Kid Dynamite 5934 Posted December 16, 2006 Share Posted December 16, 2006 Florida governor halts executions A coroner found chemical burns on Diaz's arms Florida Governor Jeb Bush has halted executions in the US state after a flawed death by lethal injection. Mr Bush said he needed to be sure that the method of death did not constitute "cruel and unusual punishment". The move came after a man convicted of murder, Angel Diaz, took 34 minutes to die - twice as long as normal - and had to be given a second lethal dose. In California, a judge has ruled death by lethal injection violates a state ban on cruel and unusual punishment. The judge ruled California's "implementation of lethal injection is broken", but said "it can be fixed". Lethal injection is the preferred method of execution in 37 US states. Mr Bush has appointed a panel to look into the practice and evaluate whether it breaches the state's ban as an unnecessarily cruel mode of death, as argued by opponents of the death penalty. US METHODS OF EXECUTION Lethal injection: Authorised in 37 states Electrocution: In 10 states (sole method in Nebraska) Gas chamber: In five states (all of which have lethal injection as alternative) Hanging: Only in New Hampshire and Washington Firing squad: In Idaho and Oklahoma Source: DPIC He has said no more death warrants will be signed until the commission completes its final report in March. The move came after the drawn-out death by lethal injection of Puerto Rican-born Diaz on Wednesday. Diaz was sentenced to death for the 1979 murder of a Miami strip club manager. Witnesses said his death took more than twice the usual time - 34 minutes rather than the usual 15. He needed a second dose of the lethal chemicals as the needles were injected straight through his veins and into the flesh of his arms. Following the autopsy, the medical examiner concluded the injections had been wrongly administered. He was found to have large chemical burns on both arms and his lawyer reported that the 55-year-old continued to move and mouth words more than 20 minutes after the initial dose. Inmates are supposed to be rendered unconscious by the chemicals within three to five minutes. Anti-death penalty activists say lethal injections - introduced in Florida and other states as a replacement for the electric chair and other methods of execution - are just as cruel and should not be considered a more humane substitute. But the BBC's Emilio San Pedro, in Miami, says that it is too soon to interpret the decisions as a sign that support for the death penalty is waning in the US. Executions, he says, continue to be seen as the best deterrent of violent crime. So many things wrong with that. Fair play he killed a man, he needs locking up, but to be locked up for 27years knowing that they are going to kill you one day or another! Also, in 2006 is it not time we figured out that having a gallery to watch people die is wrong. For the lethal injection they could just as easily give him 1 injection to send him to sleep and another to send him into cardiac or repiratory arrest when he wouldnt know anything about it. To fill his veins full of poison so he can spend 20minutes feeling himself die in front of all those people is beyond fucked up! And then lastly, they can still hang and shoot people in some states. Its scary that this countyr is the most powerful in the world Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckyluke 1 Posted December 16, 2006 Share Posted December 16, 2006 They can't even cannulate properly. Losers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sima 0 Posted December 16, 2006 Share Posted December 16, 2006 So much random bolded text, looks like a Sun article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 13867 Posted December 16, 2006 Share Posted December 16, 2006 Firing Squad and Hanging is wrong but to be fair some people deserve it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26423 Posted December 16, 2006 Share Posted December 16, 2006 I presume that where firing squad and hanging are allowed they use lethal injection as well? Yes a gallery should be allowed but only for a small number of independent observers rather than anyone related to the crime. And its a fucking piss take that it takes 27 years to catch a man through to actually carrying out his punishment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 17812 Posted December 16, 2006 Share Posted December 16, 2006 I presume that where firing squad and hanging are allowed they use lethal injection as well? Yes a gallery should be allowed but only for a small number of independent observers rather than anyone related to the crime. And its a fucking piss take that it takes 27 years to catch a man through to actually carrying out his punishment. Well, you have to be sure of his guilt and allow him his appeals. This is why it is a myth that capital punishment is a cheaper option than life imprisonment. And even then they get it wrong which is often found out pretty quickly posthumously. I'd like anyone to give me one good reason in support of capital punishment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gejon 2 Posted December 16, 2006 Share Posted December 16, 2006 I presume that where firing squad and hanging are allowed they use lethal injection as well? Yes a gallery should be allowed but only for a small number of independent observers rather than anyone related to the crime. And its a fucking piss take that it takes 27 years to catch a man through to actually carrying out his punishment. Well, you have to be sure of his guilt and allow him his appeals. This is why it is a myth that capital punishment is a cheaper option than life imprisonment. And even then they get it wrong which is often found out pretty quickly posthumously. I'd like anyone to give me one good reason in support of capital punishment. But 27 years! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Dynamite 5934 Posted December 16, 2006 Author Share Posted December 16, 2006 And for killing 1 man. How do they distinguish between who lives and who dies? Surely there must be hundreds of thousands of people in prison who have killed just 1 person. They want to come here, wed let them out after 6 or 7 years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rikko 20 Posted December 16, 2006 Share Posted December 16, 2006 I presume that where firing squad and hanging are allowed they use lethal injection as well? Yes a gallery should be allowed but only for a small number of independent observers rather than anyone related to the crime. And its a fucking piss take that it takes 27 years to catch a man through to actually carrying out his punishment. Well, you have to be sure of his guilt and allow him his appeals. This is why it is a myth that capital punishment is a cheaper option than life imprisonment. And even then they get it wrong which is often found out pretty quickly posthumously. I'd like anyone to give me one good reason in support of capital punishment. But 27 years! would've been freed if he had done it here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 6867 Posted December 16, 2006 Share Posted December 16, 2006 I presume that where firing squad and hanging are allowed they use lethal injection as well? Yes a gallery should be allowed but only for a small number of independent observers rather than anyone related to the crime. And its a fucking piss take that it takes 27 years to catch a man through to actually carrying out his punishment. Well, you have to be sure of his guilt and allow him his appeals. This is why it is a myth that capital punishment is a cheaper option than life imprisonment. And even then they get it wrong which is often found out pretty quickly posthumously. I'd like anyone to give me one good reason in support of capital punishment. Murder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 9001 Posted December 16, 2006 Share Posted December 16, 2006 I presume that where firing squad and hanging are allowed they use lethal injection as well? Yes a gallery should be allowed but only for a small number of independent observers rather than anyone related to the crime. And its a fucking piss take that it takes 27 years to catch a man through to actually carrying out his punishment. Well, you have to be sure of his guilt and allow him his appeals. This is why it is a myth that capital punishment is a cheaper option than life imprisonment. And even then they get it wrong which is often found out pretty quickly posthumously. I'd like anyone to give me one good reason in support of capital punishment. Murder you're kidding right? so if I'm a yank and carrying a gun, I shoot someone in self defense, but a good lawyer cranks my case up to murder 1 I should fry? I don't think murders deserve death. but to be fair I don't think any country has a legal/penal system that's perfect Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 6867 Posted December 17, 2006 Share Posted December 17, 2006 I presume that where firing squad and hanging are allowed they use lethal injection as well? Yes a gallery should be allowed but only for a small number of independent observers rather than anyone related to the crime. And its a fucking piss take that it takes 27 years to catch a man through to actually carrying out his punishment. Well, you have to be sure of his guilt and allow him his appeals. This is why it is a myth that capital punishment is a cheaper option than life imprisonment. And even then they get it wrong which is often found out pretty quickly posthumously. I'd like anyone to give me one good reason in support of capital punishment. Murder you're kidding right? so if I'm a yank and carrying a gun, I shoot someone in self defense, but a good lawyer cranks my case up to murder 1 I should fry? I don't think murders deserve death. but to be fair I don't think any country has a legal/penal system that's perfect You're called The Fish, it's your job And no I wasn't kidding, I believe we should reintroduce capital punishment for murder, I wasn't particluarly commenting of the USA (legal system is SOOO ropey) but here. I can't see any jsutification in keeping bastards like those recently convicted of pouring petrol through someone's letter box and setting it on fire, alive. Just my opinion though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mags 1 Posted December 17, 2006 Share Posted December 17, 2006 Gratuitous yank comment- just my own .02 worth is that in cases where there is no doubt as to guilt then yes, erradicate the f*cker. Where there is doubt I can't in good conscience advocate for the death penalty. That cock up was pathetic, and the person responsible should answer for it.. no, don't ask me how as that just keeps this whole can of worms writhing about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snakehips 0 Posted December 17, 2006 Share Posted December 17, 2006 Gratuitous yank comment- just my own .02 worth is that in cases where there is no doubt as to guilt then yes, erradicate the f*cker. Where there is doubt I can't in good conscience advocate for the death penalty. That cock up was pathetic, and the person responsible should answer for it.. no, don't ask me how as that just keeps this whole can of worms writhing about. I would like a verdict brought into UK of 'Irrefutably Guilty'. With modern forensics, such decisions can be made. Brady. Hindley (sp). Huntley. There are three names that I would have had their owners wiped out, without hesitation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rikko 20 Posted December 17, 2006 Share Posted December 17, 2006 Said it before, and i'll say it again. I don't think death is any real punishment. I for one would rather be dead, then trapped in a small room, by myself with no chance of release for the rest of my natural life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 6867 Posted December 17, 2006 Share Posted December 17, 2006 Gratuitous yank comment- just my own .02 worth is that in cases where there is no doubt as to guilt then yes, erradicate the f*cker. Where there is doubt I can't in good conscience advocate for the death penalty. That cock up was pathetic, and the person responsible should answer for it.. no, don't ask me how as that just keeps this whole can of worms writhing about. I would like a verdict brought into UK of 'Irrefutably Guilty'. With modern forensics, such decisions can be made. Brady. Hindley (sp). Huntley. There are three names that I would have had their owners wiped out, without hesitation. That couldn't happen, because I would reckon, if someone was found plain old guilty, their lawyers would suggest that as it wasn't "irrefutable" there must be some doubt, cue lots of appeals Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 17812 Posted December 17, 2006 Share Posted December 17, 2006 Gratuitous yank comment- just my own .02 worth is that in cases where there is no doubt as to guilt then yes, erradicate the f*cker. Where there is doubt I can't in good conscience advocate for the death penalty. That cock up was pathetic, and the person responsible should answer for it.. no, don't ask me how as that just keeps this whole can of worms writhing about. I would like a verdict brought into UK of 'Irrefutably Guilty'. With modern forensics, such decisions can be made. Brady. Hindley (sp). Huntley. There are three names that I would have had their owners wiped out, without hesitation. I think such a verdict would be very hard to make. There's always the possibility of contamination of evidence or the police framing you, for instance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted December 17, 2006 Share Posted December 17, 2006 Said it before, and i'll say it again. I don't think death is any real punishment. I for one would rather be dead, then trapped in a small room, by myself with no chance of release for the rest of my natural life. the point is that it isnt' a punishment, we all know a life of prolonged torture would be more of a fitting punishment, but its a deterrent and don't say it woudn't stop the real loonies because we know that as well. However if it just made one idiot think twice about stabbing someone while committing a robbery or raping and killing some poor kid then it is worthwhile and totally justified. I must admit if I could be guaranteed to know they would actually suffer a long life of prolonged torture I would go for it instead, but on the other hand why should we pay for the fuckers to be kept alive. Ideal solution - torture them for a few years then get rid of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 17812 Posted December 17, 2006 Share Posted December 17, 2006 Said it before, and i'll say it again. I don't think death is any real punishment. I for one would rather be dead, then trapped in a small room, by myself with no chance of release for the rest of my natural life. the point is that it isnt' a punishment, we all know a life of prolonged torture would be more of a fitting punishment, but its a deterrent and don't say it woudn't stop the real loonies because we know that as well. However if it just made one idiot think twice about stabbing someone while committing a robbery or raping and killing some poor kid then it is worthwhile and totally justified. I must admit if I could be guaranteed to know they would actually suffer a long life of prolonged torture I would go for it instead, but on the other hand why should we pay for the fuckers to be kept alive. Ideal solution - torture them for a few years then get rid of them. You think we should torture people for years then kill them? And not spend money to ensure they are actually guilty? Doesn't surprise me, I reckon you should move to Saudi Arabia, you'd fit right in with them. Oh the irony. Can you show me any evidence that capital punishment works as a deterrent in the only western country that has adopted it - the US? Can you explain why states with the death penalties have significantly higher rates of serious crime than states without? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckyluke 1 Posted December 17, 2006 Share Posted December 17, 2006 Said it before, and i'll say it again. I don't think death is any real punishment. I for one would rather be dead, then trapped in a small room, by myself with no chance of release for the rest of my natural life. the point is that it isnt' a punishment, we all know a life of prolonged torture would be more of a fitting punishment, but its a deterrent and don't say it woudn't stop the real loonies because we know that as well. However if it just made one idiot think twice about stabbing someone while committing a robbery or raping and killing some poor kid then it is worthwhile and totally justified. I must admit if I could be guaranteed to know they would actually suffer a long life of prolonged torture I would go for it instead, but on the other hand why should we pay for the fuckers to be kept alive. Ideal solution - torture them for a few years then get rid of them. Thanks for watching, that was a political broadcast from the monster raving looney party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 6867 Posted December 17, 2006 Share Posted December 17, 2006 Gratuitous yank comment- just my own .02 worth is that in cases where there is no doubt as to guilt then yes, erradicate the f*cker. Where there is doubt I can't in good conscience advocate for the death penalty. That cock up was pathetic, and the person responsible should answer for it.. no, don't ask me how as that just keeps this whole can of worms writhing about. I would like a verdict brought into UK of 'Irrefutably Guilty'. With modern forensics, such decisions can be made. Brady. Hindley (sp). Huntley. There are three names that I would have had their owners wiped out, without hesitation. I think such a verdict would be very hard to make. There's always the possibility of contamination of evidence or the police framing you, for instance. Aw come on. Forensic techniques these days are a huge leap forward from "Slipper of the Yard" and fit-ups are incredibly rare. I know lots of Polis and they HATE going to court and giving evidence because they get treat like shit. They've also said because of the nightmare that it is in court, that in cases that do get to trial it's 99.9% certain the defendant is guilty as fuck, and they wouldn't take the shit unless that was the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 17812 Posted December 17, 2006 Share Posted December 17, 2006 Gratuitous yank comment- just my own .02 worth is that in cases where there is no doubt as to guilt then yes, erradicate the f*cker. Where there is doubt I can't in good conscience advocate for the death penalty. That cock up was pathetic, and the person responsible should answer for it.. no, don't ask me how as that just keeps this whole can of worms writhing about. I would like a verdict brought into UK of 'Irrefutably Guilty'. With modern forensics, such decisions can be made. Brady. Hindley (sp). Huntley. There are three names that I would have had their owners wiped out, without hesitation. I think such a verdict would be very hard to make. There's always the possibility of contamination of evidence or the police framing you, for instance. Aw come on. Forensic techniques these days are a huge leap forward from "Slipper of the Yard" and fit-ups are incredibly rare. I know lots of Polis and they HATE going to court and giving evidence because they get treat like shit. They've also said because of the nightmare that it is in court, that in cases that do get to trial it's 99.9% certain the defendant is guilty as fuck, and they wouldn't take the shit unless that was the case. I'm not having a go at the police in particular, but it must be at least in the realms of possibility that a bent one (they do exist) would fit someone up if they were as convinced of someone's guilt as you make out. Anecdotal evidence suggests this happens quite a lot in the US. The point I'm trying to make is that miscarriages of justice will always happen, improved forensic evidence may reduce this but won't eliminate it entirely. And there's no going back when you hang someone, or toture someone, for that matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 6867 Posted December 17, 2006 Share Posted December 17, 2006 Gratuitous yank comment- just my own .02 worth is that in cases where there is no doubt as to guilt then yes, erradicate the f*cker. Where there is doubt I can't in good conscience advocate for the death penalty. That cock up was pathetic, and the person responsible should answer for it.. no, don't ask me how as that just keeps this whole can of worms writhing about. I would like a verdict brought into UK of 'Irrefutably Guilty'. With modern forensics, such decisions can be made. Brady. Hindley (sp). Huntley. There are three names that I would have had their owners wiped out, without hesitation. I think such a verdict would be very hard to make. There's always the possibility of contamination of evidence or the police framing you, for instance. Aw come on. Forensic techniques these days are a huge leap forward from "Slipper of the Yard" and fit-ups are incredibly rare. I know lots of Polis and they HATE going to court and giving evidence because they get treat like shit. They've also said because of the nightmare that it is in court, that in cases that do get to trial it's 99.9% certain the defendant is guilty as fuck, and they wouldn't take the shit unless that was the case. I'm not having a go at the police in particular, but it must be at least in the realms of possibility that a bent one (they do exist) would fit someone up if they were as convinced of someone's guilt as you make out. Anecdotal evidence suggests this happens quite a lot in the US. The point I'm trying to make is that miscarriages of justice will always happen, improved forensic evidence may reduce this but won't eliminate it entirely. And there's no going back when you hang someone, or toture someone, for that matter. Agreed, but it would be interesting to find out (but impossible too I would guess) the number of "innocents" found guilty/executed and the number of murderers who kill again upon release (or in prison). If the latter number was higher, the protection of innocents argument favours capital punishment. I don't advocate torture either, just a simple 9mm Nuerofen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 17812 Posted December 17, 2006 Share Posted December 17, 2006 Agreed, but it would be interesting to find out (but impossible too I would guess) the number of "innocents" found guilty/executed and the number of murderers who kill again upon release (or in prison). If the latter number was higher, the protection of innocents argument favours capital punishment. I don't agree with absolutist thinking like that. I can see the diference between the state wrongly murdering someone and an individual murdering someone. Besides, I would advocate much longer sentences and life meaning life for the most dangerous prisoners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckyluke 1 Posted December 17, 2006 Share Posted December 17, 2006 Even if you could remove all doubt I'd still be against the death penalty. Tougher sentances for murderers sure, but executing people is barbaric. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now