Two hour execution in USA

Scroll to see replies

So? They overwhelmingly don't.

So as long as another country has democratic support for a policy, we should leave them alone, with no regards to the outcome of that policy? While this might seem acceptable in a controversial topic like the death penalty, this logic clearly doesn't hold up for more serious crimes committed by foreign governments.

Reply 41

username1258398

Original post by Secretnerd123

And then they wonder why their taxes are so high

Herpderp?

Taxes are lower in the U.S. than in Britain :confused:

Reply 42

ESPORTIVA

Original post by Ripper-Roo

Or the death penalty shouldn't exist anyway

My response was more towards people saying **** like "good" "hurr durr scummy criminal!!!!1"

I'm glad he's dead

I hope he's burning good in hell

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 43

n00

Original post by Sephiroth

Maybe people shouldn't be forcing them to use inferior drugs then?

No one is forcing them to use inferior drugs, we just won't sell them ours, they use inferior drugs because they won't fork out for the good stuff.

Reply 44

Sephiroth

Original post by anosmianAcrimony

We just haven't done it well enough. If the death penalty was completely off the books, or if those chemicals were completely impossible to get (unlikely, I realise) then there wouldn't have been a problem.

Nah if you get rid of all the chemicals they just change the execution method to the next best thing. One state is already thinking about bringing back the electric chair. You aren't going to change US government policy by restricting access to certain materials.

Reply 45

Old_Simon

I cant believe the USA manufactures no drug which are suitable.

Reply 46

Falcatas

A bullet to the head would is more humane.
However the most humane way is nitrogen asphyxiation where the offender peacefully suffocates (rather than violently from carbon dioxide).

Of course one could object to the death penalty in principle but I cannot do so from arguments of justice although arguments from state power are another story.

Reply 47

username447608

So what if he suffered. Maybe he should of thought of that before brutally murdering somebody, his victim probably suffered a lot more than he did so where is the justice for the victim family. Disgusting he was a murderer he deserved it

Reply 48

nimrodstower

Original post by Sephiroth

Blame all those do-gooder anti death penalty people for this. A bullet to the head would be instant, but no they rather disallow such methods and force more "humane" methods such as lethal injections that have a higher chance of going wrong. Making those drugs difficult to get hold of makes the situation worse.

Us do gooder anti-death people would support NO method of execution, if some "humane" method is employed, it is because of the "hang 'em high loonies", who realise public opinion is turning away from their barbaric practices.

Reply 49

limetang

There's nothing inherently wrong with the death penalty in my opinion. The primary role of the justice system is to punish crime (as in, it is just to punish wrongdoing --> justice) and I think that there are certain crimes that warrant the death penalty. My only real reservations are practical ones along the lines of the inevitable horror of innocent people being executed. I understand why people have a ******* with it it's a horrible severe and permanent punishment, but it is that that is precisely the point. In that we are saying to criminals who warrant it that what they have done is so bad that they deserve to die for it.

It's not a "barbaric practice" as the poster above me chooses to call it, it's part and parcel of a recently forgotten facet of justice, that is that of punishment being absolutely central to the whole thing, and it being more than some base desire for revenge but a noble desire for wrongdoings to deserve punishment.

As for this case. A two hour execution was wrong it shouldn't have happened, but it's wrongness laid in the agonising two hours spent not simply by virtue of it being an execution. Gain some perspective.

Also. Could some mod tell me why the word ******* (p r o b l e m) is being censored?

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 50

james22

Original post by limetang

That should absolutely not be the aim of the justice system. Giving people "what they deserve" on its own does not achieve anything for the rest of society. Nor does any form of revenge. The justice system should be about deterrent and rehabilitation and (in the worst cases) getting dangerous people away from others.

Reply 51

UniMastermindBOSS

Original post by james22

It is our right to stop supplying the chemicals and to urge them to end the death penalty.

It's their right to punish someone who deserves to be punished by killing them.

Reply 52

james22

Original post by UniMastermindBOSS

It's their right to punish someone who deserves to be punished by killing them.

Unfortunately it is there right, doesn't change the point I was making though. Doesn't make what they do morally OK. Doesn't mean we cannot stop supplying the chemicals.

Reply 53

UniMastermindBOSS

Original post by james22

Unfortunately it is there right, doesn't change the point I was making though. Doesn't make what they do morally OK. Doesn't mean we cannot stop supplying the chemicals.

If you ask me, it's not morally OK to allow killers and rapists to live. I'd rather the sick people who do stuff like that suffer, than the victims and their families.

But nope, just put them in jail for a couple of months (at the cost of the tax payers) and then release them back into civilisation so they can carry on offending like before.

Reply 54

james22

Original post by UniMastermindBOSS

In the USA is alternative to the death sentence is almost always life without parole. No chance of release. What is possibly gained by executing them? Something which causes harm (in this case to the convicted), but causes no good is not morally right.

Reply 55

WeeGee9000

I am sorry to interrupt your debate but you can't simply 'abolish' death sentence because it is "inhumane" and "ohh poor criminal"*, a country where penalties for crimes are low will have its crime rate skyrocket. Same thing happens when the State tries to minimize the possibility of one to defend himself (gun control policies, for instance). The war on drugs also doesn't help.

Hell, just look at Brazil for instance; penalty for crimes is extremely low and our crime rate is one of the worst in Latin America (Mexico is worse), guns are almost completely banned (except for the police, and personal security of the politians who voted for gun bans, of course) and crime is now worse. We also didn't give up on the war on drugs.

The American ""liberals""** need to look at other countries as examples as to how most (however, not all) left-wing policies simply don't work ***.

* No, i don't think that criminals deserve to suffer, to be tortured and all that, but death sentence just simply can't be abolished for the more serious crimes. An instant and painless method is required.

** Liberals = group of people that defend a society where the respect individual rights are a priority, and the state should not interfere in other people's lives unless they violate other's individual rights. There are also other kinds of liberals, but this left-winged 'abolish everything' bull**** just isn't liberal at all.

*** And no, i do not defend the "glory of america" and neither am i a conservative who screams "COMMUNISTS!" all the time, just in case that popped in your head.

And sorry for the terrible english.

Reply 56

arkhamz

When will countries which still practice the death penalty just switch to nitrogen asphyxiation ? It's more humane (you don't feel yourself suffocating).

Reply 57

Huskaris

Read this like one of those over the top American advert. Words repeated are said by some deep voice hype man.

Tonight on HBO pay per view.

Feature length executiooooon!

He killed people, now justice has caught up with him. Justiiiiiiiiice...

Now, in your front room for $9.95 you can watch this man take his last breaths. Laaaaast breaaaaaath.

With a new UNTESTED cocktail, but this ain't coming with no straw hat. Straaaaaw haaaaaat.

Reply 58

limetang

Original post by james22

I can see where you're coming from but I absolutely disagree with you. Deterrent and safety are important but they are not what's at the core of justice. Justice is about punishing wrongdoing not out of some bloodlust for revenge but because punishment is the right result of wrongdoing. To deny punishment is to deny justice and while I can see why it might seem cruel to punish it's much more wrong not to