PDA

View Full Version : Is This Really Ethical



Agape
20th November 2013, 20:25
What I'm referring to can be found on this page :

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-24935868

Lethal injection: Secretive US states resort to untested drugs


As American states have found it harder to source drugs for lethal injections, they stand accused of using improvised and possibly painful methods - and buying drugs furtively from unregulated pharmacies.

Joseph Franklin was sentenced to death for shooting and killing a man outside a synagogue in 1977.

He was convicted or blamed for a series of other racially motivated murders, and confessed to being the sniper who shot porn publisher Larry Flynt in 1978, leaving him partially paralysed.

He is due to be executed by lethal injection in Missouri on 20 November, if no last-minute legal appeal is accepted.

The state's authorities had been planning to use propofol, a common anaesthetic that is untested as a lethal injection drug, for the execution of Franklin and a second convicted murderer, Allen Nicklasson.

But Governor Jay Nixon postponed Nicklasson's execution last month after it became apparent that using propofol, some of which was made by a German manufacturer, might put hospital supplies of the drug at risk.

The German manufacturer, warning of the risk of EU sanctions, asked for its propofol back, as did a US supplier.

Missouri then announced it would instead use pentobarbital, sourced not from a pharmaceutical company but from a compounding pharmacy - a pharmacy that makes small batches of drugs on demand for specific clients.

Campaigners object to these pharmacies partly because of an incident last year when a compounded drug in Massachusetts was blamed for an outbreak of meningitis that left more than 60 people dead, but also because they are not subject to regulation by the federal Food and Drug Administration.

"They operate in a kind of grey zone," says Brian Stull of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). "There is no way to verify that what comes from a compounding pharmacy is what it purports to be, and that it is safe and effective."

Lethal injection is the primary method of execution in all 32 states in which the death penalty is permitted, and for several years they have been struggling to obtain the drugs they need.

States employed similar three-drug lethal injection formulas for decades, until the US company that made one key ingredient, sodium thiopental, stopped supplying it. Manufacturers in Europe, where the death penalty is outlawed, have since sought to block the use of their products for executions in the US.

State authorities have reacted in two ways: by using new drugs or combinations of drugs, and occasionally sourcing them from compounding pharmacies.

This week alone three executions were scheduled in three states, using three different lethal injection methods.

Texas used pentobarbital to execute Jamie McCoskey on Tuesday, the same day that Florida used a three-drug combination to execute Darius Kimbrough.

Florida's combination included a drug called midazolam, which had never been used for an execution before the state put William Happ to death last month, using the same mixture.

An Associated Press reporter who witnessed Happ's execution said he seemed to remain conscious for longer and move more than people he had seen put to death with different lethal injections.

Ohio was due to use an untested two-drug mixture of midazolam and hydromorphone to execute Ronald Phillips on Thursday, but in an unprecedented step the execution was stayed at the last minute in order to consider a request by Phillips to donate his organs.

Brian Stull says states have been left "scrambling for drugs", and have become increasingly secretive.

"It's become really hard - even for people who follow this issue closely - to know what's going on in each state with each drug because there are so many scenarios proliferating," he says.

Missouri has shielded the compounding pharmacy supplying its pentobarbital from unwelcome publicity by adding it to the execution team - a list of people involved in the execution whose anonymity is protected.

One of those who regards the process as too secretive is Larry Flynt, publisher of Hustler, whom Franklin shot and partially paralysed.

He has put his name to an ACLU motion, which cites allegations that Missouri "appears to have used unsavoury methods to secure and maintain execution drugs and tried to hide that and other information from the public".

Earlier this year lawyers in Georgia obtained a stay of execution for Warren Hill - a convicted murderer - after questioning a new law that makes the way lethal injection drugs are obtained a state secret.

"I think states are making a mistake in being overly secretive and not transparent," says Richard Dieter, executive director of the non-profit Death Penalty Information Center.

"The sense is that they're doing something wrong and hiding something."

Mr Flynt himself opposes the death penalty in principle.

"I have had many years in this wheelchair to think about this very topic," he wrote recently in the Hollywood Reporter.

"As I see it, the sole motivating factor behind the death penalty is vengeance, not justice, and I firmly believe that a government that forbids killing among its citizens should not be in the business of killing itself."



I'm not willing to repost related images ( though they're mostly ..empty of substance ) in manner of 'good forum posters' since I don't know what to think about them anyway ,

and they're of course ..not more than pictures. I've ignored the 'sticking needle ' with 'Lethal injection' in subtitle on news page for some time till I actually realised it's loaded gun.

I'm really interested to hear whether you think this is alright .


I feel as if I've poked right to the black hole of human civilisation . Do we claim that some people are so irreprovably bad that they have to be killed .


Is there no cure ..



:angel:

Robin
21st November 2013, 01:46
This is a very touchy subject.

I guess the question comes down to: is it more ethical to kill somebody or have them live their entire life being controlled (for committing a crime)?

If I were given the option, I would rather have my life end early. I only say this because I know that I will continue to exist elsewhere and that I am not limited to one life time. However, it also may be that when coming into this lifetime, a person may choose to create such an experience so they can experience what it's like to live confined to a prison their entire life (to work off karma).

I think that everybody deserves to live a full life if they so choose, but if they choose to end their life early by suicide then that is their choice. They are entitled to committing suicide, as long as they are aware about the concept of karma and that they may continue to experience something until they learn their lesson.

mosquito
21st November 2013, 01:48
A far from simple moral dilemma.

What strikes me most about the above story is that the man in question murdered someone in 1977. So in other words, he's being executed after having served a life sentence ! And this seems to be the case with most death sentences in the "land of the free", once convicted, you rot in jail while the lawyers get rich and the nation wrings its' hands in moral anguish.

I don't know the answer.

indigopete
21st November 2013, 01:57
Capital punishment is one of the more extreme - though common - forms of insanity that prevail in our species imo.

The logic kind of goes like this:

You're walking down a street. You see a house on fire on the other side of the street. So you decide to set a house on fire on this side in the hope that the first one will go out.

The two events are in fact independent of each other - one just adds to the other and cannot by any objective measure be seen to mutually "cancel each other out", even in some crazy context of "justice".

I'd better stop now before I go ranting on forever about this subject :) Suffice to say it's dark age stuff.

rgray222
21st November 2013, 04:54
I don't have the answer to this but I do know that we are living in a violent world on purpose. The entire setup on planet earth seems to be intentional. We are constantly reminded that there is war, murder, famine, natural disasters, unnatural disasters,corruption and sickness to name but a few atrocities. On the other hand we see great human accomplishments, wonderful human achievements and selflessness that knows no bounds. We are suppose to experience the bad with the good. We are suppose to discuss it, we are all suppose to live it and more importantly we are suppose to think about it. After all if we were not suppose to be exposed to all this violence the lion would be a vegetarian.

Those that do not stop to ponder these questions are lost souls living lives that will not move their consciousness forward. Those that wish for wealth or love without thinking about the greater good of mankind are destined to be stuck on repeat until they have an inkling.

The flowery prose that everyone will live in harmony, where there is no judgement after the human experience is over is a load of rubbish. Of course there will be souls there that have moved to different levels of consciousness. Things will not be as most of mankind thinks or has been led to believe. We will be hit with the reality that the universe is infinite and our role in it is a smaller than small, but an important role. That worn out phrase "we are all connected" will turn out to be true, we are connected to everything and everybody. That in itself will be a wonderful and a frightening experience at the same time.

Some have called earth the planet of sorrows, it has be setup that way with much thought and intent. There must be those that commit heinous crimes, it forces people out of their comfort zone! The list of people that are involved with one horrible murder are endless,the families affected, the police that arrest the man,the lawyers that defend or convict the man, the judge that sentences him, the jailers that house him, the preacher who looks after him and ultimately (in this case) the doctor who kills him. As if that is not enough or we need more just turn on your television or listen to the lyrics of a lot music, it deals with all the insanity on this planet 24 hours a day 7 days a week.

Through all this we are to seek out the positive, we are to push the limits of our consciousness. We are to find a way to come through this earthly maze with our souls intact, not cutting them short like so many people have done. We need to be taking away more goodness than we have been given. We are suppose to find and perform acts of kindness even if we are down and destitute. As a matter of fact the more dire the persons circumstance the more opportunity he has for greatness. Yes your greatness will be recognized beyond these earthly limits. That is the way it must be.

toad
21st November 2013, 08:02
I particularly love this part right here..:


"As I see it, the sole motivating factor behind the death penalty is vengeance, not justice, and I firmly believe that a government that forbids killing among its citizens should not be in the business of killing itself."

-- Larry Flynt


I'll reply later when I got a bit of time

Miller
21st November 2013, 12:57
I particularly love this part right here..:


"As I see it, the sole motivating factor behind the death penalty is vengeance, not justice, and I firmly believe that a government that forbids killing among its citizens should not be in the business of killing itself."

-- Larry Flynt


I'll reply later when I got a bit of time

Firmly agree with this. Why is it abhorrent to kill murderers and paedophiles but it's OK to kill the soldiers of other countries, most of whom have families and want to live in peace like us?

toad
21st November 2013, 13:43
The crooks in the banking sector cause far more damage on a daily basis then any murderer or pedophile. I just saw that Vietnam sentenced a couple people to death for for fraud:


A Vietnamese former banker and his business associate have been sentenced to death for their part in the embezzlement of $25 million, state media has reported.

The pair were among 11 defendants in the nine-day trial in Ho Chi Minh City, state media reported on Saturday, in a case that has highlighted Vietnam's efforts to show it is stamping out corruption in the face of widespread public anger over the issue.

Vu Quoc Hao, 58, the one-time chief of a finance subsidiary of the state-owned Vietnam Agribank and building firm boss Dang Van Hai, 56, were sentenced to death on Friday, according to state television.

"They were given the sentences for embezzlement of assets, mismanagement, abuse of power and fraud, causing serious consequences to the state," it said.

The other nine defendants were jailed for up to 14 years for violating state economic regulations, the report added.

The group was accused of embezzling more than $25 million of state money between April 2008 and March 2009 by falsifying financial leasing contracts, according to reports on state media.

Vietnam is rated one of the world's most corrupt nations and graft is a top concern for many ordinary people. The communist government has vowed to clamp down on the issue.

"There will be strict punishment for state cadres and officials who received bribes," warned the deputy prime minister, Nguyen Xuan Phuc, at an anti-corruption dialogue held in Hanoi on Tuesday, according to the government's website.

Vietnam resumed executions by lethal injection earlier this year, drawing criticism from the UN's human rights office.

I do not believe we have the right to take anyones life, but I believe when its out of my hands, we should atleast do it properly, and for the right reasons. However, I believe that our(American) justice system is so twisted, that states experimenting with death cocktails is among the many things that need to be corrected.

RMorgan
21st November 2013, 13:44
Well,

Any kind of radical punishment , whether it is death penalty or life in jail, is somewhat illogical. These are palliative measures; Combating the symptoms doesn't alter the coarse of the disease.

Just a minority of horrendous crimes are committed by physiologically compromised people, in other words, genetically insane people. Most other cases are nothing but consequences of this extremely cruel and unjust system.

So, punishing people will not actually fix any problems, unless we start treating the cause and combating the root of the disease.

Of course, we know society is extremely sick and, whether we like it or not, one way or another, people will commit terrible crimes. Right now, we have no other proper solution other than throwing them in jail or sentencing them to death. Independently if the criminal is clinically insane or is a victim of society, none of us wants them walking around among us.

So, we know radical punishment is palliative. We know it doesn't solve the problem itself. However, we have to deal with it since there's no other immediate solution.

In a certain way, we know it's ultimately wrong, but we have to accept because we are forced to do so by circumstances.

I don't feel comfortable about using tax money to sustain criminals in jails, while this money could be used for much better purposes...But I don't want to sentence people to death as well, so we could actually use the tax money for better purposes...And I absolutely don't want criminals anywhere close to me and my family.

So...We're kind of cornered here. There's no immediate easy answer or solution to this problem.

There is crime. We know crimes are mostly just a reflection of how the current system treats people but there's nothing we can do to change it right now...So, what's the best way to deal with criminals, right now? Jail or Death; Which one is better? Coldly speaking, both have their pros and cons.

Society, as it is right now, is illogical. So, there's no point trying to use logic to address problems that are inherently illogical.

Raf.

toad
21st November 2013, 18:04
Society, as it is right now, is illogical. So, there's no point trying to use logic to address problems that are inherently illogical.

Raf.

Absolutely, but what we're left with is a problem non the less. Each culture has their own means of punishing or reinforcing some behavior negatively, but our culture complicated and corrupted its justice system in terrible ways, when child rapists get probation, and someone who alerts someone of a security exploit gets 25yrs in prison. :(


Also, palliative is a good word to describe it.

mosquito
23rd November 2013, 02:41
.... There's no immediate easy answer or solution to this problem.

Exactly.

I ponder this question, especially at those times when I'm visualising a future society or community.

I think you've also (as usual !) hit the nail on the head when you say ...
Society, as it is right now, is illogical. So, there's no point trying to use logic to address problems that are inherently illogical., and maybe, when we have a more humane society, the nature of transgression will be different, so the solution will be more apparent. God knows how many millenia we are away from that though !

Ernie Nemeth
23rd November 2013, 03:21
Justice in our society has nothing at all to do with "putting things right", as Raf so aptly explained. Our system is rotten to its core and no amount of jailed criminals is going to change that.
It would be wise to understand the word "criminal", though. Anyone breaking the law could be considered a criminal. Or, a criminal could be one that breaks certain prescribed laws, that come with more severe repercussions, like incarceration, not being allowed to vote, inability to travel outside your country, job restrictions and other nasties. In the latter case, who gets to decide what crime makes one a criminal?
Also palliative could mean "conducive to healing", as well what I believe was referred to: "to hide behind an excuse or apology".
That's why I believe there should only be one option considered for any crime: death. If it is worthy of death it is worthy to be called a crime. Everything else is a civil matter and must be dealt with...you guessed it - civility, ie. with respect, so that the violator never looses their dignity and is never subjected to restrictive or punitive measures.
But alas, we live in this world where such ideas are doomed.

Wookie
23rd November 2013, 03:47
If removing the "criminal" from the personality with modern technology was an option for punishment would that be ethical? No need for execution, no need for long term prisons. How about Co2? How many corporations need to profit from the death of a criminal? There will be a better way.

Peaceful Journeys Wookie

Sidney
23rd November 2013, 04:52
Lets not forget that much of the sentences goes towards justice for the victims (and their families) of the crimes that were committed. If someone has taken and/or destroyed the lives of others, then I would rather see capitol punishment rather than using taxpayer dollars to keep them alive behind bars for god knows how many years. Death IMO, would be a much better "life" than death behind bars for years and years. In a way, death is the better deal, and that is why some victims would rather see the perp rot in jail for decades then given the gift of going beyond.