Capital Punishment has been a hot topic around here lately. It got pretty heated and I debated on putting this news up. However, I would like everyone’s opinion on 
this.
This is not about Capital Punishment being legal or illegal. And it isn’t about what we think of it being legal or illegal. It is about how do we end the life of a prisoner and what is humane.
Here is what is going on in Ohio:
Ohio waded into uncharted territory Friday when it announced plans to switch from the usual three-drug cocktail used to execute inmates to a one-drug method….
The switch came two months after an Ohio inmate walked away from a botched execution attempt (they couldn’t find a vein and after 2 hours the Governor stopped the execution), and it is almost certain to get tied up in appeals and draw the close attention of other states that have long used the three-drug method…..
Under the three-drug method, the first drug knocks out an inmate, the second paralyzes him and the third stops his heart — a process that death penalty opponents argue is excruciatingly painful if the first drug doesn’t work.
The single-drug technique amounts to an overdose of anesthesia, Collins said.
Death penalty opponents hailed Collins’ decision as making executions more humane but expressed reservations about using such an untested method. The same drug is commonly used to euthanize pets, to sedate surgery patients and in some parts of Europe has been used in assisted suicides.
As most of you know I used to be a Veterinary Technician and have assisted in Euthanizing pets. It is very quick, I’ve never seen an animal appear to be in any pain (once the vein is found – which can be difficult for older pets). The animals
just “go to sleep”. It appears to be very peaceful. I have often wondered why we used the 3 drug system instead of the 1 drug system for criminals. The drug can be used in the muscle or in the vein. The vein is quicker, however for the older dogs the muscle is better than continuously poking the animal to find the vein.
In the 3 drug system, if the first drug doesn’t work 100%, which is more common than people think, the 2nd drug paralyzes the criminal. This means the person cannot tell us that the first drug didn’t work. The final injected is said to feel like fire is being injected into the vein.
So, what do you think? Should we worry so much about the comfort of the criminal? Should we want to make their final moments as peaceful as possible?
We should definitely make sure the criminal is as comfortable as possible. There are so many horror stories with the 3-drug method. One man (in Florida I believe) had the veins pushed in the wrong way and had those drugs spill into his soft tissues landing 3rd degree chemical burns on his arms. Some people who have botched executions are on the table taking over 3 hours to die because ‘something went wrong.’ He/She then becomes an experiment to see ‘what can we inject in them that will kill them.’ Sick.
However just because the death penalty would be more palatable to hear about (or watch even) doesn’t take away its practical and moral problems. That’s why they brought the death penalty back in the first place- after they found a more ‘palatable’ way to kill people, it was all a-okay, with no thought that maybe there was more to ‘cruel and unusual punishment’ than exactly how you are extinguishing the life out of them.
Let the prisoner decide his time, method of ending his life.
If he goes on living into old age, fine. If not, fine.
Let him confer with all those euthanasia clubs that know many methods to end his life with a painless ending.
Or, he can be allowed seppuku that allows the dignity of not allowing yourself to be humiliated one last time by the state.
A complete appeal to emotion.
Two states still allow for hanging the convicted murderer.
If it’s pain that makes you object to the death penalty, which it isn’t really, then disconnecting the body from the brain to not allow pain signals to reach the brain is accomplished by using the…………………. “national razor”. In the book, CITIZEN, Simon Schama,author, it was recorded that enterprising minds wondered if a person who had been guillotined could still see, and feel pain. So, a citizen who was to be beheaded was asked to blink two times if he could still see after his head was instantly chopped off. Do you hear me”? He blinked two times. Another citizen was asked to blink three times if he could hear. “Do you hear me”?He blinked three times. Finally, a citizen was asked if he would blink two times if he felt pain. He blinked two times. In essence, they volunteered to advance medical science. And it puzzled medical science for years.
Practice makes perfect.