to not understand why it is so difficult to kill a human being humanely

[ReallyTired]

Animals are put to sleep or slaughtered for food every day. They do not suffer like this poor American did. People go under general anesthetic every day for major operations without mishap. Surely an excecution is easier to carry out than complex heart surgery.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-27220406

I don't want to discuss the pro and cons of captical punishment, but surely if the state is going to kill someone it can be done quickly and simply. Why is killing a person more complicated than killing a cow or a pig? I see no excuse for botched executions.

But someone has to administer the drugs, someone has to put the line into the person.

I never understand that argument. You can't get drugs into a person by magic.

Frankel I would imagine the gas chambers were invented in order to commit mass murder on an industrial scale in the cheapest most convenient way possible.

I can't imagine that with all the other things the soldiers had to do a bit of shooting would have made much odds TBH.

I didn't say I was in favour of torture, you don't even don't whether I'm in favour of the dealth penalty.

I'm simply having difficulty feeling sympathy for this 'poor american'.

Execution is NOT punishment for a murderer. Its punishment for his family and anyone who loves him.
Execution is retribution/revenge.
Punishment would be loss of freedom for whatever amount of time deemed suitable.

How it can bring anyone satisfaction is baffling - If you are happy someone has been executed - you are not all that different in that respect to a murderer who kills for pleasure.

Only the people that have been through it can say with 100% certainty

Davsmum you said exactly what I was thinking.

No person deserves to die in such a brutal and undignified way. Even one that caused harm and suffering to others.

No justification for the death penalty under any circumstances. Slow torture makes it more horrific.

The issue currently is that a lot of manufacturers of the drugs are quite correctly refusing to take part in state-sanctioned murder and are refusing to supply them.

The US government are refusing to even say exactly what drugs they are using or where they're from which is a terrifying prospect.

There was another execution scheduled just after the botched one for a man who raped and murdered an 11 month old

But then surely it could be argued that the person who administers the bolt to the back of the prisoners head is by default a murderer?

Yep, same applies to to whoever flips the switch to administer the lethal drugs. Given the laws in some states are such that participation in a crime equals guilt even if you didn't actually pull the trigger, it could be argued that all those involved are guilty (with the prosecutor, judge, jury - if they voted for the dp - and state Governor all being accessories before the fact/guilty of conspiracy).

Davsmum - perfectly said.

The gas chambers were about efficiency and ammunition. It takes a huge amount of resources to murder 6 million people one at a time.

The only reason lethal injection is the method of choice is because it is sanitised and dressed up as 'humane'. Doctors are banned from participating in executions and drug cocktails cannot be tested as killing someone isn't a 'medical procedure'. Personally I'd rather have hanging/firing squad/guillotine.

The reason that people used firing squads for executions was so that none of the shooters knew for certain which of them had administered the lethal shot.

I probably shouldn't be posting on this thread and will probably hide it now - I don't like that capital punishment exists, but I hate that people like that man do what they did and I think they deserve extreme punishment. I am not in favour of "an eye for an eye" though. If capital punishment is going to be administered, then it needs to be clean and quick - any form of torture involvement makes it as low as the act that the person is being punished for.

The difference between euthanising an animal and a human. When I am euthanising an animal I am right there next to them feeling the way the drugs move out of the syringe watching over the vein and able to adjust immediately if all is not proceeding smoothly. As I understand there is a considerable distance between the human and the syringes which are depressed by machine, machines can not pick up the tiny differences in feel that tell you the injection is not going correctly and needs to repositioned.
There are enormously effective drugs that kill a human fast with a small volume of drug, this is sadly why my profession has a truly horrendous suicide rate.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-26273051

here is his crime btw
amarillo.com/stories/2000/08/25/tex_convictedof.shtml

of course we can excute people humanely, just ask Dignitas

This will sound awful, but I cant get het up about this story. I dont approve of the death penalty, but fact is the US loves it! am not suprised they make it painful and fuck it up in all honesty, vile

but i have little sympathy for him,and bigger fish to fry than the US vile policies

Maybe the victims family could flip the switch instead

Idkick then the question of the punishment would fall to the family which would cause a lot of problems. It could tear families apart even further, different criminals would get different punishments for the same crime and so on. Generally this is why victims and families are not given decision making powers about the crimes they are affected by in the laws of most countries,

I to find it hard to care, what he did is relevant otherwise he wouldn't have ended up with a sentence of the death penalty in the first place.

And someone would still need to strap the person down, put the line in and so on.

Interesting link reallytired

This is a link for those of you that are interested In the history of the gas chamber as a method of execution:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_chambers

Why is killing a person more complicated than killing a cow or a pig?

Have you seen the inside of a slaughterhouse? They barely kill animals humanely. I don't think that'd be a good way to kill humans... Also, it'd be too messy.

I'm not advocating torture or anything, but what should they have done when things went wrong? Waste time and equipment to save him so they could kill him properly?

I don't understand why everyone is getting upset about the drugs being used for these. They wanted a guy dead, and he is in fact dead. Let's not dress it up and pretend to take the moral high ground on this because he didn't die the way they wanted him to.

Personally, I'd rather put these guys in solitary confinement the rest of their lives. It's cheaper to just keep them alive instead of doing a million appeals. Why waste the resources on them? We have schools and assistance programs getting cut, let's put the money there instead.

to not understand why it is so difficult to kill a human being humanely

I misread the lines in Active Convos and thought this had been posted in DIY..... Made me boggle a bit before I realised.

It's fucking barbaric imo!

There was a Good Wife episode recently where they found it impossible to execute a man as they couldn't find a good vein to inject it, it was just awful.

Why can't they just administer a huge dose of anaesthetic so at least the person is asleep - or is that what happens anyway?

Sorry Andro - just read your post.