Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

leathal injections are painless. Mass murderers are getting killed without any pain. this is useless. we should go back to the use of the electric chair. that is the most humain, yet cruel, way of killing people.

this is still not good enough for murderers. they are, at that point, less than human. they should be killed the way the killed their victoms, but that won't happen, ever.

leave your own way of killing murderers.

Firing squad. It's load and there is blood.

At 6/16/06 12:26 AM, Ice-9 wrote: Firing squad. It's load and there is blood.

Loud. Sorry, I just got all excited at the thought of jacking a round to whack a criminal.

All I have to say is don't get justice confused with revenge.

At 6/16/06 12:35 AM, Freemind wrote: All I have to say is don't get justice confused with revenge.

Isn't that all justice is? We redress those who society feels have done wrong?

At 6/16/06 12:25 AM, Hell-Itself wrote: leathal injections are painless. Mass murderers are getting killed without any pain. this is useless.

Where did you get the idea that lethal injection is painless?

"In most states three chemicals are used for lethal injection: Sodium thiopental, pancuronium bromide, and potassium chloride. The first of these is considered an ultra-short-acting bromide which is effective as an anesthesia for just a few minutes. The second, pancuronium bromide, marketed as Pavulon, paralyzes the skeletal muscles without affecting the nerves or brain. The individual injected with Pavulon is conscious without being able to move or speak, thus giving the impression of serenity or tranquility. In the state of Tennessee, it is a crime for veterinarians to use this drug in euthanizing pets. The final injection, potassium chloride, stops the heart while causing excruciating pain. The effect of this cocktail, according to testimony by Dr. Mark J.S. Heath who teaches anesthesiology at Columbia, is that the sodium thiopental can be inadequate or wear off leaving the prisoner conscious, paralyzed, suffocating and subject to extreme pain from the potassium chloride (Liptak, NYT, 10/7/2003).

According to Judge Ellen Hobbs Lyle, The subject gives all the appearances of a serene expiration when actually the subject is feeling and perceiving the excruciatingly painful ordeal of death by lethal injection the Pavulon gives a false impression of serenity to viewers, making punishment by death more palatable and acceptable to society (Liptak, NYT, 10/7/2003)."

http://ocucc.org/DeathPenalty/Problems.htm

there is no painless way to die,just face it, dieing is a bitch

If you want painful executions, I say forget the electric chair. I say go for straight for Crucifixion ! And I'd go a little further and crucify people upside down!

Im against the death penalty in general.....

I think the real question is: why do they swab the guy's arm with alcohol before giving the injection? Are they worried he'll get an infection within the 5 minutes before he's dead?

I think we should revamp how we put people to death. Keep lethal injection, but make it more humane. I'm sure it can be done; why aren't we doing it?

How about the 'eye for an eye' technique?

He is in for beating his wife over the head with an iron.
Do the same!

He is here because he strangled and drowned his partner.
Do the same!

He is here because he raped 3 women
Do the same!

It would create new jobs!!!

At 6/16/06 02:48 AM, KingAdrock wrote: I think the real question is: why do they swab the guy's arm with alcohol before giving the injection? Are they worried he'll get an infection within the 5 minutes before he's dead?

What if the Governor gives a pardon right before the poisonous injection but after the first injection? It's possible... Or the execution might be abortion for another reason.

How is the person killing the convicted criminal any less of a criminal. As far as I'm concerned they're both murders killing defenceless individuals. How is killing someone who killed showing that killing is wrong? The death penalty is entirely about vengence. No-one ever deserves to die no matter how henious their crime.

At 6/16/06 02:48 AM, KingAdrock wrote: I think the real question is: why do they swab the guy's arm with alcohol before giving the injection? Are they worried he'll get an infection within the 5 minutes before he's dead?

It's not only to clean the area, it's to make the vein rise to the surface, making it more easy to penetrate with a needle. Penetrating a muscle area slows the time the injection takes to approach each area around the body - such as the circulatory system (like the heart, lungs) and central nervous system (spine, brain).

At 6/16/06 02:54 AM, -metalstorm- wrote: How is the person killing the convicted criminal any less of a criminal. As far as I'm concerned they're both murders killing defenceless individuals. How is killing someone who killed showing that killing is wrong? [etc]

Wait, how do we know they won't kill again in jail?

RedScorpion - Why does it matter either way if the execution is mindboggling painful for these guys? The way I see it they don't deserve any mercy for the act of murder. It's hard to be merciful with a guy who rapes seven ine year old girls, eviscerates them while they're conscious, strangles with their own intestines and continues to maim and murder other people. Being merciful with these scum is like using proper etiquette in the presence of a grizzly bear. It doesn't make sense.

At 6/16/06 03:02 AM, Wyrlum wrote:

At 6/16/06 02:54 AM, -metalstorm- wrote: How is the person killing the convicted criminal any less of a criminal. As far as I'm concerned they're both murders killing defenceless individuals. How is killing someone who killed showing that killing is wrong? [etc]

Wait, how do we know they won't kill again in jail?

Are you saying that just because there is a chance that they may try to kill or kill someone in jail that someone should be given permission to kill them? Simply put thats a barbaric and simplistic way of thinking.
'We can't put him in jail because theres a chance he might try and kill someone while he's in there. I know! Lets kill instead. Unlike him we're allowed to kill because he's evil and we're good'.
Don't give them a chance to kill. Two years ago I visited the most high tech, high security jail in Australia as part of a Legal Studies excursion. The jail housed only murders and sex offenders which were held in different wings of the jail and they had no acces to each other as sex offenders were heavily looked down upon. All criminals had seperate cells which were constantly monitered by video cameras as was the rest of the jail. There were also mant other features to ensure the safety of all criminals whilst serving their term.

REASONS FOR LETHAL INJECTION!!!

1) Saves money!! No more paying for food for those murders!! No more washing their clothes for the rest of their lives!!

2) Repeated crimes!! What if they get out? They will just do it again! Look at the percenteges for repeat felons!

The only reason i oppose the death penality is because inniocent people will , have been murdered because the system is still flawed. Until they come through with a fool proof way to know someone is guilty im not going to support it.

At 6/16/06 03:37 AM, pendelum5 wrote: REASONS FOR LETHAL INJECTION!!!

1) Saves money!! No more paying for food for those murders!! No more washing their clothes for the rest of their lives!!

Because thats just. 'I feel like saving some money today so instead of putting this criminal in jail I'll just kill him with a lethal injection because thats cheaper'. You talk about these people as If they are disposable entities. What if the courts got it wrong? What if he was innocent? What would you do then?

2) Repeated crimes!! What if they get out? They will just do it again! Look at the percenteges for repeat felons!

In a just system a murderer should be lucky to get away with a 20 year sentence for a single murder and people who have killed 2 of 3 people can get back to back sentancing ie a 40 or 60 sentence. If you think about it loosing 60 years of your life is a pretty big deal. Thats more than 3 times how long i've been alive for. One of the primary reasons for jailing criminals is to protect society from the criminal. If it is thought that a murderer will re-offend after being released from jail he will be held in jail for as long as possible. It is also possible to obtain a court order to hold a dangerous criminal in jail past the maximum time of his sentance. Just remember, not all murderers are homicidal maniacs.

At 6/16/06 03:37 AM, pendelum5 wrote: 1) Saves money!! No more paying for food for those murders!! No more washing their clothes for the rest of their lives!!

Actually, it doesn't save any money. It costs roughly 4.5 million dollars in court costs to put someone to death. It costs between 25-35 thousand a year to keep someone in jail.

DO THE MATH

For the price it costs execute someone, you could put them in jail for 125-180 years.

At 6/16/06 03:37 AM, pendelum5 wrote: REASONS FOR LETHAL INJECTION!!!

1) Saves money!! No more paying for food for those murders!! No more washing their clothes for the rest of their lives!!

It is more expensive for the death penalty than life in prison. The cost of appeals alone overshadows the cost of these murders living for a few more decades. The death penalty is far from perfect.

2) Repeated crimes!! What if they get out? They will just do it again! Look at the percenteges for repeat felons!

Life in prison. And what if they don't repeat their bad behavior. It is absurd to kill all of them just because some of them repeat their actions.

Your arguements are flawed at best.

At 6/16/06 02:29 AM, KingAdrock wrote: If you want painful executions, I say forget the electric chair. I say go for straight for Crucifixion ! And I'd go a little further and crucify people upside down!

:I think the real question is: why do they swab the guy's arm with alcohol before giving the injection? Are they worried he'll get an infection within the 5 minutes before he's dead?

I think somebody's been listening to some Carlin. More of a philosifer than a comic, but still very funny at times.

At 6/16/06 03:16 AM, JadedSoB wrote: RedScorpion - Why does it matter either way if the execution is mindboggling painful for these guys? The way I see it they don't deserve any mercy for the act of murder. It's hard to be merciful with a guy who rapes seven ine year old girls, eviscerates them while they're conscious, strangles with their own intestines and continues to maim and murder other people. Being merciful with these scum is like using proper etiquette in the presence of a grizzly bear. It doesn't make sense.

Hmm... I haven't exactly argued for preference of it being painless or not, but to me, it doesn't matter. The guy/girl is sentenced to death, and whether or not he feels pain is irrelevant to the procedure. This murderer will die, whether it be painful or not. The relevance only bears on the living, on how they will feel after the execution occurs. If they feel lethal injection is more 'humanitarian', then it is. If they desired a more painful execution, a revenge scenario, then they may live on with that desire. I think most victims would prefer a more healthy conscious after the death of their assaliant (I remember watching a documentary on it), and rather live with a pure knowledge that this person cannot harm them no longer, rather than live with a knowledge of committing gruesome harm (why stoop to the criminal's level if they have no consciousness on which to bear upon). The immediate effect is irrelevant, as such the overall effect must be remembered over the course of their lifetime.

As said before, the method doesn't matter to me, for they are dead, unable to cause harm any more. The victim or victim's consciousness bear more importance than this murderer will. If the goal is not to rehabilitate (punishment is a form of rehabilitation), then pain on the murderer will carry no objective meaning. If the criminal lacks consciousness, then why waste the effort of pain on this person? They cannot be rehabilitated if they lack some sort of consciousness, and pain is only objectively effective on the conscious. If you wish to stroke your vengeful side, you may feel pleasure in harming those deemed 'worthy' of such pain. But, the choice of mind style is in the individual. If they are so unworthy of secular mercy, then why are they worthy enough for someone to care how they feel? Why should you (as an example, not meaning to pick on you) care whether or not they feel pain or not, when the inevitable goal is achieved, being that they are unable to cause harm any more, existing only in death?

At 6/16/06 04:13 AM, -Jose- wrote: It is more expensive for the death penalty than life in prison. The cost of appeals alone overshadows the cost of these murders living for a few more decades. The death penalty is far from perfect.
Life in prison. And what if they don't repeat their bad behavior. It is absurd to kill all of them just because some of them repeat their actions.

At 6/16/06 04:12 AM, KingAdrock wrote: Actually, it doesn't save any money. It costs roughly 4.5 million dollars in court costs to put someone to death. It costs between 25-35 thousand a year to keep someone in jail.
For the price it costs execute someone, you could put them in jail for 125-180 years.

At 6/16/06 04:02 AM, -metalstorm- wrote: What if the courts got it wrong? What if he was innocent? What would you do then?

These are a few of the reasons why I prefer life sentencing over that of mere death sentencing. Many people have been found innocent of the charges against them, before or after the fact. Life sentencing is cheaper, and overall a greater guarantee of proper justice is served. If an error is made in the process of justice, then it is possible for the person to be retributed upon, rather than the clean swipe of death.

At 6/16/06 12:25 AM, Hell-Itself wrote: leathal injections are painless. Mass murderers are getting killed without any pain. this is useless. we should go back to the use of the electric chair. that is the most humain, yet cruel, way of killing people.

this is still not good enough for murderers. they are, at that point, less than human. they should be killed the way the killed their victoms, but that won't happen, ever.

leave your own way of killing murderers.

It wastes my motha' fuckin' money. If you wanna' kill someone, fuckin' blow their brains out, and stop waisting my fuckin' money on that "humanitarian" bullshit.

At 6/16/06 07:34 AM, Ranger2 wrote:

Mass murderers shoot and torture people. Why shouldn't they get an equally painful if not more painful death?

Because
1. What if the courts get it wrong and kill an innocent person?
2. How is the murder of an convicted murderer any different to the murder of a civilian? Thats right. Execution is cold-blooded murder
3. No-one should have the final say over wether someone lives or dies the fact that some courts in some countries have this power is nothing short of disgraceful and barbaric.
4. How would you like to be in a situation where someone you didn't even know had the final say over wether you lived or died. Dont just shrug this off either saying that it isn't relevant because you woudn't find yourself in this situation. think of it as a hypothetical situation.
5. If you were convicted of murder and sentenced to death would you still retain the same views? Of course you wouldn't because you'd now be involved in the system realizing the reality of whats about to happen to you.

"An eye for an eye and the world will be blind"-Ghandi

At 6/16/06 10:27 AM, sdhonda wrote: "An eye for an eye makes the world blind"-Ghandi

Damn, beat me to it. I think it depends on the severity of the case, and whether the jurors can be sure that the person is guilty. A man who might have killed his wife, but might have been out with his buddies, getting drunk and crashing with them. Probably shouldn't get the death penalty. However, if you've got the guy on tape, slaughtering his entire family at thanksgiving, he's probably guilty.