This ought to curdle your blood

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

State executions are supposed to be without rancor or malice - an expression of what society considers justice (an interesting word in its' own right) though law. The death penalty was considered Constitutional when the Constitution was ratified and poll after poll shows the majority approve - do we need our berobed masters to tell us it isn't? Should we use hanging or perhaps a firing squad?

The Europeans obviously are not to 'blame' for our legal system and I'm sorry that using 'Europeans' is too broad a brush (it is). But unintended consequences just the same.

Pete

So, you're holding the Governor and state legislature faultless for disregarding the Supreme Court's stay of execution and the subsequent botched execution?

[piece-itpete]

It doesn't mention the SCs' stay in the article?

Have you ever read about the first use of electric chair? This positively pales in comparison.

Pete

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

It doesn't mention the SCs' stay in the article?

Have you ever read about the first use of electric chair? This positively pales in comparison.

Pete

The appeals for disclosure about the drug sources, supported by a state court in March, threw Oklahoma’s highest courts and elected officials into weeks of conflict and disarray, with courts arguing over which should consider the request for a politically unpopular stay of execution, the governor defying the State Supreme Court’s ruling for a delay, and a legislator seeking impeachment of the justices.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/30/us...xecutions.html

With respect to your bolded comment, something either represents cruel and unusual punishment or it doesn't. Writhing in pain on an execution gurney for 43 minutes qualifies, IMHO.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

The death penalty was considered Constitutional when the Constitution was ratified

So were slavery and the male franchise.

John

[piece-itpete]

Those things were changed the proper way.

Finn that article is FAR from clear. What does this mean?

"A constitutional crisis appeared to be brewing. But last Wednesday, the Supreme Court announced a decision on the secrecy issue — overturning the lower court and declaring that the executions could proceed."

I agree that it was terrible. However it was accidental.

Pete

[4-2-7]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

State executions are supposed to be without rancor or malice - an expression of what society considers justice (an interesting word in its' own right) though law. The death penalty was considered Constitutional when the Constitution was ratified and poll after poll shows the majority approve - do we need our berobed masters to tell us it isn't? Should we use hanging or perhaps a firing squad?

The Europeans obviously are not to 'blame' for our legal system and I'm sorry that using 'Europeans' is too broad a brush (it is). But unintended consequences just the same.

Pete

And I thought this country was formed from fleeing European ways. To create a new world and independence.

A very goofy push the past 15-20 years to be like Europe, No Thanks.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

Those things were changed the proper way.

Finn that article is FAR from clear. What does this mean?

"A constitutional crisis appeared to be brewing. But last Wednesday, the Supreme Court announced a decision on the secrecy issue — overturning the lower court and declaring that the executions could proceed."

I agree that it was terrible. However it was accidental.

Pete

From the linked article, a legislator threatened to start impeachment proceedings against the SC justices who voted for the stay of execution. While their backpedaling isn't exactly a profile in courage, it seems to me that this legislator and the governor should be held accountable for the botched execution by virtue of their demanding it take place despite the drug cocktail never being tested (or the contents even publicly disclosed).

Are you against the governor and the legislature being held accountable for the consequences of their strong-armed tactics? Are you OK with them subverting the intent of the 8th Amendment?

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

The death penalty was considered Constitutional when the Constitution was ratified and poll after poll shows the majority approve.

What's that have to do with cruel and unusual punishment? It seems to me that rushing to execute someone without knowledge of the efficacy of the drug cocktail, with the result of the prisoner writhing in pain for 43 minutes before dying, isn't exactly what the public or the constitution envisioned.

I find it exceedingly odd that "constitutional conservatives" have no qualms about subverting the 8th amendment, as long as it assuages their blood lust and need for revenge.

[piece-itpete]

It's a rapidly morphing argument

The clash between branches was planned. So yes I'm fine with their strong armed tactics.

As far as the 8th being subverted, that's a stretch imo as it was accidental.

Pete

[piece-itpete]

Yes I am filled with blood lust and rage Honestly though if I came across the crime at the time I'd probably have shot him. He deserved the death penalty - ultimately his end position was his fault.

Pete