Sounds almost like a movie plot -- the iv's were already inserted into his arms when THE phone call came in!

is this cruel and unusual?

I think so.

I dunno what's up with you Yellow Staters. The rest of the world's gonna start thinking you are soft on crime.

Justice has been served.

is this cruel and unusual?

I think so.

Posted by vernon at 2006-01-27 12:09 AM | Reply

I agree Vern, no need to disappoint the murderous bastards. Let them have it,first chance. Especially for copkillers.

Funny how rcade had to go overseas for this article.

Fla use to have the elctric chair, remember "sparky"? Would he prefer that? Give the bastard his choice!

If Kenneth McDuff had visited Texas' Sparky in '73 four women would be alive today.

Death is not "cruel" or "unusual". He was found guilty and now must pay the consequences for the crime he committed. If he or anyone else doesnt like it, thats too damn bad. We cant run the risk of having him one day escape or get out on parole, only to end up killing someone else.

Cruel AND unusual

What's cruel or unusual about dying for killing someone? We now know why they prep the injection site with alcohol. Hopefully the poor guy doesn't develop an infection.

It's too bad that the Supreme Court is even allowing this argument. It shows that the criminals have more rights than the victims, just like the libs want it.

The Death Penalty the Ultimate in Hypocrisy

Larry

So that's why they apply iodine before administering a lethal injection

Never ever made sense to me.

If life in prison was configured as punishment I'd be for it because it would end the bullshit. No more arguments that a mistake might be made. None of this crap about cruel and unusual punishment.

But after seeing that video clip of Richard Speck having the time of his life, boasting of having sex with everyone in the joint, I don't see the downside for a psycopathic killer.

Did the victim in this crime die a painless death? Did he get one last chance to say goodbye to his family, his friends? We know that he did not. THAT is cruel and unusual.

I say Hang 'Em High.

Hanging, firing squad, electric chair...these all seem like a more painful and scary way to go. Anyways, if the convicted murderer feels a bit of pain in the last moments of his life, so be it. He should be happy he didn't have to suffer the way his victim did.

"What's cruel or unusual about dying for killing someone?"

Times change, standards change. When the Constitution was written the phrase "cruel and unusual" did not mean what it means today. They did all sorts of nutty stuff in those days. (And before, it was even worse. The final scenes in "Braveheart" are not overdrawn---pardon the pun.)

I cannot think of a more humane way to end someone's life than putting him to sleep first. If he would rather be hung, who are we to stop it?

Has anyone else seen Battle Royale? We should get a bunch of death row inmates together and do the same thing .. hell we could probably abolish taxes due to all the revenue it would raise for the gov't ;)

Death is not "cruel" or "unusual".

Sooo...him dealing death to his victims in the first place was ..."what" then?

Regards,
etc.

Death is not "cruel" or "unusual".

Sooo...him dealing death to his victims in the first place was ..."what" then?

Regards,
etc.

Posted by theperfectstorm at 2006-01-27 12:03 PM | Reply

Death is inevitable...however, noone has the right to decide when someone else dies. The only exception to this is when you take a life, you forfeit your own life.

LM, the death penalty isn't the ultimate in hypocrisy, as the people condemning the man haven't actually killed someone for a reason other than as a punishment. Therefore, your statement has no credence. Come up with something new, your old and tired liberal views don't fly any more.

The cruel and unusual punishment of death happens all the time and the left defends it.


4000 times a day as a matter of fact. AND the killed did NOTHING wrong. Had no choice, had no voice and no defense.

Until now.

DarkSwn it damned sure is the Ultmate in Hypocrisy. You are killing a killer to show that Killer and society that killing is wrong. if it is wrong for a killer to kill then it should equaly be wrong for Society to kill a killer. It makes society killers by doing such. It is the taking of another Human Life no matter how You slice it.


Larry

"AND the killed did NOTHING wrong. Had no choice, had no voice and no defense.Until now.Posted by niceville at 2006-01-27 01:47 PM | Reply"

TA ta ta...tuddle dee tuddle dee dum!
Niceville to the rescue
Faster than a one-legged duck
More powerful than a wisp of smoke
Look!
Up in the sky!
Is it a bird?
Is it a plane?
No, it's Niceville with his boring, repetitious, sad little deja vu message

niceville-
I've always been pro-death penalty. Lately, I've been questioning it a bit... wondering if this is just man's vengeance and not rising above the criminal. How do you think that the death penalty fits in with the Bible, concerning, "Thou shalt not kill", and Jesus saying, "When a man strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other"?

Jesus saying, "When a man strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other"?

Posted by Matt_in_Texas1 at 2006-01-27 02:04 PM | Reply

The Bible also say an eye for an eye.

If society wanted to wreak vengeance on a convicted murderer, we would torture him before putting him to death. Instead, the use of lethal injection is the most easy way to exit this life.

If you want to "rise above the criminal", as you stated, then we should view every prisoner as able to be 100% rehabilitatable and all our efforts should be into easing him back into society, no matter his crime.

" The Bible also say an eye for an eye. "

That does predate Jesus by a few weeks.

If you're searching for consistency you'll need to check out something other tha religion

I did mass spectrometry fro ten years. The mass of sodium atoms was pretty consistent.

for

Matthew 5:38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.



Larry

" The Bible also say an eye for an eye. "

Hammarabi beat the bible to it by centuries. The bible plagerizes.

chrisinco-
"If you want to "rise above the criminal", as you stated, then we should view every prisoner as able to be 100% rehabilitatable and all our efforts should be into easing him back into society, no matter his crime."

I respectfully disagree. That's a different argument entirely. Some folks should never be allowed to re-enter society... like child molesters and murderers. As I said, I'm on the fence on this one. I think that an 'eye for an eye' can be seen as antiquated when we are supposed to be more civilized than those who committ such atrocities. Do you think Jesus would be for the death penalty?

He didn't try to save the two theives who were being crucified on either side of Him. And yes, I think He would be for the death penalty.

chrisinco-
"He didn't try to save the two theives who were being crucified on either side of Him."

It's hard to help when your hands are nailed down.

"And yes, I think He would be for the death penalty."


Matthew 5:38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.(thanks larry)

We must agree to disagree. I think that the Jesus who would be for the death penalty is the same one who was hijacked by the republicans. But that's just my opinion. Thanks for keeping it civil.

"What's cruel or unusual about dying for killing someone?"

Well, what if they guy turns out to be innocent? Wouldn't that make the death penalty... murder?

Death is inevitable...however, noone has the right to decide when someone else dies. The only exception to this is when you take a life, you forfeit your own life.

I see you don't understand the contradiction in your words.

Regards,
etc.

DarkSwan: What's cruel or unusual about dying for killing someone? We now know why they prep the injection site with alcohol. Hopefully the poor guy doesn't develop an infection.

It's too bad that the Supreme Court is even allowing this argument. It shows that the criminals have more rights than the victims, just like the libs want it.

I can't believe those dumb libs wrote the Bill of Rights. They should have known it would only lead to more crime.

the only trouble with death penalty is that it is not carried out often enough or swift enough. it is punishment for the most heinous crime.

Yes, what we should do is send them to prison for life. That way, when they escape (which seems to be on the news everyday), they can kill again. Genius, plain and simple.

LM, the difference between the death penalty and murder is that the death penalty isn't doled out on the spot. The "victims" in the death penalty are given appeal after appeal. Last time I checked, murderers don't do this. Come up with a better argument. I understand if it's a guy strangling to death at the end of the rope. That would be cruel. A lethal injection isn't. It's the liberals, once again, giving more support for the criminal than the victim. That's what being a liberal is all about.

I see you don't understand the contradiction in your words.

Regards,
etc.

Posted by theperfectstorm at 2006-01-27 06:00 PM | Reply

Sorry about my uneloquence...:) Let me try and rephrase... Murder is wrong, the state putting to death in a merciful way a convicted murderer after years and years of appeals and irrefutable evidence of his guilt is as close to justice as I suppose we'll ever get.

It's the liberals, once again, giving more support for the criminal than the victim. That's what being a liberal is all about.

Posted by DarkSwan at 2006-01-27 06:47 PM

Instead of spewing Bill OReilly's man batter out of your mouth and onto our screen, try instead to find a 'liberal' who doesnt feel criminals should be punished.

That one is a Republifundie agenda: they aren't punishing criminals, they are electing them to public office.

I believe in the death penalty...

One word you wont see liberals say is JUSTICE....

Boaz, I guess that would explain why John Kerry was a District Attorney who successfully prosecuted rape and murder cases.

Dear Larry Moe and Curly. The death penalty is not a lesson; it is removal. We are not being mean, spiteful or vengeful. It is extermination. We are removing the trash. I'll step on a spider for no more than walking across my floor. Removing those who think so little of others that it is easy for them to kill is a good thing for society. "Ignorance of the law is no excuse" Those who kill know the penalty can be death; they made their death bed and now they can die in it.

What's cruel or unusual about dying for killing someone? We now know why they prep the injection site with alcohol. Hopefully the poor guy doesn't develop an infection.

It's too bad that the Supreme Court is even allowing this argument. It shows that the criminals have more rights than the victims, just like the libs want it.

Posted by DarkSwan at 2006-01-27 09:33 AM | Reply

Thats bullshit and so are you.

If victims want the same rights criminals have, they only need to go out and commit crimes. Then they can exercise all the rights they want to.

I believe in the death penalty...

One word you wont see liberals say is JUSTICE....

Posted by boaz at 2006-01-27 07:45 PM | Reply

Bullshit, liberals use that word all the time when trying to refute your use of the word as an excuse to kill people.

And please, a death penalty is not punishment.

At the worst its a legal revenge killing,

At the best, its a deterrent.

Punishment would be 10 lashings with a bamboo cane. At which point you go holy fuck I'm never gonna do that again.

When your dead however.. your only not doing that again because your dead.

Personally I'm not against the death penalty. What I do tend to be against is the standards for which the death penalty is merrited out.

Bullshit, liberals use that word all the time when trying to refute your use of the word as an excuse to kill people.

Posted by KnightHawk at 2006-01-27 08:44 PM | Reply

Yep, like libs use the word fetus to describe unborn babies before they kill them.

Varmints need killing.
One name: Kenneth McDuff.
Require solid forensics, screw circumstantial, then snuff 'em.

McDuff's time ran out finally on November 17, 1998. Just after six P.M he was put to death by lethal injection in the Huntsville prison. Justice had been served, 32 years too late.

Talk about overdue....

Dear Larry Moe and Curly. The death penalty is not a lesson; it is removal. We are not being mean, spiteful or vengeful. It is extermination. We are removing the trash. I'll step on a spider for no more than walking across my floor. Removing those who think so little of others that it is easy for them to kill is a good thing for society. "Ignorance of the law is no excuse" Those who kill know the penalty can be death; they made their death bed and now they can die in it.

Posted by bytewon2 at 2006-01-27 08:39 PM | Reply



Welcome to the Killers world. You have become a killer by supporting the Death Penalty and are NO BETTER Than the Killer. Congratulations.

Larry

why is it always a "lethal cocktail"

these damn journalists and their overused cliches...

Welcome to the Killers world. You have become a killer by supporting the Death Penalty and are NO BETTER Than the Killer. Congratulations.

Larry

Posted by LarryMohr at 2006-01-27 09:23 PM | Reply


I may be no better in your eyes but the world is definitely better without them. Sorry cant risk convicted murderers escaping and killing again. There are too many former felons walking the streets as it is. You hear on the news all the time how so and so just got out of jail only to rob or kill someone else. Or how their rap sheet is a mile long and the justice system just spat them back out into society so they could commit more crime.

Ya but at leaast we support killing those ajudged guilty of capital crimes, as opposed to idiot lefties that support the killing of innocents.

Just look at the blind eye the Republifundies are turning on the crimes happening in the White House if they ever question whether Liberals are 'soft on crime'.

Libby? Rove? Cheney? Bush? DeLay? Frist? Ken Lay?

All innocent until proven innocent.