15
   

The least cruel method of execution?

 
 
Grand Duke
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Nov, 2003 09:07 am
I think that life imprisonment is more cruel than execution, provided that it is done properly.

Lock them up 24hrs-a-day in a small cell with nothing but a bucket until they die of old age. It wouldnt surely cost that much, and if new facts come to light that they are innocent, at least there is the option of letting them out.
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Nov, 2003 09:22 am
dyslexia wrote:
scrat, a serious question for I know not the answer, Has world-wide terrorism increased or decreased since the US invaded Iraq?

I don't know the answer either, but then you are kind of asking whether an increase in the number of skirmishes at a given point in time means we're losing the war (or a decrease in them at another time necessarily means we're winning it).

So, even if I could answer your question, I do not believe it would tell us what you seem to suggest we would learn from this information.
0 Replies
 
Heywood
 
  1  
Reply Wed 19 Nov, 2003 10:05 pm
John Garvey wrote:
One of the chemicals used in lethal injection almost everywhere is pancuronium bromide. It paralyzes the skeletal muscles but does not affect the brain or nerves. Its use is so cruel that in some states it is a crime to use it to euthanize pets. The paralysis it induces leaves the inmate wide-awake but unable to speak or cry out as (s)he slowly suffocates. "The subject gives all the appearances of a serene expiration when actually the subject is feeling and perceiving the excruciatingly painful ordeal of death by legal injection" was the opinion of a Tennessee judge, Ellen Hobbs Lyle. She ruled its use has "no legitimate purpose."


I wondered if that was true. I looked it up, and it is. My God, that has to be one of the most terrifying things I've ever heard of. Few things horrify me, and I must say, thats one of them.

See for yourself. And all this time, I've thought that L.I. was the most humane way to kill a person.
http://www.arktimes.com/reporter/031017reportera.html
0 Replies
 
Adrian
 
  1  
Reply Wed 19 Nov, 2003 10:27 pm
I agree with Grand Duke. Put them in a prison, bring them out when they are dead. Easy! If you absolutely must execute people then I reckon the chinese have got the best system. If you appeal the sentence and lose they take you straight out and put a bullet in the back of your head within a few hours. I think locking someone up for years with the knowledge that one day you are going to kill them is absolutely disgusting. (What was it that Hitchcock said about anticipation?)
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2003 01:23 am
I think Larry Niven had the right idea in his "Gil the Arm" stories, and if you must have capital punishment, then organ banks would be a great help.
0 Replies
 
Turner 727
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2003 02:28 am
I'm rather fond of the way the USSR used to do it. You'd be walking down a corridor to talk to someone about your confession, then someone would jump out of a door behind you and put a 9mm slug into the back of your head. Quick.
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2003 09:31 am
Heywood wrote:
John Garvey wrote:
One of the chemicals used in lethal injection almost everywhere is pancuronium bromide. It paralyzes the skeletal muscles but does not affect the brain or nerves. Its use is so cruel that in some states it is a crime to use it to euthanize pets. The paralysis it induces leaves the inmate wide-awake but unable to speak or cry out as (s)he slowly suffocates. "The subject gives all the appearances of a serene expiration when actually the subject is feeling and perceiving the excruciatingly painful ordeal of death by legal injection" was the opinion of a Tennessee judge, Ellen Hobbs Lyle. She ruled its use has "no legitimate purpose."


I wondered if that was true. I looked it up, and it is. My God, that has to be one of the most terrifying things I've ever heard of. Few things horrify me, and I must say, thats one of them.

See for yourself. And all this time, I've thought that L.I. was the most humane way to kill a person.
http://www.arktimes.com/reporter/031017reportera.html

I note that you write that it is ONE of the chemicals used, but which one? The injections are given at different points in time. Is it possible that this one is given AFTER one that renders the victim unconscious?

I just checked your citation, and it looks like I was correct:

Quote:
Like most other states that employ lethal injection, Arkansas executes prisoners using the so-called "Texas Cocktail," a three-drug sequence adopted by Oklahoma in 1977 in the first lethal injection protocol in the United States, and later refined and deemed humane by research at the University of Texas School of Pharmacy. First, a dose of sodium pentothal, a fast-acting barbiturate, puts the inmate into an almost immediate sleep. A second injection paralyzes the lungs and diaphragm. Last, a fatal shot of potassium chloride interrupts the electrical signals in the heart.

The problem is the second drug of the three: pancuronium bromide, marketed under the trade name "Pavulon." A drug that paralyzes skeletal muscle in the body, pancuronium bromide is used in delicate surgery where it is crucial that the patient doesn't move. It's also a drug that often plays a part in the rare surgical horror story, in which the patient is completely alert throughout a painful procedure, but paralyzed, unable to communicate with doctors.

I suspect the people involved in pushing this story are knowingly misleading people. YES, this drug given alone could yield the horrifying results reported, but it is NOT GIVEN ALONE. It is given AFTER the victim has been rendered unconscious (and so unable to experience anything) by the first injection.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2003 10:33 am
ye110man wrote:
the least cruel method of execution? that's like asking what the most compassionate method of rape is.

I like this statement so much, ye110man, that I intend to use it in the future, never give you credit for it, and claim that I came up with it myself. Well done!
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2003 12:19 pm
ye110man wrote:
the least cruel method of execution? that's like asking what the most compassionate method of rape is.

Only if you assume that women who are raped did something to deserve it. Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
patiodog
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2003 12:51 pm
Yeah, I'd disagree with that answer, too. The question isn't "What is the compassionate method of execution?" The question is, "What is the most compassionate method of execution?" This question is the other end of the spectrum from, "What is the least compassionate method of execution?" And, while there is no one answer to that question, it certainly is not without meaning.

I am adamantly opposed to the death penalty, for a variety of reasons. But, if it's going to happen, I would definitely prefer that some degree of distinction be made between putting someone on the rack and drugging them.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2003 02:33 pm
How about a test flight on the space shuttle?
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2003 02:42 pm
Scrat, the problem with the 3 drug method is not so much the paralysis inducing vecuronium per se, but the tendency of Pentathol to be innefective. Pentathol's efficacy is limited by large amounts of catecholemines in the blood stream. Since most "executees" likely have high levels of catecholemines coursing about due to the fact they are about to die, it is not surprising that the pentathol dosage might be innefective.
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2003 02:43 pm
cjhsa wrote:
How about a test flight on the space shuttle?

That's a punishment? Shocked
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2003 02:46 pm
Maybe...
0 Replies
 
patiodog
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2003 03:06 pm
Quote:
Pentathol's efficacy is limited by large amounts of catecholemines in the blood stream. Since most "executees" likely have high levels of catecholemines coursing about due to the fact they are about to die, it is not surprising that the pentathol dosage might be innefective.


Is this because the catecholamines and pentathol are competing for the same receptor, or is it that the sympethetic response overpowers any signals that the parasymp is processing in response to the pentathol?

It does, frankly, seem like the cruelest part of the whole exercise would be the anticipation.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2003 03:21 pm
I've tried several times to send John Garvey a PM, but for some reason, it will not go through.

So let me send him my message here in the thread.

I missed the name when he first posted -- and only noticed it when someone else posted a response.

John is a retired Catholic priest who, in my opinion, was one of the most intelligent posters over in Abuzz. For certain his take on things and my agnostic perspective conflicted on several occasions -- but I respected ever word he ever wrote over there -- and I am delighted to see him here in A2K.

Hope he sticks around.

John, if you are tracking this thread, please PM me. I'd like to say "Hi" personally.
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2003 03:43 pm
patiodog wrote:
Quote:
Pentathol's efficacy is limited by large amounts of catecholemines in the blood stream. Since most "executees" likely have high levels of catecholemines coursing about due to the fact they are about to die, it is not surprising that the pentathol dosage might be innefective.


Is this because the catecholamines and pentathol are competing for the same receptor, or is it that the sympethetic response overpowers any signals that the parasymp is processing in response to the pentathol?

It does, frankly, seem like the cruelest part of the whole exercise would be the anticipation.

Sypathetic response overpowers the parasympathomimetic effect of pentathol. I saw similar responses in the ED when dealing with GHB overdoses. The best way to handle them is to paralyze them and let them breathe on a vent until the GHB is out of their systems. First one gives an hypnotic, like pentathol, then one administers the paralytic. IT often took three or four times the "normal" dose for that body weight to get the hypnotic to have an effect.
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2003 03:46 pm
hobitbob wrote:
patiodog wrote:
Quote:
Pentathol's efficacy is limited by large amounts of catecholemines in the blood stream. Since most "executees" likely have high levels of catecholemines coursing about due to the fact they are about to die, it is not surprising that the pentathol dosage might be innefective.


Is this because the catecholamines and pentathol are competing for the same receptor, or is it that the sympethetic response overpowers any signals that the parasymp is processing in response to the pentathol?

It does, frankly, seem like the cruelest part of the whole exercise would be the anticipation.

Sypathetic response overpowers the parasympathomimetic effect of pentathol. I saw similar responses in the ED when dealing with GHB overdoses. The best way to handle them is to paralyze them and let them breathe on a vent until the GHB is out of their systems. First one gives an hypnotic, like pentathol, then one administers the paralytic. IT often took three or four times the "normal" dose for that body weight to get the hypnotic to have an effect.

Then let's go to 5 times the "normal" dose, just to be sure.
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2003 03:47 pm
Perhaps abolishing the death penalty would be a better idea.
0 Replies
 
patiodog
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2003 04:52 pm
Quote:
Perhaps abolishing the death penalty would be a better idea.


Now what civilized country would go to such an extreme measure as that.

Quote:
Then let's go to 5 times the "normal" dose, just to be sure.


This is what they do at animal shelters in places that use injection instead of gas chamber. Pit bulls are the ones that generally show an adverse reaction (they're so amped up that twice the normal dose doesn't have any effect on them, and in the meantime they've figured out that this is a very bad situation they're in and freak out, if they haven't already). The next double dose does kill them, but not as gently as does the first shot when things go "well." Never knew the mechanism before, though.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Too crazy to be executed? - Discussion by joefromchicago
A case to end the death penalty - Discussion by gungasnake
Death Penalty Drugs - Question by HesDeltanCaptain
Cyanide Pill - Question by gollum
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/28/2024 at 04:25:15