situation from your life, you certainly would not have the right to do so for a person who murdered and had paid their debt to society.

Shearaha

I'm not convinced that they need to be killed either. At least not all of them. Case in point. A few months ago an elderly woman was found in her driveway dead with bite marks on her arms and shoulders and the family dog standing next to her. Everyone assumed because of the breed of the dog that the dog killed her. After the dog was put down the coroner’s report shown that the bite marks were wounds from dragging, the dog was trying to get the woman, who died of a heart attack, back to the house where the rest of the family was. This dog was labeled as vicious when it wouldn't let paramedics and police near the woman’s body.

Would you consider the death of this animal a tragedy?  

[Fiddlers Green]

My nation has a confused sense of justice.
We cannot decide whether we want to rehabilitate criminals, punish them, or just lock them away to keep others safe from them. Beyound that, our system of juror selection is fraught with corruption, and intentionally removes persons who actually are students of the law. I will not even scratch the surface of my disdain for the method of investing Judges.

Such a cluttered and dysjunctioned chimera aught not have the power of life and death.
To wit, in my opinion, no corporate identity, or faceless collective aught have such power. Only one who can be killed aught have the sanction to kill. This creates sympathy with those being judged, and also opens the door for the killer to in turn be killed, as they have passed such judgment, that they must abide when another kills them. If something would execute a living person, it must be a living person who in turn may be executed. In summation, I rebuke the idea that any state/government may decide who is deserving of death.

Now, beyond those objections, I find execution to be a cowardly and base tactic. The corpse shall not make restitution for whatever crime they committed to supposedly deserve death. If you execute a person, you kill them. Is killing wrong? Under what circumstances? What if the victim, or their family does not howl for blood? What if the convicted is later proven innocent. Are you willing to take that risk? If you are, if you are willing to slay the innocent to ensure the guilty die, then should not your own justice find you, as you are a threat to innocents? By what authority does a court kill a person? does a government have the right to kill it's people? Does a person sanctioned by a government have a right to kill defenseless people? At least in gladiatorial executions, the convicted had a chance to die fighting, rather than rendered helpless.

I have problems with my nation's prison systems as well, mostly to do with privatization and profit mongering there thru, but also dealing with the (aforementioned) confused nature of the beast, where it cannot be decided whether the criminal aught be punished, rehabilitated, or locked away like a rabid animal.

At the end of the day, for me, I consider that regardless of what anyone else does, I must live with myself, and the Evil I do will not be cleansed by dressing it up as justice, or gaining the sanction of some nebulous legal body.  

[Shearaha]

Brass Bell Doll

Shearaha

I've also got to point out that people will bang their arms and legs against thing while in deep sleep and not notice the pain until waking in the morning. I know I have. Who's to say that the registering of pain in this case is any different.

I feel it is important to point out that responding to pain and experiencing pain do not always coincide.

True, but that's the same point I was making. The pain of bashing my arm was felt during sleep, but I didn't react to it until I woke up.

Brass Bell Doll

Shearaha

The condemned are also being placed into a surgical plane of anesthesia. The same type of sleep that doctors perform heart surgery under. I really think that if the pain of heart surgery is not felt during the procedure then lethal injection wouldn't be felt either.

My understanding of the procedure is that it is not the same dosage used in surgery.

I feel that when there are claims about the executed prisoner's departure being "peaceful", it should be supported by something more- especially when autopsy studies published in peer reviewed medical journals like The Lancet have shown post-mortum that the prisoner was likely not unconscious at the time of their execution.

My understanding is that this is the current source of a challenge regarding the Constitutional validity of Lethal Injection executions.

IV anesthetics aren't used in humans anymore, only inhalants.

I honestly haven't read any human medical journals, my focus lies with animals and those journals take up a lot of my time. Do you have a link to these articles? If I have time I'll read them.

There will always be someone challenging the prison system. It's the reason that inmates have internet access, TVs and conjugal visits.

Brass Bell Doll

Shearaha

I know that absolute security doesn't exist, that's why we have people like police officers and firemen and prison guards. I could get mugged or raped on my way home from work every day. I could get killed in my own home. Security is an illusion, but if a known danger can be removed it does slightly increase that security.

Does it truly increase security or does it increase our comfort by deceiving ourselves into a false sense of security?

See the bolded. All security is an illusion. We are constantly deceiving ourselves with the illusion of security. Be it security form murder, or financial security, or planetary security. At any moment any one can die, be killed, loose everything they think they have, or the planet could get hit by a large meteor and we all die.

Brass Bell Doll

Shearaha

I do believe in reincarnation, but for me part of that is a resting time. That time can be long or short by how we measure time, but where we come back into time is not always "after" we left it. We're also not the same person who left. Some things may be the same, but not all. An individual who in one lifetime was a danger to society may be an asset in another.

It is also possible that Jack the Ripper was reincarnated as Hitler.

Since there is no means to verify the claims one way or the other, I would suggest that they could not reasonably be used as an argument.

Very true, but you're the one who brought up reincarnation. I just gave you my personal beliefs on the subject.

Brass Bell Doll

Shearaha

I wouldn't want a known murderer living next door any more then I would want to live next door to an aggressive, ill contained dog.

If you do not wish to live along side them, then that is your choice of course. That would not negate their right in and of itself however and in the same sense that you do not have the right to execute an obnoxious animal based on your desire to remove the situation from your life, you certainly would not have the right to do so for a person who murdered and had paid their debt to society.

I agree. But I also think that I should have the right to not have known murderers, even those who have served their time, move in next to me.

I do not have the right to put down my neighbors dog, but I do have the right to report them for not properly containing their dog. If the dog is properly contained and the people of the neighborhood are protected from it I have no problem with them choosing to own an aggressive dog. But I will excersize my right to voice that the dog needs to be contained.

Brass Bell Doll

Shearaha

I'm not convinced that they need to be killed either. At least not all of them. Case in point. A few months ago an elderly woman was found in her driveway dead with bite marks on her arms and shoulders and the family dog standing next to her. Everyone assumed because of the breed of the dog that the dog killed her. After the dog was put down the coroner’s report shown that the bite marks were wounds from dragging, the dog was trying to get the woman, who died of a heart attack, back to the house where the rest of the family was. This dog was labeled as vicious when it wouldn't let paramedics and police near the woman’s body.

Would you consider the death of this animal a tragedy?

I would consider this an example of how flawed our legal system is and a tragedy for the family who fought the death of their dog up to the hour he was euthanized.


I don't think every convicted murder needs to be killed. I think some do. I think that there are people who regret that they killed, not that they got caught.  

[CuAnnan]

Gho the Girl

River_Moonwolf

True, but by condemning another sentient to death, aren't we, in effect, saying we can dictate destiny? At least, that's the way it always seemed to me, no offense intended.

Unless destiny dictates it's own way, and we merely give a judgement that is in line with what has been written.

Precisely.
I don't believe in destiny, but destiny may well exist.  

[CuAnnan]

Fiddlers Green

Such a cluttered and dysjunctioned chimera aught not have the power of life and death.

As you present your government, and I am not contesting the presentation, I agree.
I don't know enough about American jury selection, etc, to comment beyond bowing to those who know more.

Fiddlers Green

In summation, I rebuke the idea that any state/government may decide who is deserving of death.

We don't have the death sentence for precisely that reason.

Fiddlers Green

By what authority does a court kill a person? does a government have the right to kill it's people?

In the case of Ireland, by the constitution which was later ammended to strip them of that right.
Like America, the Irish government is empowered by the Constitution. The Constitution however, in the case of Ireland, does represent the collective desires of the majority in accordance with public morality (insert the rest of the constitutional caveat here).
If enough people want a refferendum, they get it.

Fiddlers Green

I have problems with my nation's prison systems as well, mostly to do with privatization and profit mongering there thru, but also dealing with the (aforementioned) confused nature of the beast, where it cannot be decided whether the criminal aught be punished, rehabilitated, or locked away like a rabid animal.

We lack common ground here.
The prisons, here, are public run.
They are designed for rehabilitation, though their design is flawed.  

[Brass Bell Doll]

Shearaha

True, but that's the same point I was making. The pain of bashing my arm was felt during sleep, but I didn't react to it until I woke up.

I feel there is a miscommunication here. Since there can be a difference between reaction and observation of reaction, there is nothing to say that someone is not suffering, instead in the case of lethal injection, it allows us to pretend someone is not suffering. For this reason, I feel that the point does not support your position.

Shearaha

IV anesthetics aren't used in humans anymore, only inhalants.

Would you be able to provide a source for this in reference to Lethal Injection? I ask because while this may be true for hospitals, it may not be such for prisoners.

Shearaha

I honestly haven't read any human medical journals, my focus lies with animals and those journals take up a lot of my time. Do you have a link to these articles? If I have time I'll read them.

Unfortunately it seems you need a subscription to read the full article, but a summery can be found here:
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(05)66377-5/fulltext#

A commentary can be found here:
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(05)66345-3/fulltext

I feel this excerpt sums up the concern I have with your approach:

The researchers also obtained toxicological reports from four other states which indicate that post-mortem thiopental concentrations in the blood of 43 of 49 executed inmates (88%) were lower than those needed for surgical anaesthesia, and 21 (43%) episodes were consistent with awareness. That is: those being executed may have been awake. Of course, because they were paralysed, no one could tell. It would be a cruel way to die: awake, paralysed, unable to move, to breathe, while potassium burned through your veins. That is why, as Koniaris and his co-authors point out, the American Veterinary Medical Association and 19 states, including Texas, prohibit the use of neuromuscular blocking agents to kill animals.

Shearaha

There will always be someone challenging the prison system. It's the reason that inmates have internet access, TVs and conjugal visits.

I feel it is a benefit when science is brought in to expose an Unconstitutional act- as I feel we cannot ignore the 8th Amendment.

I feel that when we devalue human life to the point where we engage in cruelty, we loose our own humanity.

Shearaha

See the bolded. All security is an illusion. We are constantly deceiving ourselves with the illusion of security. Be it security form murder, or financial security, or planetary security. At any moment any one can die, be killed, loose everything they think they have, or the planet could get hit by a large meteor and we all die.

If this is the case, then why should someone die for an illusion?

Shearaha

Very true, but you're the one who brought up reincarnation. I just gave you my personal beliefs on the subject.

I attempted to preemptively address an argument.
Sorry if I worded it poorly.

Shearaha

I agree. But I also think that I should have the right to not have known murderers, even those who have served their time, move in next to me.

I feel this attitude is based on a form of bias that dehumanizes others, and feeds a form of irrational prejudice. Perhaps it is a subset of Classism that allows us to view convicted criminals who have been freed through the legal system as undeserving of the rights you and I enjoy.

Having said that, it seems that it is very important to explore this attitude. When we decide that a single act has removed that value of that person's humanity- rendering them a mere object worthy of our disdain, how do such attitudes reflect upon us?

Shearaha

I do not have the right to put down my neighbors dog, but I do have the right to report them for not properly containing their dog. If the dog is properly contained and the people of the neighborhood are protected from it I have no problem with them choosing to own an aggressive dog. But I will excersize my right to voice that the dog needs to be contained.

I feel that this does not reflect your attitudes above. Based on position as presented, it seems to imply that either animals have more rights than humans or that humans, should we be able to devalue their humanity, deserve death or exile regardless of their current behavior.

Shearaha

I would consider this an example of how flawed our legal system is and a tragedy for the family who fought the death of their dog up to the hour he was euthanized.


I don't think every convicted murder needs to be killed. I think some do. I think that there are people who regret that they killed, not that they got caught.

It seems that this also reflects an attitude towards the value of other people though, one that is filtered through an illusion of safety that then allows us to say that the person, in order that we feel more comfortable with ourselves can be executed- without regard for what is really taking place.

In that sense, in the sense that we would then decide that killing someone else will make us feel better, do we not do exactly as those who are being killed?  

[Shearaha]

Bell, I don't have time right now but I will reply to your post. It may take some time though.  

[CuAnnan]

Musical_Vampire_Socks

I think it helps deter people

I really think the statistics contradict this.  

[Brass Bell Doll]

CuAnnan

Musical_Vampire_Socks

I think it helps deter people

I really think the statistics contradict this.

Link
The above link has statistics for the United States on the matter.  

[Fiddlers Green]

CuAnnan

I don't know enough about American jury selection, etc, to comment beyond bowing to those who know more.

I will now forever render myself inillegible to serve on an American jury.
I assert that I am familiar with and understand the application of the legal process of Jury Nullification.
Basically, if you demonstrate an active understanding of the specific laws about a case, or are shown to be biased (read have any emotions) about a topic that either of the attorneys decides is important to their case, you are removed from illegibility.
The process, which varies in the minutiae from place to place, is to bring in dozens if not hundreds of people, and then the legal counsels take turns kicking people they don't want as jurors out of the selection process.

CuAnnan

In the case of Ireland, by the constitution which was later ammended to strip them of that right.
Like America, the Irish government is empowered by the Constitution. The Constitution however, in the case of Ireland, does represent the collective desires of the majority in accordance with public morality (insert the rest of the constitutional caveat here).
If enough people want a refferendum, they get it.

Now for the fun question... do the majority have the moral right to chose who lives and dies, because that's pretty much what this boils down to. The collective will has the right to kill.

CuAnnan

We lack common ground here.
The prisons, here, are public run.
They are designed for rehabilitation, though their design is flawed.

Our prison system, especially in my current state, fills me with a special kind of hate.

Execution as deterrent is a tire argument. It has failed for how many millenia? However, most statistics lack complete context. While I do appreciate the links and information, without comprehensively looking at all the factors, it renders it a bit moot. Then again, that, in and of itself, is a solid point.  

[Fiddlers Green]

Celeblin Galadeneryn

I believe prison is both, however, I also believe not all people deserve a chance to reform.

What determines whether a person deserves a chance to reform?