Unless we just want to admit that we are in the vengeance business and not the justice business

Don't get me wrong, I am just as bloodthirsty as any other "rabid righty" but if we allow this kind of thing, what's next? Do we bring back the rack, or do we start  "Drawing and quartering" criminals? Even the Chinese are more humane when executing criminals, they simply put a bullet in the back of their head. Putting down a murderer should be like putting down a rabid dog, we don't torture a rabid dog when putting one down, why should we treat a human being worse?

and to the OP, plenty of people are talking about the victims, but when we start trampling the rights of the guilty, it's not a big leap before we start trampling the rights of the innocent.

For the record, I am all for capital punishment, but only if there is ZERO doubt about the  person's guilt, and by zero I mean beyond a shadow of a doubt, not a reasonable doubt, and then once we have decided that person's life is forfeit, the execution should be carried out as humanely and expeditiously as possible.

From what I understand, they missed the vein, so it was not an intentional infliction of pain.

Also, all the death penalty opponents make it harder to with the least amount of risk (hard to obtain the original 3 drug cocktail).

The guillotine was invented to execute in a humane way (one quick clean cut). In comparison to firing squad and gas chamber, I seems fairly quick and relatively painless. Very little risk of botched execution like electric chair and lethal injection.

If you don't like seeing the separation, then something like a magicians box (where they cut people in half) to hold the separate pieces would take care of that problem.

First, everyone knows that there are drugs that can be used that are fast and painless.

Everyone who held a pet while it was put to sleep knows this.  (I did this 3 times with my Old English Sheep Dogs that I loved.)  Everyone who had an operation, went to sleep, and woke up with 10 stiches knows this.  Everyone who believes in the "Death with Dignity" movement knows this.

There is one reason why they don't use those drugs in prisons and that is because the anti-death penalty forces have put pressure on the companies not to sell them for executions.  That is why they can't get them.  That is why they have to use other drugs.

They removed the option of painless death.  

The anti-death penalty forces would rather have 10 people die with a little pain than have 100 painless executions.

And that is all this was - a little pain - if you want to be honest, an hour of pain when he was 90% unconscious,

...about the human rights of bad guys, especially righties.  Read some of their posts on this board for examples of callous indifference.  Or just wait and read their posts in this thread about how the guy got what he deserved.

I wonder how willywonka feels about the botched execution of one criminal considering he'd like to see the genocide of all Muslims and Jews in the Middle East.

-- Modified on 7/24/2014 1:43:17 PM

You said, "The Supreme Court has ruled this is type of execution is "cruel and unusual" and absolutely not allowed."

No. That is wrong.  This type of execution was never before the Supreme Court in so far as the use of these drugs.  As to death by injection generally, every case that has been before the court has allowed for it.

Finally, the Court has expressly held that some level of pain does not amount to Cruel and Unusual punishement and that there is no constitutional guarantee that death be totally painless.

In short, the court never held what you siad.

Here is the challenge.  Just find the case and page number where the court ruled on this type of drug and where it prohibited this level of pain.  

Very easy to prove me wrong. All you have to do is say "in Smith v. Arizona (19##) at ### U.S. ###, at page ###, the court stated.

(I can't prove you wrong because that is proving a negative.  However, you must know that executions have been allowed by the court, presumably because the court thinks they are okay.

You put those words right out of my mouth, Sir.    I experienced my eldest sister and brother in law killed in the most brutal fashion in 1988 in their own bed and their throats were cut to make sure they were dead.    The killer is walking free now after serving 17 years.     None of our family members got to see them even in death, as their bodies were so brutalized they were put in wooden boxes, not even decent caskets for cremation.

If the attorneys think these guy suffer, get the firing squad or just hang them.    Americans cheered when Sadam was hanged.

but I agree, if we can put a dog down humanely, why not a human?

Part of me of course wants to agree with the OP, who incidentally happens to be a flaming liberal, but apparently a rather bloodthirsty lib, but if we are going to maintain any claim to being a "civilized" nation, we can't be torturing our criminals to death, or the next thing we know King Obama will sentencing his political opponents to be drawn and quartered, as it appears that the desire for vengeance doesn't appear to be limited to just "rabid righties" You lefties seem to have a bloodthirsty streak in you as well.

Kill'em all and let GOD sort them out.

Quote :
Would a patient dying in this fashion suffer? No, it’s unlikely they will suffer. If the doses of midazolam and hydromorphone are large enough, the patient will be unconscious before and during their cardiac death.

http://theanesthesiaconsultant.com/2014/01/16/january-2014-lethal-injection-with-midazolam-and-hydromorphone/

If someone does not want to go through "cruel and unusual punishment", he/she should not kill another human being.

We don't execute prisoners because of prison over crowding. that is a statement worth handing you the SPOTY trophy right now. We have literally millions of people in prison in this country, the number we execute is in the dozens or hundreds at most each year.