Oklahoma Botched Execution - Clayton Lockett took 45 Minutes to Die

a reply to: crazyewok

true, thats why I or you alone shouldnt be able to dictate what it means. The MAJORITY do.

Most people would agree with me, hence that is what THE PEOPLE want it to mean.

If they all shared your ideal, I and those like me who share my ideals would have to try to convince them of our reasons.

When we fail to do so, we would have to accept that the will of the people is being served. Calling them names because they dont agree with our interpretation based on OUR ideals would be of poor spirit and illogical.

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: NavyDoc

But the point is why use a expensive cocktail which is difficult to get hold of when you can use one simple and cheap drug. One drug also means less can go wrong.

I don't disagree. You have a valid point with a single drug. As morphine is not a hypnotic, you may not be able to guarantee insensibility immediately.

We should really lift the stupid prohibition of medical boards and let qualified anesthetists do it. It would save all of this drama.

a reply to: NavyDoc

For the indivdual no I feel no sympathy.

But something went wrong and a investigation carried out plus a examinatiom of ways to improve the execution method.

I dont care he suffered but I do care processes are carried out that comply with the law.

And it is hypicritical when people claim the 8th amendment is up for interpretation yet get irrate if you even mutter the 2nd amendment in any form of debate.

originally posted by: anon72
I am for the Death Penalty, when it is beyond a reasonable doubt (Video killing as the cop pulls up and arrest the guy-DONE!)



As for it taking too long and being painful.... too bad. Don't kill people and you won't be at the receiving end.



If I had it my way, the family would have first choice to do something (like kill them as they killed the victim).



Eye for and Eye.



I am tired of hearing about "I didn't try to Kill them", " the gun went off accidently" or shoots and misses or wounds. Too bad you are a crappy shot. You won't have to worry about that anymore... just lie back and close your eyes.....



Time we start getting meaner than the perps, it is the only way our society will survive-the way we want it to.

Bravo!!

I felt the same way as my day started with this being the talk of the liberal news media.

I mentioned "liberal media" because for too long, they have had way too much sympathy for criminals. Now I will be honest in saying how I felt about this the instant that I heard it:

SO WHAT

Like you, I feel Hillary Clinton's sentiment when she said, "What difference does it make?"

He was a killer and the state has saw fit under it's jurisdiction to put him to death. What difference does it make whether he was intraveinously killed or beheaded at the guillitine? Death is Death.

Sounds like typical liberal sympathy for the criminal- "he shouldn't have to feel the drug as it's killing him"....WHAT??

How much sympathy went into the murder(s) he committed???

a reply to: woodwardjnr

No, the death penalty is NOT preventing crimes here. Why? Because these criminals know that if their scumbag attorney can't get them off, they still have a million appeals they can file to stall their sentence while they sit on death row while our tax dollars pay for their living expenses.

That's why I'm saying:

Once you have been convicted and sentenced to death, you should be given the option of how you want the sentence carried out, but it must be more public and it needs to be swift. As far as cruel and unusual, those words mean different things to different people. What is cruel to you may seem perfectly reasonable to me. So let them choose, as did the guy FlyersFan pointed out on page one or two of this thread. But make it public and don't let these monsters hang around sucking up valuable oxygen on death row until they die of old age.

I believe that if we went back to the old school way of things (public executions in the town square), it would strike fear into the hearts of many would-be murderers and perhaps scare them straight. If it only prevented the loss of one innocent life, I think it's worth it. Plus, if they charged admission or made it pay per view on tv, the city or county would have that extra revenue to put back into the community....or give it to the victims' families to pay for the victims' final expenses.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
If he had been aborted, we wouldn't be talking about him today.

According to Freakonomics ... the higher the abortion rate, the lower the crime rate.

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: NavyDoc

God you always try and turn things into a left/right thing

Change the record.

Two dimensinal partasian thinking will get you nowhere.

Plus lefties can be just as brutal with human life.

In the US, the "left" / "right" paradigm is a bit different than in the UK, so I apologize if my labels are not accurately reflective in your view. Perhaps I should start out with "in the US" because this issue (death penalty) is very cleanly divided along that parallel over here.

Does it not seen weird to anyone else that in this day and age with the state of modern medicine, we are so incompetent we are unable to mix a cocktail of drugs to administer a fast lethal injection to a criminal. When you think about it, its ludicrous unless its being done on the cheap.

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: NavyDoc

For the indivdual no I feel no sympathy.

But something went wrong and a investigation carried out plus a examinatiom of ways to improve the execution method.

I dont care he suffered but I do care processes are carried out that comply with the law.

And it is hypicritical when people claim the 8th amendment is up for interpretation yet get irrate if you even mutter the 2nd amendment in any form of debate.

Actually I'm quite consistent on the original intent of the 8th amendment and the 2nd amendment, so I don't get your beef. That both amendments have been "interpreted" away form their original intent and action by "progressives" over the years have not changed their intent.

The latest push by the anti-justice crowd that the very act of placing an IV to administer the drug is "cruel and unusual."

originally posted by: Shiloh7
Does it not seen weird to anyone else that in this day and age with the state of modern medicine, we are so incompetent we are unable to mix a cocktail of drugs to administer a fast lethal injection to a criminal. When you think about it, its ludicrous unless its being done on the cheap.

No, IV's fail all of the time in the OR and in hospital. In those places, we simply place another one. It is only in this case where the hysteria comes about

You do have a point in that there are a prohibition in medical boards across the country for a physician or nurse anesthetist to perform this procedure, so the IV's are usually set up by techs. If that prohibition was to go away, then this "problem" would go away as well.

You anti big government types and pro constitution should all be against the death penalty. You complain and moan constantly about big government yet you support the right of government to kill?

And what is it about red states cant they do anything right? How hard is it to kill some one humanely? Don't they have doctors and other professionals in there states that can tell them a proper mix that would be effective or are the politicians using drug combos from there political money cows?

How many people have been found innocent while on death row in the last decade? Quite a few, so is there really a thing called "reasonable doubt" when science is freeing those convicted and sentenced to die??

The constitution gives us the protection from cruel and unusual punishment, it should also protect us from incompetence.

originally posted by: NavyDoc
[

In the US, the "left" / "right" paradigm is a bit different than in the UK, so I apologize if my labels are not accurately reflective in your view. Perhaps I should start out with "in the US" because this issue (death penalty) is very cleanly divided along that parallel over here.

Apology noted

Fair point we do have a very different left/right divide.

a reply to: DustbowlDebutante

I believe that if we went back to the old school way of things (public executions in the town square), it would strike fear into the hearts of many would-be murderers and perhaps scare them straight.

Isn't this the type of behaviour we condemn in nations like Iran and Afghanistan. The sort of actions we ascribe to tyrannical regimes like the Taliban.

originally posted by: Acidx
a reply to: FlyersFan
The big problem that I have with this is that the high court ruled that he had no right to know what drug was going to be used to kill him. He said that he would not know if it was a cruel and unusual punishment if he did not know the punishment, true. They violated this mans rights and sourced the drug used to kill him from an overseas lab as no pharma company in the U.S. will make the # anymore.
Also, lets not make this issue about his crime. This is about his punishment, which was unjust. The drug probably was not manufactured properly thus did not work properly. The judge who ruled this human beings right's did not matter because he was an inmate, should be fired for violating his oath.

Really? Did the 19 year old get to ask the same? How will you be killing me, Will it hurt when you rape me, will you smack me around a little bit, Will you make sure I am dead and can feel no pain before you put me in that hole and cover me with dirt? Her rights were not violated one bit.

The only difference here is that he had a set date to meet his maker, she did not.

originally posted by: NavyDoc


The latest push by the anti-justice crowd that the very act of placing an IV to administer the drug is "cruel and unusual."

No I agree. There is a line and a IV is not that.

Cruel and unusual to me would be deliberately doing something or administrating something to cause pain and suffering.

Prison and execution of it self is not Cruel and unusual nor is a pin prick from a IV. Although IV were not around at the time both Prison and execution were being used in early America when the founding fathers were still alive so Prison and execution would to me be in the spirit of the constitution.

Some on this thread though would torture said criminal deliberately if they could, that to me is crossing the line. My apology's if I misunderstood you to be in that group.

So a rapist killer suffered for a few moments? Good. I hope the families of his victims got satisfaction in that. I say forget lethal injections. Lets go back to trees and rope on the courthouse lawns every Saturday. Rope and trees are cheap and work very well every time.

a reply to: FlyersFan

I have a real hard time finding sympathy for the guy. I don't understand why we don't use a bullet to the head. If I ever ended up on death row, that's what I would want as it seems the less painful way to go.

My 0.2 Amero's of course.

a reply to: woodwardjnr

Welcome to the Oligarchy. Everything you thought you knew about our democracy, constitution, and christianity, throw it out the door.

originally posted by: woodwardjnr
a reply to: DustbowlDebutante

I believe that if we went back to the old school way of things (public executions in the town square), it would strike fear into the hearts of many would-be murderers and perhaps scare them straight.

Isn't this the type of behaviour we condemn in nations like Iran and Afghanistan. The sort of actions we ascribe to tyrannical regimes like the Taliban.

I am not advocating that we adopt their religious laws or any of their laws - I think their laws are insane! We aren't going to start stoning people for adultery or beheading women for not walking far enough behind their husbands or for showing a little ankle. Ok? I'm not talking about changing what is or is not a crime in this country. I'm talking about swift, public justice. I'm talking about putting to death swiftly those people who have killed innocent people slowly.

Hell, it's what the lethal injection is supposed to do - kill the convicted! I'm just saying we need to publicize it more so that everyone sees that when you take your neighbor's life or rape a toddler, punishment is swift and very very final. And I have no problem with letting the convicted decide how he/she wants to leave this world. It's certainly more compassion than the killer gave his victim!

originally posted by: Fylgje
So a rapist killer suffered for a few moments? Good. I hope the families of his victims got satisfaction in that. I say forget lethal injections. Lets go back to trees and rope on the courthouse lawns every Saturday. Rope and trees are cheap and work very well every time.

THIS RIGHT HERE.^^^^^^^^^

I wish I could give you a thousand stars for this statement.