Now murderers are complaining lethal injection is cruel and unusual..must we satisfy murderers?

Question

The two murderers are from Kentucky. They murdered by shooting their victims. Would they be okay with a firing squad?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070925/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_lethal_injection

halsca...if these convicts need an IV to stay alive in a hospital, is it a form of torture putting in an IV?

Answer 1

The only people subjected to cruel and unusual punishment is the victim and the victim's loved ones.

In most death penalty cases the murder has to have egregious circumstances that made the murder exceptionally heinous...(I said most...for you liberals that will cite a case where this is not applicable)...

So to me anything short of being, raped ,tortured and murdered, is a more compassionate death than the victim probably received.

The death penalty should not be just about retribution and punishment either....it should also be about getting rid of their irredeemable behinds and off the tax payers dime.

I heard once that it cost more to execute them than to house and feed them for life....if that is so, then someone is paying alot of money for those cyanide tablets...

BTW, if all these criminals last hours were spent frolicking in a field of flowers, being hand fed grapes and were allowed to "drift off" during a back rub...they would still claim cruel and unusual...nothing satisfied them in life....nothing will satisfy them in death.

Answer 2

All punishment is cruel and unusual; otherwise it would not be punishment. Some are worse than others. By trying to take the stigma away from lethal injection, they've made the application into something cruel and unusual. Imagine a 5-man firing squad, where 4 of them had blanks and only 1 was a real bullet, so that nobody knew who the actual killer would be. And the real bullet only grazed the prisoner. Death by injection should be death, not interminal suffering by some non-lethal chemical flowing through your veins. Death by electrocution should be death, not 20 minutes of slow-frying. Death by hanging should be death, not gradual strangulation. It's not the death sentence, but the squeamish application by those who aren't suited for it.

Answer 3

The issue isn't whether we are satisfying or accommodating murderers -- the issue is whether what we are doing complies with the constitutional requirements that the govt must abide.

The constitution prohibits cruel and unusual punishment -- and the defendants in this case didn't write that, nor are they the ones sitting on the bench interpreting it -- so the only issue is whether the state is following the constitutional requirements.

The fact that these criminals may benefit if the state is not following the rules -- that's a side effect -- but whether they benefit or not, the state must follow the constitutional rules.

Answer 4

It is absolutely amazing what we will waste tax dollars on. This is another glaring example of how many believe that criminals should have more rights than the victims. I couldn't care less if they don't get enough anesthetic. I don't think they should get any. Did they give their Victim's the same consideration? For me I think we should cut costs and use the same syringe and a bottle of liquid Drano. It will do the trick within minutes as well. I don't feel those few minutes are cruel or unusual when compared to the pain and suffering they caused their victims and their families.

Answer 5

Shoot man.
Look at Brian Nichols here in Atlanta. Everyone knows he shot the judge and the court clerk and the federal agent and cop and pistol whipped the other cop so bad she's hardly recognizable.
They actually had hearings recently to try and come up with more money for his case simply because his attorneys are trying to prove he's nuts.

Talk about a waste and a travesty.

Frankly I believe he should be boiled in oil or buried alive.

Answer 6

I think if lethal injection was "cruel and unusual" and did somehow violate the rights of a murderer, an intelligent person would have caught on years ago. Like, scholars and politicians and human rights advocates didn't realize it was "inhumane," but the bright minds of a couple of murderers were able to realize injustice??

Oh, and they put old and sick pets down with lethal injection. How long until someonw complains about that?

Answer 7

Problem with lethal injection is many of the offenders will have problems because they have no usable surface veins because of years of IV drug use.

Trying to locate a vein suitable for injection takes time and usually quite painful. Now multiply that by 3 as they're several needles involved. It can be thought of as torture and in this country torture is largely illegal.

Best method would be carbon dioxide gas, I don't see why they don't use it. The condemned person simply passes out.

Answer 8

Stupid huh? People who go out and brutally kill someone in cold blood complaining about how any type of death penalty is cruel!?

Utter nonsense! I think they should be punished according to the crime they committed against the victim(s)! I know it sounds harsh, but that's how I feel.

And any lawyer who knowingly defends a murderer/rapist should be tossed into jail too!

Answer 9

The problem with capital punishment.

I believe some are not fit to live in our society at all. It is way too expensive to keep these people housed for life and is not a great deterrent.

However, I also believe we should not be giving the power to the goverment of who lives and who dies.

Answer 10

Challenges to the death penalty and, specifically, lethal injection as cruel and unusual are based on the 8th amendment to the Constitution's protection against same. Because it is the STATE who puts someone death in the name of the people, one presumes the STATE is held to a higher standard than the criminals among their populace.

Secondly, it is appellate attorneys whose job it is to save the lives of their clients, NOT the clients themselves, who raise any and all legal arguments conceivable in attempting to do so. One cannot (or should not) fault them for defending their clients' rights zealously as that is what they are charged to do.