MUST BE 18 OR OLDER - MUST READ TERMS OF SERVICE AND PRIVACY POLICY

Did you know we built a library of self-help documents for inmates and their loved ones over the decades? Check it out: WriteAPrisoner.com Self-help Series.

Nevada going to execute, judge signs off

19 posts / 0 new
Last post
Sunnysideup
Sunnysideup's picture
Nevada going to execute, judge signs off

I'm just horrified. The drug cost $18.
I have a DR pen pal. I can't imagine what he must be feeling.
I know it's a sign off on someone who says that's what he wants, but this could open the floodgates.

Edited by: Sunnysideup on Jul 11 2018 - 4:46pm Reason: Imported from old database.
Daxi
Daxi's picture

Page 18 of the following document for The World Society for the Protection of Animals, cites Nitrogen as being unsuitable for euthanasia in animals.

http://www.icam-coalition.org/downloads/Methods%20for%20the%20euthanasia...

Dogs euthanised by nitrogen gas have been observed convulsing and yelping after falling unconscious.

And it looks like part of the report that suggested Nitrogen as a humane execution method to Nevada was based upon a 1961 study that found that human volunteers who hyperventilated, or rapidly breathed, pure nitrogen fell unconscious within 20 seconds. Both our understanding of science & our research methods have changed considerably in the past 57 years.
1961 was the year thalidomide was taken off the market following the death of approximately 2,000 children and serious birth defects in more than 10,000 children.
Presumably no scientific evidence exists about how humans behave after unconsciousness occurs?
I can only find only two instances of inert gas being used for suicide, so what is the evidence that it is a humane method to kill someone? Presumption or evidenced based science?

Daxi
Daxi's picture

I agree about debating topics like this. I like hearing both sides, even if I dont agree, its good to see things from another prescriptive.
I do agree with the post above that certain people cannot be rehabilitated. Some sex offenders would come under this bracket too, and these people should never be allowed back into society.

I totally agree with the above.

Personally I am opposed to the death penalty & as a whole I find very few intelligent arguments for it's existence in a civilised country, with a decent legal system. But some do exist.
For me civilised justice is about being better than those we imprison, not about retaliation or about being equal too the lowest possible denominator.
The way our countries treat prisoners says a lot abut our humanity & society. An awful lot.
However John Douglas, one of the FBI men who developed Criminal Profiling, always says that by stopping the State from having a death penalty we do not stop the death penalty, just stop the State from having it. Criminals will still impose their death penalties & I do not disagree.
John Douglas also observes that there is always a psychiatrist etc who wants to believe he can change even the worst offenders & rightly says that without a death penalty we always risk those who should never be released, being released. Again, I agree.
I have worked with offenders who have mental health needs & have seen so called professionals who know they are not ever going to be held accountable for their actions, arguing against common sense & what is plain for everyone else to see. Both for & against someone being given more freedom. Sadly not every half wit has no power over others.

Daxi
Daxi's picture

@Daxi: John Douglas is a good example, I read several books and essays he did about his work and he's speaking right "from the horse's mouth".
Did you read/watch Clint van Zandt as well? He worked as an FBI negotiator and did some remarkable work also.

Hi, yes I have read Clint van Zandt. Also books by other profilers such as Robert K Ressler, Roy Hazlewood & Candice DeLong among others. Human's interest me, I read a lot about topics such as parapsychology, hypnosis, psychology, as well as topics around an area of magic called mentalism.

Zarchery
Zarchery's picture

What are you talking about exactly? I don't see any context. Is this Nevada's first ever execution? What are the floodgates you mean?

Zarchery
Zarchery's picture

They can't do executions because they can't get the drugs for it. They screw up the executions and the deaths are really painful. These seem like such stupid problems to have. There are a bunch of ways to kill a person. I don't understand why it's so hard for them to figure this out.

I have heard recently that suffocation by nitrogen is a really pleasant way to go. You essentially suffocate because the nitrogen replaces the oxygen you need. Except your brain doesn't realize what's happening so you don't realize you're suffocating. You get high as a kite. Then you pass out and never wake up. Nitrogen is an abundant element. Gas chambers are not hard to build. Nitrogen is not inherently poisonous; you could take a few breaths of pure nitrogen and be fine as long as there is plenty of good air available. Therefore, it's not toxic to innocent bystanders. It's a wonder they're not doing this.

I don't care about the death penalty on a moral level. The alternative is life without parole. To me, there's really not a lot of difference between the two. Only one I can see is that an innocent man has more time to be exonerated from the latter.

Zarchery
Zarchery's picture

Im not vert comfortable with the death penalty either. The mention of gas chambers made me shudder a bit. But to take on your point about nitrogen gas, couldnt they do it on a smaller scale such as through an oxygen mask or similar?

I guess. I mean if the goal is to deprive someone of oxygen in a pleasant way, that would probably work. I don't know a whole bunch about the science of it, just what I've read. The idea is that the pure nitrogen will render you unconscious very quickly. Gas chambers aren't anything new in U.S. executions though. I don't find them particularly moribund myself. So far, Oklahoma is the only state that has approved nitrogen suffocation as a means of execution.

Zarchery
Zarchery's picture

Kirsten, there are a couple different things being said here.

1) The morality of the death penalty period.
2) The legality of the death penalty with regards to the 8th amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

The point of execution by nitrogen gas versus a more painful method like lethal injection is to handle the legal issues in #2. It also crosses over into #1 a bit, because a pleasant death is easier for people to swallow morally than a painful death.

I more hate the death penalty because it's wasteful and pointless. It seems like the legal system is so hesitant to do it because it is such a severe sentence. But if they're that hesitant, just don't do it!

Marilyn Presley
Marilyn Presley's picture

I think this discussion is useful, every point of view is interesting, and I respect each one.
Personally, I'm against death penalty, it was abolished in France in 1981. Good points were discussed here, espicially murder of children. There was a debate in France lately, because last february, a man was arrested for the killing of a little girl, many people were asking for the reinstatement of the death penalty for him (for those interested, I found a wikipedia page in english about the case : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Ma%C3%ABlys_de_Araujo. In a certain way, I understand people asking for the murderer's death, it's true that this murder involving a child was horrible, but on the other hand, I don't think death is the real answer. I'm much more convinced by life sentence, because it gives the murderer time to think about his crime and regret it. I also know that there are real psychopaths who will never express the slightest regret, but I don't think a death can make amends a death.

regards
Marilyn

Sunnysideup
Sunnysideup's picture

Thanks Galapagos diver, I was somewhat upset yesterday at the news, first execution in 12 years I believe. By floodgates I mean if they are doing one execution, more will follow. As I understood it, pharma companies weren't supplying the drugs needed.

Sunnysideup
Sunnysideup's picture

Galapagosdiver, same in the UK, abolition of the death penalty. I have never been able to feel comfortable with the death penalty...even as a youngster. I understand the families of victims wanting it, I am also aware that if something happened to my loved ones, I could change my mind, although I would want revenge I expect. I can't see me forgiving.

Zarchery, your post saddened me, talking about gas chambers. That's all I will say, because I like you a lot and enjoy your posts. We're just on different sides of the fence with this one.
And yes, from what I understand the pharma company has sold the drug to Nevada, although not sure why or whether they knew the reasons behind it.

Sad :(

Sunnysideup
Sunnysideup's picture

I'm really sorry my OP has created tension, I really only came on for support because I was so upset. I can't begin to imagine, no matter how painless the actual death is, the agonies of waiting for your turn. Also, of course the fact there have been executions on innocent people, or at least, people who for a variety of reasons, shouldn't have been executed.
Gas chambers will always conjure up images for Europeans and those of a certain age.
The UKs history on this subject is no better, public hangings were once the norm.
I find it abhorrent.
I appreciate all your comments, but realise it was perhaps, not my wisest post.

Sunnysideup
Sunnysideup's picture
Sunnysideup
Sunnysideup's picture

It's been halted, the drug company are withdrawing the drugs.

BabyBlueEyes
BabyBlueEyes's picture

Im not vert comfortable with the death penalty either.

The mention of gas chambers made me shudder a bit. But to take on your point about nitrogen gas, couldnt they do it on a smaller scale such as through an oxygen mask or similar?

I watched a Lock Up episode which featured DR inmates and one who was coming up for exicution. The CO doing the interview broke down in tears. I had never thought about how it affects staff, the people who deal with these inmates day after day for years. I think that?s a heavy burden for them also.

BabyBlueEyes
BabyBlueEyes's picture

I agree about debating topics like this. I like hearing both sides, even if I dont agree, its good to see things from another prescriptive.

I do agree with the post above that certain people cannot be rehabilitated. Some sex offenders would come under this bracket too, and these people should never be allowed back into society.

I dont know, the DP just doesnt seem right to me. How can a state say its ok to kill someone when to your average person its a crime? On the other hand, with regards to the worst of the worst cases, I could probably be on board with it.

GalapagosDiver
GalapagosDiver's picture

I believe this is referencing Nevada's first execution since 2006, with a never-before-used cocktail of drugs. Will be July 11 according to the below article.

https://news.sky.com/story/nevada-to-use-an-untested-cocktail-of-drugs-f...

GalapagosDiver
GalapagosDiver's picture

That's okay! It's such a complex issue. I don't even know where I sit in regards to the death penalty. It was abolished here in Australia so long ago. I hear horror stories about executions in the US - horrible drug cocktails causing terrible suffering, convulsions.

And I hear stories about innocent people being executed too. If the justice system isn't strong enough, then I don't see how it can have the power of ending human lives.

In saying that, I feel like some of the most horrific crimes are suited to the death penalty - if the system and method is 100% smooth, painless and non-complicated.

Maybe the more I communicate with inmates, my views will become more solid one way or another. Regardless, it's a tragic situation any way you look at it.

GalapagosDiver
GalapagosDiver's picture

It seems like the legal system is so hesitant to do it because it is such a severe sentence.

Try telling that to Texas. They seem to have no problem carrying out, what to me, is a huge number of executions each year.

And hey, Sunnysideup - don't apologise for anything! I think discussions like this are really healthy. I like seeing both sides of a debate, especially on a sensitive issue where people are able to be mature about things.

Euthanasia seems to be growing across the world, including in the States. Applauded for being such a humane way of ending suffering (and a human life). Can't the states that carry out executions somehow adopt a similar drug protocol and procedure? Or are such things prevented by drug companies not wanting to be associated with prisons or killing inmates?

I feel so conflicted on the whole thing. It's almost like a case by case basis. For example, a terrorist would love the death penalty, and while their crimes might be suitable for it, it'd be better to give them life in prison, preventing them being a martyr. On the other hand, someone that murders children, or chops them up - they're beyond rehabilitation in my opinion and in so horrendously robbing innocent children of their human rights, they've effectively given up their own rights to live their own life. I kind of see such cases as like putting down a rabid dog. I think where possible, the desires of the victims family should be taken into account with sentencing. After all, it's all about getting justice for the victim and their family in my opinion.

There's a really good movie called [I]Pierrepoint: The Last Hangman[/I] with Timothy Spall - highly recommend it! And I hope my post didn't offend anyone, certainly wasn't my intention :)