Thursday, April 17, 2008

Lethal Injection

The Supreme Court ruled yesterday that the most common method of lethal injection used to execute condemned prisoners is constitutional, a decision sure to restart the nation's dormant death chambers. But the court's splintered reasoning seems likely to result in more challenges to the way capital punishment is administered in the United States. In a 7 to 2 vote, the justices said the three-drug combination used by Kentucky, similar to that used by the federal government and 34 other states, does not carry a risk of substantial pain so great as to violate the Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishment. I know we probably already covered this topic but what are people's thoughts about capital punishment. Also, do you think that lethal injection is inhumane due to the time it takes to pass through the body causing a "substantial risk of serious harm," or should we continue to use this way of executing. If people have such a problem with lethal injection, why don't we just stick to another method? I think we should just go old school and use the guillotine.

7 comments:

William Chen said...

I think that the death penalty should only be used in the most EXTREME cases possible. Things like mass murder, genocide, and stuff like that certainly qualify for that kind of capital punishment. People who get the death penalty for a single murder or something like that do not actually deserve that. Thats why life in prison is a sentence, to give to criminals who commit serious but not absolutely earth shattering crimes. I think that lethal injections are a totally acceptable way as long as the poison takes effect quickly and does not prolong torture. The guillotine is a little crude nowadays, so im guessing that most people wouldn't want that.

Anonymous said...

I think that we should use the death penalty with greater frequency. It seems to me that it is stupid to keep a homicidal maniac alive when all he would be doing is sitting around wasting tax-payer money and breathing our oxigen. Imagine a man who murdered five people, and was sentenced to five consecutive life sentences. there is no way a man like this will be rehabilitated, so it makes more sense to just give him the death penalty. It is a waste of resources to keep people like him alive becuase they are not beneficial at all to society. in regards to which method to use, it makes sense to use the most humane method possible, which should either be lethal injection or being dropped from a helicopter.

Melissa Reinertson said...

i'm in the middle of the two above me. i think that the death penalty should be used for intense cases such as multiple murders...i dont believe one murder should do a person in. life in prison is good enough. now a few lifes in prison for one person? huh? death penalty should definitely be used for multiple offenses. and i think the method we have now is the most humane...why do people complain?? would they rather we used the electric chair or hangings or executions again?? really though.

Derek Lee said...

I think that it is easy for people who are against capital punishment to condemn the death penalty as often times they have not gone through the suffering of having lost a loved one to the hands of a murderer. I am, of course, generalizing, but for those who have not gone through this traumatic experience cannot truly understand what those families went through. I agree with Melissa's stance that while the death penalty should not be used for a one time offender, it should be used for people who have multiple offenses.

Anonymous said...

Greg, Juno, I think you guys bring up a very important debate: guillotine v. helicopter dropping. On the one hand, the guillotine has a lot of messy clean up afterwards but it is also fairly effective and a good deterrent for citizens who wish to keep their heads. The helicopter idea seems a little tough with all the logistical problems. For example we'd have to figure out the ideal drop-zone (Canada is the only logical choice).

Ellie said...

In general, I'm against the death penalty. I just can't convince myself that anything gives someone the right to decide when someone else's life should end, even if the person in question is a murderer. It's the whole two wrongs don't make a right idea. At the same time, i think that a lethal injection is certainly the most humane way to go about it as long as we do continue to institute the death penalty. This might be a little off topic, but is there ever an instance when people might prefer the death penalty to living in prison with their guilt for all those years? In that case, the death penalty would be more akin to assisted suicide, which as bad as it may sound, I'm not against. In any case, I stongly belive that nothing gives someone the right to decide to end someone else's life, people should be in control of their own fate.

Anonymous said...

I completely agree with Ellie (lethal injection too in a hypothetical situation). I kind of feel like the death penalty is an easy way out for criminals. Living in prison is literally hell.

I watched this program on MSNBC about prisons (I think it was called Lockdown?... It was pretty scary, my mom made me turn it off :( ), and it's definitely a huge punishment to have to spend your whole life there.

I also don't think that we have the right to play God. In most cases there isn't 100% certainty that the criminal is guilty. Without that, and just in general, I don't think the death penalty is a good idea.