Arkansas Set To Execute 8 Inmates over 10 Day Period in April

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/03/us/arkansas-death-penalty-drug.html?_r=

Kind of surprising given my state has not executed anyone in 11 years. Equally surprising that this has been pushed along mostly by the issue of obtaining adequate supplies of drugs for lethal injections.

Personally, I think they should use firing squads again. Equally lethal. Bullets will never become rare or unavailable. Probably just about as painless (relatively) as a lethal injection anyway.

I've never understood the huge effort to make executions literally as bloodless as possible all to make the persons or institutions conducting the executions feel better about themselves. Dead is dead.

Agree the firing squad or guillotine is fast and 100 percent effective. If you have already set your mind to execute an inmate does blood make it any worse?

Worse for the janitor.

Spring cleaning.

You sound excited. "An eye for an eye" is soooo Old Testament. Got tickets?

Wow. arkansas will be in good company with North Korea. A real improvement.

The death penalty has done fuck-all to deter crime, detaining the prisoner while he exhausts all his appeals to fight for life costs more than regular lifetime incarceration, so it doesn't save money, and it rarely gives the victims resolution.
And it makes hypocrites of conservatives that have a hate-boner for the state, because death of American citizens is the ultimate power to give them.

All it's successful at is to help elect "tough on crime", phony assholes to office, and momentarily slake the endless bloodlust of absolute morons.

Good point. I bet no one commits a crime in Arkansas after this upcoming blood bath.

I didn't think the arguments in favor of the death penalty were ever about "deterring crime" or "saving money".

Though I'm sure some people somewhere have mentioned them before I don't think either of those arguments were primary.

My post sounds "excited"?!? How?

And I've never made the "eye for an eye" argument.

Then what was your point? "Arkansas does it better"?

Be serious Faceman. The guilt of these 8 murderers is beyond doubt.

.

It seemed like a newsworthy item. If no one thinks it is then a moderator can feel free to close the thread.

Also wanted to point out the ridiculousness of the entire arguments in favor of executing people by lethal injection.

Do you pretend to be this stupid?

Why else would we do this if not to defer crime?

And yes, people think that if we sped up the executions that it would be less costly. But as it's been pointed in every other discussion on this topic, the appeals process is lengthy; rightfully so, given you can't unkill someone if evidence proves innocence later.

So the government is so incompetent that they can't be trusted with anything except life and death.

Because liberty.

It was a joke, homey.

I thought the purpose was to punish wrongdoers.

So, "an eye for an eye" after all.

Whatever...Chad

Nice comeback.

Don't pretend to know what justice is. You're-a felon after all.

"You're"

To make sure the punishment fit the crime.

Agree 100 percent.

Unless the murderer keeps his victims in a dungeon, the prison part of the equation doesn't work.
What if the killer tortured their victim?
What if the killer ate their victim?
How do you fit the punishment for child molesters? Have a giant grope at them?

No, this "punishment fits the crime", line is a bunch of jive that only applies to murder for murder.
It's petty vengeance wrapped up in self righteousness.
Which would be fine, if you just legalized vengeance killings like the Klingons, but it's the state doing it on the taxpayer dime which conservatives are supposed to hate.
Y'know, the state, the people you don't trust to run healthcare, or the fire department.

I'm against the death penalty, but also agree with the confusion at the apparent perception that the less blood there is the less painful it is.

Getting a half dozen bullets into the head, or being in a small concrete room with a bomb would be a much quicker and less painful way to go.

As someone else said earlier, lethal injection is just less clean-up for the janitor.

What was *your* point?

Capital punishment is as old as human civilization. It's primal. And yes, there is very much an element of vengeance in it, and that's perfectly fine. The criminal justice system recognizes the legitimacy of vengeance as a motivating factor in sentencing and punishment. Even in civil matters - I'm sure you've heard of "punitive" damages. As in, punishment.

125 years ago all you needed was a horse, rope, and tree. Or a Colt revolver and one bullet. It's modern society that's complicated the matter.

Hell, for all we know, the current cocktail of injections they give might actually be more painful than getting shot. So really it's more for the people watching than anything else. Helps to give them the illusion of being civilized while they strap someone down and kill them. As opposed to strapping them down to a chair and watching them get electrocuted to death, or get gassed to death, or watching them take a short drop with a sudden stop, or watching them get tied to a post and shot. Compared to all that, lethal injection is way less traumatizing on the people watching it. Of course, for all we know, the person being executed might be in agonizing pain for the process, which isn't all that fast.

Though most people don't realize it, hanging (if done properly) is probably among the least externally brutal and among the most merciful.

The thing is, hanging is far more than an art than a science with a staggering number of variables to take into account. And the number of botched hangings we know of goes back centuries. The guillotine was specifically designed to eliminate botched hangings.

The guillotine is almost certainly one of the most merciful methods to the condemned, but its staggeringly disturbing to people viewing it (from what I've heard).