How can Texas carry out its executions without inflicting pain but their neighbor to the north are the keystone cops.
Can’t they do anything right?
“After a six-year pause, Oklahoma carried out its third consecutive botched execution Thursday, causing 60-year-old John Marion Grant to vomit, convulse and curse as he was killed with a lethal injection of three drugs.“
They put down dogs and cats and horses without this turmoil. Why not do it the same way with people? Or just get an anesthesiologist to put the guy under, before administering the lethal dose. Hell, they can amputate limbs and transplant hearts without the patient feeling a thing during the procedure.
Better yet, let’s do away with the death penalty entirely.
I hate to be the jerk in this thread but no one could have predicted he would have reacted this way.
Anesthetics are a double-edged sword because while it does its job and sedates you, it has the side effect of nausea. In fact, after my surgeries, as soon as I woke up, I was throwing up for 2 days or so afterwards. But at least I didn’t have to writhe in pain.
Sodium-something is the sedating agent in this process. Then a paralytic agent is given, and finally, KCl to cause an MI and do the dirty work.
I would think that because it uses anesthetic, it is at least a little more humane. In states like SC, peope have the option of electric chair or firing squad. In AZ, they can choose the gas chamber. In Japan they just hang you by opening a trap door underneath you. Also in Japan, they are not always transparent as to what goes on even from the interrogation process. For example, a person may not get to be questioned with lawyer present.
“Hoping to give the cruel and unusual punishment clause a more workable application, the Supreme Court began to follow the “evolving standards of decency” test. In 1958 Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote that the clause “must draw its meaning from the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society.” (Trop v. Dulles, 356 U.S. 86, 100-101 (1958).) The Court continues to follow the evolving standards approach”
Having someone vomit is cruel and therefore unconstitutional.