Texas Executions

[Dreamor]

something to do with the barbituates and the anasthetics etc. either way, the one that supposedly stops you being in pain wears off rather quickly. while the other one that has paralysed your muscles keeps on going. so as they are injecting the lethal part, the person is still alive. therefore suffering in extreme agony but they cannot move or speak at all.

I've been hearing something similar myself, check here

Past the adverts to the 2nd -3rd pages...

Edit - to save yourself some time...

The execution team is either in a separate room or behind a curtain and cannot be seen by witnesses or the condemned. In some cases, the executioners may wear a hood to conceal their identity. At the warden's signal, the execution team will begin injecting lethal doses of two or three drugs into the IVs. Some states use multiple executioners, all of whom inject drugs into an IV tube -- but only one of the executioners is actually delivering the lethal injection. None of the executioners know who has delivered the lethal dose and who has injected drugs into a dummy bag.

The drugs are administered, in this order:

Anesthetic - Sodium thiopental, which has the trademark name Pentothal, puts the inmate into a deep sleep. This drug is a barbiturate that induces general anesthesia when administered intravenously. It can reach effective clinical concentrations in the brain within 30 seconds, according to an Amnesty International report. For surgical operations, patients are given a dose of 100 to 150 milligrams over a period of 10 to 15 seconds. For executions, as many as 5 grams (5,000 mg) of Pentothal may be administered. This in itself is a lethal dose. It's believed by some that after this anesthetic is delivered, the inmate doesn't feel anything.

Saline solution flushes the intravenous line.

Paralyzing agent - Pancuronium bromide, also known as Pavulon, is a muscle relaxant that is given in a dose that stops breathing by paralyzing the diaphragm and lungs. Conventionally, this drug takes effect in one to three minutes after being injected. In many states, this drug is given in doses of up to 100 milligrams, a much higher dose than is used in surgical operations -- usually 40 to 100 micrograms per one kilogram of body weight. Other chemicals that can be used as a paralyzing agent include tubocurarine chloride and succinylcholine chloride.

Saline solution flushes the intravenous line.

Toxic agent (not used by all states) - Potassium chloride is given at a lethal dose in order to interrupt the electrical signaling essential to heart functions. This induces cardiac arrest.
Within a minute or two after the last drug is administered, a physician or medical technician declares the inmate dead. The amount of time between when the prisoner leaves the holding cell and when he or she is declared dead may be just 30 minutes. Death usually occurs anywhere from five to 18 minutes after the execution order is given. After the execution, the body is placed in a body bag and taken to medical examiner, who may perform an autopsy. It is then either claimed by the inmate's family or interred by the state.

 

[tris-]

also, the executioners are not actually doctors. i assume they may recieve basic training on what to do. i also believe it is them who measure the doses.

i could also be talking shit though

 

[Dreamor]

also, the executioners are not actually doctors. i assume they may recieve basic training on what to do. i also believe it is them who measure the doses.

i could also be talking shit though

Check my post, its usually the guards or 'other staff members' within the jail that get to do it.

I was looking, its not just America who do this... China ia far far worse. Iran shortly behind...

 

[Marc]

I hope the bastards DO suffer.

 

[noblok]

I'm against death punishment. Especially in it's current form (in the US). I think killing is wrong and death punishment has no positive consequences which outweigh this. On top of that it's also more expensive than locking someone away for life.

If death punishment should exist, then the one pleading for it should do it. Place the gun to the convicted's head, look him in the eyes and shoot. Lethal injection is the easy way out for the ones who got him killed.

 

[tris-]

i would prefer the person to go in solitary confinment in the smallest space possible. only being given the minimum items required for them to live.

 

[DrunkSkunk]

i would prefer the person to go in solitary confinment in the smallest space possible. only being given the minimum items required for them to live.

my thoughts aswel;

dark room (2m at 1.5m) with a very small window, small bed, bread and water as food. 18th century prisons ftw.

oh and a long cord and a hook on the ceiling.

 

[Ezteq]

you'd prefer someone to live in abject misery and in what is considered torture conditions than just to kill them and end it all.... thats rather sadistic (not saying its bad, have ben known to have my sadistic times).

why are you all going on about texas tbh? you read what the people did to earn the death penalty, in places like saudi arabia people get executed for just converting fro islam, they get bits chopped off for stealing oh and dont forget the old fave of throwing rocks at a woman until she dies for committing adultery (and in some places... thinking of a case i nigeria, the woman got stoned to death because she had the bareface cheek to get raped)

and in china they have public executions, they take school kids along on field trips to watch it happen just so they can see what will happen to then if they step out of line.

tbh whats worse, killing a dangerous criminal in a relitively quick way (lethal injection vs stoning to death = quick) or keeping them in jail, where tax money is used to take care of them then letting them out after 6 years so they can go do it again.....................









i know which i'd vote for.

 

[noblok]

tbh whats worse, killing a dangerous criminal in a relitively quick way (lethal injection vs stoning to death = quick) or keeping them in jail, where tax money is used to take care of them then letting them out after 6 years so they can go do it again.....................

This is an unfair comparison.
1. Lethal injection is more expensive than locking someone away for life, or so I have been told.

2. The fact that someone is against the death penalty doesn't imply that he thinks a criminal shouldn't spend a long time in jail. If the risk is too high he will recommit the crime, that person should be locked away for life. If the risk is relatively low, he should not.

The time of a punishment should, in my opinion, be influenced by three factors: deterring, correcting and reintegration. The time should be long enough to serve as a deterrant. It should be as long as needed to be able to change the criminal's attitude and it shouldn't be that long that he can no longer 'fit in' in society.

 

[Ezteq]

2. The fact that someone is against the death penalty doesn't imply that he thinks a criminal shouldn't spend a long time in jail. If the risk is too high he will recommit the crime, that person should be locked away for life. If the risk is relatively low, he should not.

The time of a punishment should, in my opinion, be influenced by three factors: deterring, correcting and reintegration. The time should be long enough to serve as a deterrant. It should be as long as needed to be able to change the criminal's attitude and it shouldn't be that long that he can no longer 'fit in' in society.

exactly you hit the nail on the head there with just one word "should" dangerous murders, rapists, child abusers should be locked up for life (lets face it a severe attitude change is pretty rare), but they never are, they get out, their victim (providing they left them alive) has to live with the fear of them getting out then the fear of what they will do once they get out.

no one should have to live with that but they do.

personal opionion only and im not saying im right or anything like that but if it was down to me i'd have the offenders removed perminantly (dont you dare doubt me, yes i would. and i'd gladly flip the switch myself, how many of you have been victim to brutal crime? well i have so i can say it with all honesty) via death penalty.

 

[Bugz]

Death punishment for murders only is just wrong.

Rape and paedophilia should also be offencers punishable by death.

Fuckin leanient countries. If I had my way, Gary Glitter would have died a terrible, terrible death.

 

[noblok]

I know they don't effectively get locked away for life. I am not advocating that offenders where the risk of recomitting a serious crime is too high should be set free again though. I am simply saying that I find death penalty too brutal a punishment and think that locking them away for life is preferable. Not only for the offender's sake, but also for the sake of those who love him.

The choice is between killing them and locking them away for life. Both are equally effective. Both cost about as much. In this case I think the choice should be left to the offender. Lock him away for life, but give him the option of suicide.

 

[Bugz]

I know they don't effectively get locked away for life. I am not advocating that offenders where the risk of recomitting a serious crime is too high should be set free again though. I am simply saying that I find death penalty too brutal a punishment and think that locking them away for life is preferable. Not only for the offender's sake, but also for the sake of those who love him.

The choice is between killing them and locking them away for life. Both are equally effective. Both cost about as much. In this case I think the choice should be left to the offender. Lock him away for life, but give him the option of suicide.

Prison isn't as bad as you make it. The stereotypicalness that goes with them being hell-holes is a load of bullshit.

Anyone would choose prison over suicide, in the UK at-least.

 

[Platin]

First thing I noticed too, why state the race?

Why not?

 

[noblok]

That's irrelevant to my point though. The main purpose of the punishment should, in my opinion, be to protect society. This is done equally well by imprisonment as death punishment. Part of it should also be a symbolic reparation towards the people who lost a loved one, but this is also done by imprisoning the offender for life.

 

[Bugz]

That's irrelevant to my point though. The main purpose of the punishment should, in my opinion, be to protect society. This is done equally well by imprisonment as death punishment. Part of it should also be a symbolic reparation towards the people who lost a loved one, but this is also done by imprisoning the offender for life.

Well, it is hard to discuss such a thing due to the conflicting opinions.

If someone murdered someone close to me, I'd take imprisonment as a joke. I'd want them dead.

For others, imprisonment is adequate.

 

[noblok]

However, there may be people loving the offender too. Don't you think it's cruel to do to them what the offender did to you? After all, they are innocent. Should they be punished just for loving a criminal (murderer, rapist, whatever)?

Of course they'll suffer from him being imprisoned too, but not as bad.

 

[tris-]

thats rather sadistic (not saying its bad, have ben known to have my sadistic times).

imo, when it comes to cases of a murder you need to compare what they did to the sentance they recieve.

in one of the examples i seen earlier, he raped a young girl. he cryed while giving the confession as she stated "jesus loves you".

now obviously he kept going after she said this.

lets compare it. someone can be locked away in the minimum conditions. or they can be killed. the person raped a young girl (8 or 9?) and kept going after she said such a thing.

what is more sadistic -

carrying on to rape and kill her after she said that

or

lock the person in the smallest room allowable, only supplying the minimum requirements needed to keep them alive as long as possible.

i chose the second option, for which the reasons are obvious. if not, i can explain it if anyone requires

hmm, what im getting at is he tortured her for the rest of her life. so why should he not recieve the same?

Prison isn't as bad as you make it. The stereotypicalness that goes with them being hell-holes is a load of bullshit.

Anyone would choose prison over suicide, in the UK at-least.

ye. in the uk you get a tv, fluffy carpets and anything else you want. tbh, it never really sounds like prison at all :/ the fact is, if you go around commiting crimes why shouldnt it be a hell hole? you cant just break the law for the fucking hell of it :/