Results 1 to 11 of 11
  1. #1
    Joined
    May 2004
    Posts
    987

    Killer's execution postponed indefinately

    Anesthesiologists in California raise ethical concerns

    Stolen from http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/02/21/ca....ap/index.html

    I agree with Michael Morales' lawyers that this constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. Death by lethal injection can cause the victim excruciating pain and therefore should not be allowed by our justice system. Michael Morales is an honorable man that doesn't deserve this type of barbaric action taken against him. He merely plotted with his jealous gay cousin to murder seventeen year old Terri Winchell because his cousin was jealous of her relationship with a man he had a crush on. Winchell was attacked with a hammer, stabbed and left partially nude in a vineyard. And we want to punish him by this grotesque manner? How sick can you be ..............

    It's about time the U.S. joins the rest of the civilized world and eliminate the death penalty. It's unfair, unjust, and most importantly cruel!

  2. #2
    Joined
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    8,887

    Re: Killer's execution postponed indefinately

    (Psst, it's "indefinitely" by the way.)

    Since you seem so steadfast in your opinion, let's try and justify it. Shall we?

    What gives you, a jury, the government, any or all of the above to take the life of someone else? If the assertion is that taking the life of another human being is morally wrong in the utmost, how then can that same action be morally right simply by switching the individuals (or groups) involved? Is the crime that they took another life, or that they dared exercise power nominally reserved for the government? Why should the government get to decide if someone lives or dies? Why should a jury get to decide it? Why am I wrong for killing someone and everyone else right for killing me?
    Promote then, as an object of primary importance, institutions for the general diffusion of knowledge. In proportion as the structure of a government gives force to public opinion, it is essential that public opinion should be enlightened.

  3. #3
    Joined
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    74,682

    Re: Killer's execution postponed indefinately

    I guess the operative word is "can"[feel pain] ...but Ive never read any complaints or seen written documentation from the folks that suffer this "alleged" pain.
    I also wonder how the alleged pain stacks up against having your skull bashed in with a hammer [in this case the stab wounds probably werent painful].

    At the same time I fully understand the anti death penalty position.
    Last edited by jimzinsocal; 02-21-2006 at 10:25 PM.

  4. #4
    Joined
    May 2004
    Posts
    987

    Re: Killer's execution postponed indefinately

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangutan
    (Psst, it's "indefinitely" by the way.)
    Gee willickers, you're right! He should get to live just for that. I mean, the nerve of me to misspell my complaint. But since we are giving out grammar and spelling lessons, what in the world does the below quoted phrase mean?

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangutan
    What gives you, a jury, the government, any or all of the above to take the life of someone else?
    What gives you, a jury, the government, any or all of the above the right to take away someones freedom when all they did was simply take away someone else's freedom? Is it because we say only the holy "government" has the right to "selectively" take away freedom?

    RELEASE ALL PRISONERS!!!!
    Last edited by 'K-; 02-21-2006 at 10:22 PM.

  5. #5
    Joined
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Twin Cities,MN
    Posts
    2,150

    Re: Killer's execution postponed indefinately

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangutan
    What gives you, a jury, the government, any or all of the above to take the life of someone else? If the assertion is that taking the life of another human being is morally wrong in the utmost, how then can that same action be morally right simply by switching the individuals (or groups) involved? Is the crime that they took another life, or that they dared exercise power nominally reserved for the government? Why should the government get to decide if someone lives or dies? Why should a jury get to decide it? Why am I wrong for killing someone and everyone else right for killing me?
    Out of curiosity, in this instance, what would you consider "justice" for the convicted?
    He's already lived 25 years longer then his victim!
    There are none so blind as those who will not see!

  6. #6
    Joined
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    8,887

    Re: Killer's execution postponed indefinately

    Quote Originally Posted by jimzinsocal
    I guess the operative word is "can"[feel pain] ...but Ive never read any complaints or seen written documentation from the folks that suffer this "alleged" pain.
    I also wonder how the alleged pain stacks up against having your skull bashed in with a hammer [in this case the stab wounds probably werent painful].
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lethal_...uments_Against

    In 2005, University of Miami researchers reported in the medical journal The Lancet that they believed in 43 out of the 49 executions they investigated, the level of thiopental in the blood was lower than that required for surgery. This has led them to believe that the prisoners were fully aware of what was happening to them. The authors attributed the rate of likely consciousness among inmates to the lack of training and monitoring in the process, and recommended that states take a look at the American Veterinary Medical Association's recommendations on animal euthanasia, which prohibits the use of paralytic agents in combination with barbiturates and recommends animals like cats and dogs be euthanized by a single injection of a short-acting barbiturate such as sodium pentobarbital. [9]

    Opponents of lethal injection as currently practiced argue that the procedure employed is entirely unnecessary and is aimed more towards creating the appearance of serenity and a humane death than an actually humane death. Pancuronium bromide, the paralytic agent employed in lethal injection, is used in surgery to keep patients immobilized during delicate surgical procedures that occur near vital organs. By contrast, its use in lethal injection serves no purpose, since there is no need to keep the inmate completely immobilized and the inmate is physically restrained.

    The opponents say that because death can be painlessly accomplished, without risk of consciousness, by the injection of a single large dosage of barbiturate, the use of any other chemicals is entirely superfluous and only serves to unnecessarily increase the risk of torture during the execution...
    It's an interesting take on it, at least.

    Quote Originally Posted by 'K-
    Gee willickers, you're right! He should get to live just for that. I mean, the nerve of me to misspell my complaint. But since we are giving out grammar and spelling lessons, what in the world does the below quoted phrase mean?
    What gives you, a jury, the government, any or all of the above the right to take away someones freedom when all they did was simply take away someone else's freedom? Is it because we say only the holy "government" has the right to "selectively" take away freedom?

    RELEASE ALL PRISONERS!!!!
    The sentence within parantheses related very little to the questions I posed to you. It is good to know that you are so secure in your beliefs that you are either unwilling or unable to justify them when challenged. Instead, you avoid the subject and resort to the equivalent of yelling and beating your chest. Congratulations.

    Now, to address your question even though you evaded all of mine, the answer is nothing. I can think of many reasons why it is right, but I cannot think of any that are absolutely sound when viewed from a logic-contesting perspective. If I have the right to deny someone else life, then others can do the same to me. Hence, we would all be . It's quite the conundrum.

    Quote Originally Posted by trekrider
    Out of curiosity, in this instance, what would you consider "justice" for the convicted?
    He's already lived 25 years longer then his victim!
    I don't know, but then again I'm not taking a stance here. I'm playing the role of Devil's Advocate to someone who apparently cannot explain to us why they hold certain beliefs. I'm just trying to stoke the fires of logic and argument. Personally, I'm mixed on the death penalty. I believe there are some crimes heinous enough to warrant death, but who am I to mete out that punishment? What gives me the right to do that?
    Last edited by Orangutan; 02-21-2006 at 10:44 PM.
    Promote then, as an object of primary importance, institutions for the general diffusion of knowledge. In proportion as the structure of a government gives force to public opinion, it is essential that public opinion should be enlightened.

  7. #7
    Joined
    May 2004
    Posts
    987

    Re: Killer's execution postponed indefinately

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangutan
    I believe there are some crimes heinous enough to warrant death
    Seems like we agree here. And as for you playing the role of devil's advocate, I don't really like your question. What do you mean, "what gives anyone the right?" If we give them life in prison do we not take away their freedom? What gives us that right? I believe a society must punish those who break laws that are designed to ensure civility. As you said, "I believe there are some crimes heinous enough to warrant death." What more reason do I need? I'm not one who just believes in picking random people and issuing out death. I say people "choose" death when they knowingly and maliciously inflict death on others. Michael Morales and the likes of his kind don't care about whether it's right or wrong to take your life and best believe they're not going to argue about the most painless way to take it. What justice does it serve to house a guy like that for life? I say in that particuliar case, given the extremely cruel and unusual and disrespectful way he took the life of his victim, HE FORFEITED HIS OWN RIGHT TO LIFE. I believe the law was such when he committed the crime so I don't pity him at all!!!!!

  8. #8
    Joined
    Mar 2004
    Location
    mtl,canada
    Age
    41
    Posts
    37,286

    Re: Killer's execution postponed indefinately

    how about let him be in prison for a lil while.im sure teh other inmates will not be bothered by them facts.

    add a couple 120mm fans overhead to drop temps by 10+ celsiusD.S.C-12(2)-disclaimer : whatever u do with your hardware/software is your
    responsibility, which i dont hold if u break anything

    GRAB here OcBible v1.55 and Guidemania v1.21
    scary pooch?pooch#1taking ball from dogpooch pulln on ropeme on board after 2 years
    of no board
    http://gonny.se/ <-cool lady http://www.mediafire.com/?8dmg21ms1vx
    IN MEMORY OF HOW BM WAS TREATED HERE...

  9. #9
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    kansas city area, MO
    Posts
    523

    Re: Killer's execution postponed indefinately

    my point of view is that the death penelty is an easy way out.you don't have to live your natural life confined in a cell for upto 50+ years.if i was in that position,i'd take death over life without parole any time.i just couldn't not being able to to do life while knowing i'd never be free again.

  10. #10
    Joined
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Indian-uhhh
    Age
    38
    Posts
    5,807

    Re: Killer's execution postponed indefinately

    One of the powers of the government is to give a fair trial of someone, and then administer punishment as necessary. If it cites execution, so be it. I don't have a problem with the appeals process, but after 25 years, I think it's way past the time for any contrary evidence to have surfaced. If someone has been convicted of murder and sentanced to die, then that's what should be carried out.
    Governments are there to take the evidence and give a ruling, pass judgement, and sentance (if needed).
    It's not in good to clump murder, killing, and execution together as the same thing.
    Murder: the deliberate act to cause the death of a person.
    Kill: causing the death of someone. Not necessarily deliberate, but can be insinuated as such
    Execution: punishment carried out for a convicted murderer.

    I'm sorry if this next part sounds harsh, but if you have been convicted of murder and you are set to be executed, I don't have any qualms about it hurting you. Now, I'm not sure we need to go with beheadings and slow tourture, but I do think that it's the duty of a government to proceed with the execution of a convicted murderer who has been sentanced to death.

  11. #11
    Joined
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Twin Cities,MN
    Posts
    2,150

    Re: Killer's execution postponed indefinately

    While I do believe an execution should be carried out humanly & painlessly, it should also be carried out quickly! 25 years of appeals is too long! I think a person on death row should have a set length of time for those appeals (and they should have presidents over newer trails, so as to expedite them).

    What gives a Judge, a Jury or the Government the right to issue a death sentence?? It's called THE LAW!! What gives a traffic cop the right to issue me a speeding ticket? THE LAW! (extremely over simplified, I know....but it is THE LAW.)

    If you don't like THE LAW...change it! Use your vote.
    There are none so blind as those who will not see!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •