WP: Va. Senate votes for using electric chair if execution drugs stay scarce

[TheGreatBuzz]

Well as far as painless, I would say a person who gets a shotgun to the forehead probably won't feel anything.  And running 50,000 volts through someone or putting them in a chamber and filling it with cynide doesn't really seem any more humane.

[visionary]

8 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

Well as far as painless, I would say a person who gets a shotgun to the forehead probably won't feel anything.  And running 50,000 volts through someone or putting them in a chamber and filling it with cynide doesn't really seem any more humane.

Not sure about the electric chair and gas chamber, but I did see this from wiki

Quote

Typically, three drugs are used in lethal injection. Sodium thiopental is used to induce unconsciousness, pancuronium bromide (Pavulon) to cause muscle paralysis and respiratory arrest, and potassium chloride to stop the heart.

I think only a few states use the electric chair and not sure they do so exclusively.  No idea about gas chambers.

 

[KingGibbs]

Just make sure Percy is overlooking the prep work.

[Renegade7]

I still believe that if there can be a realistic case made for an appeal or retrial, execution should not be an option.  If its absolutely obvious, like that guy in South Carolina who shot up that Church, they need to be executed.

I consistently see the argument about people possibly being innocent being executed, and I get it, I really do.  Some people on the other hand, just need to die, there's no nice way to say it, and do not deserve the opportunity to do others harm and continue to cost the taxpayer additional resources.  

Prison needs to be about rehabilitation or executing individuals who simply cannot be allowed back into society (not a giant holding pen throwing everyone together without any regard for the effect that will have on any of them).  I like guillotine over electric chair or even hanging, and executions should no longer be allowed for public viewing.  

[TheGreatBuzz]

2 hours ago, visionary said:

Not sure about the electric chair and gas chamber, but I did see this from wiki

I think only a few states use the electric chair and not sure they do so exclusively.  No idea about gas chambers.

 

I haven't done a lot of research on it but I've been told those injections only keep them from moving but the pain is intense.  So it only makes it more humane for those watching.  Again, just what I've heard .

[visionary]

3 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

I haven't done a lot of research on it but I've been told those injections only keep them from moving but the pain is intense.  So it only makes it more humane for those watching.  Again, just what I've heard .

Ah, ok, I haven't really looked into it much.  

[Predicto]

2 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

I still believe that if there can be a realistic case made for an appeal or retrial, execution should not be an option.  If its absolutely obvious, like that guy in South Carolina who shot up that Church, they need to be executed.

I consistently see the argument about people possibly being innocent being executed, and I get it, I really do.  Some people on the other hand, just need to die, there's no nice way to say it, and do not deserve the opportunity to do others harm and continue to cost the taxpayer additional resources.  

Prison needs to be about rehabilitation or executing individuals who simply cannot be allowed back into society (not a giant holding pen throwing everyone together without any regard for the effect that will have on any of them).  I like guillotine over electric chair or even hanging, and executions should no longer be allowed for public viewing.  

 

 

Just so you understand that "some people just need to die" is an emotional argument, not a logical one.  It's ok to make emotional argument if you recognize that is what it is.    

 And FYI the wasting resources argument cuts strongly AGAINST the Death Penalty, not in favor of it.  

Needless to say, I'm also not comfortable with the idea that the government should be able to say that is "absolutely obvious" that anyone needs to be executed.   

[Renegade7]

30 minutes ago, Predicto said:

 

 

Just so you understand that "some people just need to die" is an emotional argument, not a logical one.  It's ok to make emotional argument if you recognize that is what it is.    

 And FYI the wasting resources argument cuts strongly AGAINST the Death Penalty, not in favor of it.  

Needless to say, I'm also not comfortable with the idea that the government should be able to say that is "absolutely obvious" that anyone needs to be executed.   

 

You may be right on the emotional standpoint, no matter what logic I bring to the table on this one.  Death Penatly from what I'm seeing is as expensive as it is because of the resources put forth to try to make it humane (like lethal injection).  There may not be a humane way to execute someone, its still about protecting the rest of society.

[ExoDus84]

Just ship the condemned to a barren hellscape replete with deadly creatures, insufferable temperatures, a venomous and hostile populace, and evil overseers. A place so desolate and nightmarish that it takes a severe psychological and emotional toll on all who are forced to suffer its existence.

After all, Texas has plenty of space.

[Predicto]

1 hour ago, Renegade7 said:

 

You may be right on the emotional standpoint, no matter what logic I bring to the table on this one.  Death Penatly from what I'm seeing is as expensive as it is because of the resources put forth to try to make it humane (like lethal injection).  There may not be a humane way to execute someone, its still about protecting the rest of society.

 

 

No, the reason it is expensive is that the Constitution requires that everyone receive a fair trial.  In the case of the death penalty, it really is two trials.  First, a guilt or innocence trial.  Second, a "does this warrant the death penalty" trial.   That second trial involves multiple experts and a huge amount of extra evidence.   Everyone involved in the legal system has to spend a much larger amount of time and effort, because the consequences are so drastic and irreversible.  Then you have the appeals, not only the direct appeal but also the habeas appeals, which take years and go through all levels of the court system several times.   All of that is paid for by your tax dollars.

"For example, a 2015 study showed that in Washington death penalty cases cost an average of $1 million more to prosecute than comparable cases where the death penalty is not sought. A 2012 study showed that death penalty has cost California more than $4 billion since 1978, and suggested that commuting all the state's death sentences to life imprisonment would immediately result in $170 million in savings per year. In Kansas, death penalty cases studied between 2004-2011 cost around four times more than cases where the death penalty was not sought."

http://www.ncadp.org/pages/cost

 

"Death-penalty cases typically involve lengthy post-trial proceedings, known as habeas corpus, that consume vast sums of time and money for two reasons: The process consists of an exacting review of the entire case, and the government generally pays for both sides, because felons usually are indigent. The cost likely is millions per case.

I spoke with U.S. District Court Judge Gregory Frost about the time he and his staff spend on death-penalty cases. Like all federal judges, Frost presides over habeas corpus cases. To assist with the review of these cases, each of the three federal courts in the Southern District of Ohio employs a full-time law clerk (all licensed attorneys), and the court here in Columbus employs a part-time clerk, as well. The law clerks in Columbus handle about 25 cases, which may consist of anywhere from two boxes of documents to tens of thousands of pages.

Judge Frost also is involved in two other aspects of the death penalty. He reviews the very detailed protocol that begins 30 days prior to each execution and presides over a civil action concerning the death penalty, filed in 2004 on behalf of about 87 Death Row inmates.

The death protocol includes a review of every aspect of the execution process. The state has to ensure it has an adequate supply of the execution drug. The inmate’s mental state is assessed, and he is examined for a suitable vein for injection. Invariably, there is a request for a temporary restraining order and a hearing to review the process.

Hearings are attended, at a minimum, by three assistant attorneys general, three attorneys for the inmate, the Lucasville prison warden, the director of the Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, counsel and other officials from the department, Frost and his two law clerks. These people all are paid by either the state or the federal government. Hearings can last from a few hours to multiple days....

Frost estimates that he and his staff spend 40 to 60 hours per month on some aspect of death-penalty cases."

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/editorials/2012/08/08/death-penalty-cases-waste-a-lot-of-taxpayers-money.html

 

I work for a state supreme court.   The death penalty cases take up a huge amount of our time.   But we can't give them less attention - we are deciding whether the government can be given the ultimate power to end the life of someone.  The condemned has to be given the opportunity to raise every possible issue, and we have to give every one of those issues the greatest of attention.   After they are killed, there is no opportunity to consider new evidence that could exonerate them.  No opportunity to show that they received ineffective assistance of counsel,  No nothing,   So we cross every T and dot every I.  

[Renegade7]

29 minutes ago, Predicto said:

 

 

No, the reason it is expensive is that the Constitution requires that everyone receive a fair trial.  In the case of the death penalty, it really is two trials.  First, a guilt or innocence trial.  Second, a "does this warrant the death penalty" trial.   That second trial involves multiple experts and a huge amount of extra evidence.   Everyone involved in the legal system has to spend a much larger amount of time and effort, because the consequences are so drastic and irreversible.  Then you have the appeals, not only the direct appeal but also the habeas appeals, which take years and go through all levels of the court system several times.   All of that is paid for by your tax dollars.

 

I work for a state supreme court.   The death penalty cases take up a huge amount of our time.   But we can't give them less attention - we are deciding whether the government can be given the ultimate power to end the life of someone.  The condemned has to be given the opportunity to raise every possible issue, and we have to give every one of those issues the greatest of attention.   After they are killed, there is no opportunity to consider new evidence that could exonerate them.  No opportunity to show that they received ineffective assistance of counsel,  No nothing,   So we cross every T and dot every I.  

 

I understand.

[tshile]

I'm absolutely for the death penalty in some cases. There are some crimes where, to me, that is the closest to justice you can get.

I do not want innocent people executed.

I realize the legal system makes mistakes (even when those involved in a particular case have no ill intent)

I don't care that it's expensive.

If you find a way to square all that let me know because I haven't. 

[twa]

Predicto just wants more extremeskins time .....that lawyer stuff interferes 

[Predicto]

16 minutes ago, twa said:

Predicto just wants more extremeskins time .....that lawyer stuff interferes 

 

(luckily, I don't have to do the death penalty work.   It's soul numbing - in addition to being an incredible waste of time and money...)

[visionary]