lethal injection gone wrong

[TechSage]

The first point is really a problem with the system more than the penalty itself. The only problems I really have are with the system.

The second point is debatable. If you kill someone for a completely unjust reason, have you really not given up your right to live?

Not everyone goes to prison for killing

[teschidererste]

This isn't about religion. This is about how our system works. If a person kills someone, how can you know that he won't do it again? If you cannot predict or discover whether it is safe to let a person back into society, then it is stupid to take a risk like that and potentially put more people at risk of death or incredible suffering at the hands of a person like that. And if they go to prison, is their life worth anything? It becomes useless, totally pointless to continue an existence that may never recover mentally after doing such a crime. A death penalty could be a relief to them, something to end the suffering they have to endure for the rest of their lives. I don't give a crap what the Bible says; it's stupid.

I didn't say that murders shouldn't be punished. Just lock them away for the rest of their lifes, but killing is never an option.

[WillFromGA]

Don't quote me on this, but I remember reading somewhere that it costs more to execute someone than to incarcerate them for life due to legal fees and time spent on death row.

Yes that is true.

[LAwLz]

First of all, how do you prove that someone is undeniably innocent? Evidence is forged all the time. It cuts both ways.

No it doesn't cut both ways, because you are innocent until proven guilty. You are not guilty until proven innocent.

 

 

And, if an innocent person were found guilty, what if no further evidence was found to support his case? Would he/she rather rot for a life in prison or die? Either way, their life will not continue. Sure, it isn't fair for truly innocent people to be unjustly killed like that, but neither is being murdered by a madman. Life isn't fair, and this is just, sadly, another consequence of life. I hate to admit it, because I believe that people should be as fair as possible to others, but it doesn't seem like it's going to change.

On the other hand, you vote that prisons should be used over the death sentence. It's cheaper, works almost effectively as the death sentence, but prisons probably cost a lot to construct. You want to use this on the basis that killing, no matter for what reason, is immoral. Following the Ten Commandments with that "Thou shalt not kill" stuff? Yeah, I get it, but what I DON'T get is why you would prefer to have them suffer a life in prison, slowly dying away, over dying quickly through the so-called "humane" methods we use now? Why isn't that immoral? Why is killing a person quickly more immoral than forcing them to die in a dank, musty cell? I don't get that at all.

You do realize that all the people who we know have been wrongfully executed were found to be innocent later, right? In the case I brought up before, it took less than a year after the execution for us to realize he was innocent. Would you take ~10 months in prison or having your lungs paralyzed and your blood circulation stopped so that you slowly feel yourself choking to death? Cases usually stop being investigated after the execution so there is a very big chance that if less were executed, more innocent people would not only live, but also be found to be innocent.

With execution:

"Well we killed the person we think was guilty. What's done is done so there is no reason to investigate it anymore."

 

Without execution:

"Well the person we think is guilty is now in prison but he keeps denying to the crime, and there is something strange with the whole deal. We should investigate some more".

 

The more time an innocent person spends in prison, the more likely it is that the truth gets out.

 

 

By the way, your whole "but we would need to build more prisons" just shows how little you know about this. How many people do you think are executed? Hint: Not enough to have to build several new prisons.

[beebskadoo]

No it doesn't cut both ways, because you are innocent until proven guilty. You are not guilty until proven innocent.

You do realize that all the people who we know have been wrongfully executed were found to be innocent later, right? In the case I brought up before, it took less than a year after the execution for us to realize he was innocent. Would you take ~10 months in prison or having your lungs paralyzed and your blood circulation stopped so that you slowly feel yourself choking to death? Cases usually stop being investigated after the execution so there is a very big chance that if less were executed, more innocent people would not only live, but also be found to be innocent.

With execution:

"Well we killed the person we think was guilty. What's done is done so there is no reason to investigate it anymore."

Without execution:

"Well the person we think is guilty is now in prison but he keeps denying to the crime, and there is something strange with the whole deal. We should investigate some more".

The more time an innocent person spends in prison, the more likely it is that the truth gets out.

By the way, your whole "but we would need to build more prisons" just shows how little you know about this. How many people do you think are executed? Hint: Not enough to have to build several new prisons.

more prisons aren't the answer at all. The answer is stop putting non violent victimless "criminals" in prison. The american prison system is fundamentally broken, so get rid of the corruption and kill private prisons and you'll have room for violent offenders.

[Shakaza]

-snip-

Okay, I'm gonna go against what I initially stated to explain a few things to you:

You are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, not in the general sense of things. How often do murderers run free because of corruption and forged evidence? That is what point I'm trying to get across here. In court, proclaiming a person innocent doesn't definitively prove that he is innocent. The courts system says he is, but doesn't necessarily mean so.

And, as well, how has every innocent person convicted been proven innocent after being executed if cases USUALLY stop being investigated after the conviction is made? Furthermore, I would prefer to have a lethal injection or something than spend 10 months in prison if I were innocent of committing a crime, but proven guilty in court, because I wouldn't know if someone is going to rescue me from the corrupt system. It's just like having your mouth numbed before getting a cavity filled; there's some pain from a needle before you experience relief. But, if I were in jail, it would be long and drawn out. Also, my claustrophobia might drive me insane before I could be freed.

And where did you assume that I said we need more prisons? When I said that prisons cost money to construct, I meant that prisons that are currently in use cost money to build. Why would we need to make more prisons, anyway? Who ever said that we don't have enough? But, it really is ridiculous how much money it takes to execute someone and all the things involved with the task.

But, you've convinced me; as it currently stands, the death penalty is stupid. If as many innocent people die as you claim, then it should be discontinued until there is a more effective way of proving whether a person is actually guilty or not.

[Art Vandelay]

Not everyone goes to prison for killing

The ones who get caught and have done it for a completely unjustified reason do.

[ionbasa]

Meh, if I had it my way we would have death by firing squad. Alot faster and basically painless if they get the shot in the right location. Also the money spent on medical equipment and drugs could be used elsewhere, ammunition is cheaper than staffing a drug induced death bed.

 

BTW, yes I support capital punishment.

[LAwLz]

You are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, not in the general sense of things.

They are to me. You're always innocent until proven guilty in my eyes, since the burden of proof is on the one making the claim.

If I accused you for breaking the law, do you expect people to think you actually did it even though there is lack of evidence?

 

How often do murderers run free because of corruption and forged evidence?

At least 144 times in the last ~40 years in the US alone. That's almost one every month. That's not just normal murderers by the way (not all murderers get the death penalty, even in states which has it) so the real number is probably a lot higher, so let's say about one every 2 weeks or so. Luckily, the court usually realize their mistake before executing the wrong person though.

 

In court, proclaiming a person innocent doesn't definitively prove that he is innocent. The courts system says he is, but doesn't necessarily mean so.

And your point is? I honestly don't get it.

Yes there are criminals which get away with their crimes. I get that but I don't see how that is relevant to our conversation at all.

 

And, as well, how has every innocent person convicted been proven innocent after being executed if cases USUALLY stop being investigated after the conviction is made?

Because the investigation sometimes (but very rarely) continues. That's why I said they usually stop investigating. Usually and always are not the same thing. In the case of Cameron Willingham I talked about earlier, Rick Perry himself ordered that the people that were arguing against the theories (which we now have hard evidence to prove that they were wrong) be removed from the case. There were many people against the execution of Willingham which is why the investigation continued afterwards. Some of the evidence used against him was posters of heavy metal bands... Yes, that's right. Some of the "evidence" used against Willingham was his Iron Maiden poster, because it symbolized "violence and death", and his Led Zeppelin poster showed signs of "cultive-type activities".

Perry also ignored evidence that showed that the theories the case was based on were wrong. Rick Perry is responsible for the death of an innocent man. By your logic, shouldn't we execute Rick Perry as well? He indirectly killed an innocent human being, and was aware of it. I am against the death penalty so I don't think we should, but surely you who is for it would agree that he should be put to death, right?

I mean, if killing someone should be punishable by death, shouldn't everyone involved in the execution of an innocent person be executed? I am sure that would dramatically cut down on the number of innocent people put on death row at least...

 

Furthermore, I would prefer to have a lethal injection or something than spend 10 months in prison if I were innocent of committing a crime, but proven guilty in court, because I wouldn't know if someone is going to rescue me from the corrupt system. It's just like having your mouth numbed before getting a cavity filled; there's some pain from a needle before you experience relief. But, if I were in jail, it would be long and drawn out. Also, my claustrophobia might drive me insane before I could be freed.

If you would rather die than spend 10 months in jail then I pity your life. I would spend 10 years in jail if it meant I got to live the other 50-60 years of my life. Hell, I'd spend many many times more than just 10 years rather than dying. Even a life in imprisonment is better than no life at all. You only have 1 life, and once it's over it's over forever.

 

And where did you assume that I said we need more prisons? When I said that prisons cost money to construct, I meant that prisons that are currently in use cost money to build. Why would we need to make more prisons, anyway? Who ever said that we don't have enough? But, it really is ridiculous how much money it takes to execute someone and all the things involved with the task.

What does the cost of the prisons already built have to do with anything? Why did you bring it up at all if it wasn't to imply that we needed more if the death penalty was abolished?

Yes it costs a lot of money, but for good reasons. Less money would most likely result in more innocent people being put on death row.

 

It's nice to see that you have changed your mind. I still don't think you changed it for the right reasons though. my stance is that killing someone is never justifiable. "Killing is bad" sounds like a good moral to me.

Oh and only a handful of people in the US have been wrongfully executed. The list I linked earlier are people who have been sentenced to the death penalty but then before the execution had been carried out been proven innocent. About 4% of the people who are sentenced to death are found innocent before the execution. Some very unlucky once gets executed before they are found to be innocent though, and there is hard to know just how many people have been wrongfully executed (since the investigation stops after the execution).

[Shakaza]

-snip-

And now, all I have to say now is that if I went to prison with only a dim hope of ever being saved, with no one who cares, what more is there more for me to do? Why should I exist anymore? My life is going to be dedicated to studying and using chemistry to better our lives and the world. I also like to have fun gaming, building computers, and stuff. How often would I be able to enjoy doing that stuff in prison?

However, if there were some concrete possibility of being freed, I may decide that my life is still worth something, and I would still want to be in this world. And, if my family would still visit me, I would as well want to live, because my life would still be meaningful.

And I was talking about the cost of prisons because I was sillily (is that a word?) wondering if the cost of all the prisons in the world would exceed the cost of executing people with life sentences. (And the process, of course.)

But, really, there isn't much more to say. It's obvious by now that we have different views.