Which is more “cruel” – leaving somebody to die a slow, painful, and lingering death, or easing their path? My sister died of ALS, so I’ll leave you to guess my answer.
Hmmm … Was the slow and painful death due to the medical condition, or to the lethal injection? The phrasing is a bit ambiguous. Part of the reason for asking is the medical comments that the lethal injections used in many US prisons do cause a lot of pain, but the victim doesn’t show it because one of drugs in the mixture causes paralysis.
Judges must be selected on their objectivity and knowledge of the law rather than their perceived political ideology in a constitutional democratic republic. Is the nation so divided that justice is no longer blind and impartial?
From a legal standpoint, setting aside Bucklew’s specific issue, the opinion is sound. The 8th does not assure the right to a painless death. It assures that the state will not deliberately cause more pain than required to accomplish the task.
“As originally understood, theEighth Amendment tolerated methods of execution, like hanging,that involved a significant risk of pain, while forbidding as cruel onlythose methods that intensified the death sentence by “superadding”terror, pain, or disgrace.”
As for his condition, the medical literature does not support his claim that the pentobarb is going to cause a problem. Nor, apparently, did his attorneys present convincing evidence.
Beyond that, this is his 7th or 8th appeal, each based on a different reason. All have failed.
If you read through the entire opinion you will hopefully understand that this decision is completely in line with the previous SCOTUS decisions regarded injection protocols for capital punishment. Bucklew tried to game Baze v. Rees by suggesting a never tried alternative method. Had he been successful it would have required years of testing and arguments before it could be administered.
Bottom line. Because of pharma refusal to supply several drugs, and because MO doesn’t currently have any alternative execution methods, Bucklew will get the pento shot. All in accordance with Baze v. Rees, which, BTW, was a 7-2 decision with only Ginsburg and Souter dissenting.
My message to all you readers? Always go to https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/slipopinion/18
Download the case and read it yourself. ALL OF IT. Never take the word of a partisan.
I was ambivalent about the death penalty until once, many years ago, when a convict was being put to death there was a group of “christian”, “law abiding”, “citizens” outside the prison cheering on the process with signs and slogans like it was a reason to celebrate . Now, the individual being put to death may well have deserved their fate, but at some point it stops being about them and starts being about the rest of us. If a civilized society decides, by whatever means, to deprive one of it’s members of life…it should not be cheered by the masses or used as a political prop by the politicians. The condemned may not have cared about the sanctity of life, but the rest of us are supposed to know better.
For those who are not opposed to the death penalty per se, I will once again point out that there is a cause of death which is both reliable and painless, as is proven by numerous deaths — both accidental and deliberate — every year.
That is carbon monoxide poisoning.
Compared to other methods, it is extremely inexpensive. What’s more, it doesn’t depend on any complex dosage calculation, since the gas can be administered (e.g., by simply pumping it into a room occupied by the “subject”) until monitors confirm that death has occurred.
The only “feeling” that results is one of drowsiness, followed by unconsciousness, before eventual death. Even in the unlikely event that the subject regains consciousness (because of some malfunction), the worst “pain” reported is essentially the same as a hangover. And the process can be repeated at any time — even immediately — with the same simplicity.
So why is this procedure not being considered by authorities, not even to the extent of them criticizing it?
thebashfulone about 5 years ago
I wish this wasn’t so accurate.
Dani Rice about 5 years ago
Which is more “cruel” – leaving somebody to die a slow, painful, and lingering death, or easing their path? My sister died of ALS, so I’ll leave you to guess my answer.
gigagrouch about 5 years ago
It’s time to ban the death penalty.
jc17 about 5 years ago
Hmmm … Was the slow and painful death due to the medical condition, or to the lethal injection? The phrasing is a bit ambiguous. Part of the reason for asking is the medical comments that the lethal injections used in many US prisons do cause a lot of pain, but the victim doesn’t show it because one of drugs in the mixture causes paralysis.
superposition about 5 years ago
Judges must be selected on their objectivity and knowledge of the law rather than their perceived political ideology in a constitutional democratic republic. Is the nation so divided that justice is no longer blind and impartial?
Godfreydaniel about 5 years ago
We could be seeing the “oranges” of the dystopian world of “A Clockwork Orange”……..
pipi1863 about 5 years ago
Is Kavanaugh burping in the first panel?
Andylit Premium Member about 5 years ago
Did a bit of reading. The opinion itself then some research on his rare medical condition.
https://www.rightdiagnosis.com/c/cavernous_hemangioma/intro.htm
From a legal standpoint, setting aside Bucklew’s specific issue, the opinion is sound. The 8th does not assure the right to a painless death. It assures that the state will not deliberately cause more pain than required to accomplish the task.
“As originally understood, theEighth Amendment tolerated methods of execution, like hanging,that involved a significant risk of pain, while forbidding as cruel onlythose methods that intensified the death sentence by “superadding”terror, pain, or disgrace.”
As for his condition, the medical literature does not support his claim that the pentobarb is going to cause a problem. Nor, apparently, did his attorneys present convincing evidence.
Beyond that, this is his 7th or 8th appeal, each based on a different reason. All have failed.
If you read through the entire opinion you will hopefully understand that this decision is completely in line with the previous SCOTUS decisions regarded injection protocols for capital punishment. Bucklew tried to game Baze v. Rees by suggesting a never tried alternative method. Had he been successful it would have required years of testing and arguments before it could be administered.
Bottom line. Because of pharma refusal to supply several drugs, and because MO doesn’t currently have any alternative execution methods, Bucklew will get the pento shot. All in accordance with Baze v. Rees, which, BTW, was a 7-2 decision with only Ginsburg and Souter dissenting.
My message to all you readers? Always go to https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/slipopinion/18
Download the case and read it yourself. ALL OF IT. Never take the word of a partisan.
Znox11 about 5 years ago
I was ambivalent about the death penalty until once, many years ago, when a convict was being put to death there was a group of “christian”, “law abiding”, “citizens” outside the prison cheering on the process with signs and slogans like it was a reason to celebrate . Now, the individual being put to death may well have deserved their fate, but at some point it stops being about them and starts being about the rest of us. If a civilized society decides, by whatever means, to deprive one of it’s members of life…it should not be cheered by the masses or used as a political prop by the politicians. The condemned may not have cared about the sanctity of life, but the rest of us are supposed to know better.
The Grampster about 5 years ago
paralyzed but fully aware.
gammaguy about 5 years ago
For those who are not opposed to the death penalty per se, I will once again point out that there is a cause of death which is both reliable and painless, as is proven by numerous deaths — both accidental and deliberate — every year.
That is carbon monoxide poisoning.
Compared to other methods, it is extremely inexpensive. What’s more, it doesn’t depend on any complex dosage calculation, since the gas can be administered (e.g., by simply pumping it into a room occupied by the “subject”) until monitors confirm that death has occurred.
The only “feeling” that results is one of drowsiness, followed by unconsciousness, before eventual death. Even in the unlikely event that the subject regains consciousness (because of some malfunction), the worst “pain” reported is essentially the same as a hangover. And the process can be repeated at any time — even immediately — with the same simplicity.
So why is this procedure not being considered by authorities, not even to the extent of them criticizing it?