Accepted Wisdom on Punishment for Murder
(Accepted Wisdom is a semi-regular feature of this site, highlighting contradictory viewpoints held by the elite.)
It is Accepted Wisdom that:
Any method of execution — including lethal injection — is cruel and unusual punishment, and therefore unconstitutional, because it inflicts unnecessary suffering on the prisoner.
And at the same time:
Life in prison is a better punishment than death, because prisoners suffer much more being kept alive in prison than they would from an execution.
(P.S. This installment of Accepted Wisdom was inspired by a recent actual letter to the editor of your favorite local L.A. rag.)
Accepted wisdom (by a certain other group): the fetus has a right to life from the moment of conception, but once born, does not have a right to the medical care that can maximize its basic chance at a healthy life, such entitlements being “socialist” and antithetical to good government.
This is not intended to be (solely) a hijack of your provocative question. The more common objection to the death penalty is that (a) the state is fundamentally not entitled to kill as part of its civil function, and/or (b) the system by which the state executes prisoners is too prone to error to entrust with such a weighty and irreversible form of punishment.
Neither issue is without its shades of grey.
biwah (f5ca22) — 2/23/2006 @ 6:59 amCheaper to kill’em. If they happen to be ‘suffering’ during a lienient period of penal history, they may actually get parole. You kill, you get killed. Off the planet. period. They didn’t consider the suffering of their victims therefore they have abrogated their expectation of mercy from society. I’m sure that offends someone.Not accidental mansalughter, but Murder 1 ,I have no gray area.
paul (8e5be1) — 2/23/2006 @ 8:39 amSo paul, death for anyone convicted of 1st deg. homicide?
biwah (f5ca22) — 2/23/2006 @ 8:45 amAh, the irony. Didn’t you get the memo that some forms of suffering are politically correct?
DRJ (3c8cd6) — 2/23/2006 @ 9:03 amHow about a lead injection to the back of the head of Mr. Morales? That, or get a furlough for Jack Kervorkian to do the job.
PCD (317d0d) — 2/23/2006 @ 9:16 amIsn’t it interesting that many (probably most, if not all) of the people who crinch at the thought that criminals sentenced to death might suffer some pain during the execution, have absolutely no qualms about a partial birth abortion.
Ron Olliff (096a64) — 2/23/2006 @ 9:40 amThis is the democrat party strategy. Since the public overwhelmingly support the death penalty, the platform is to support the death penalty. Then they appoint judges who screw the voters.
This is why they are so angry at Bush for appointing common sense judges who will uphold the Constitution.
They did the same for Prop 187, gay marriage, etc It is time the public wakes up
JoeS (fbbfa0) — 2/23/2006 @ 9:50 amPunishment/suffering is bad but punishment/suffering is good. Among Liberals, this kind of thinking is not unusual but instead characteristic of the Liberal thought process – which is not news.
After all, it’s the Liberal’s momentary feelings which justify any thought. But then, Relativism somehow avoids making feelings relative [equal in value], unless the epitome of correct feeling is to avoid the Liberal’s perceived torture of thought.
Functionally, we must do whatever Liberals want, however contradictory it is with other things they want done, or else they will be upset. But they are always upset anyway, so you really can’t win. Therefore, I give up.
J. Peden (cef9d8) — 2/23/2006 @ 10:28 am“it inflicts unnecessary suffering on the prisoner.”
Unnecessary being the key word. Since the California method of execution, in Fogels’ own ruling, is %99.999999 pain free, where’s the unnecessary pain?
Fogel’s ruling is a cobbled together poorly thought-out own plan that collapse under its own weight of vagueness.
Consigliere (f14a5b) — 2/23/2006 @ 10:31 amWhereas imposing the death penalty on convicted murderers may actually cause them some pain and suffering, and
Whereas the People of California are compassionate and decline to inflict unrequired distress on convicted murderers sentenced to death.
Therefore let it be resolved, that the level of pain and suffering visited upon convicted murderers sentenced to death, shall not, in the aggregate, exceed the pain and suffering inflected by the convicted murderer on the victim(s).
Black Jack (d8da01) — 2/23/2006 @ 12:32 pmIf the medical personnel pulled out of the execution because their license could be suspended doesn’t that mean that every person that has participated in a partial birth abortion should have their license suspended immediately and permanetly? At least they are now open to lawsuits since the excuse was accepted by the prison officials and the so called judge. I hate lawsuits but people should now file a million or so against the Dr’s, nurses, hospitals and every other filthy excuse for a human that has performed or assisted in an abortion.
scrapiron (a90377) — 2/23/2006 @ 12:46 pmScrapiron, you’re forgetting something: only acts that offend the left are unethical. Offending the right is just dandy.
Xrlq (9501cb) — 2/23/2006 @ 1:48 pmYet again, the pain and suffering of the victim are sidelined to irrelevancy. In the case of Morales’ victim the pain and suffering were, well, words are not equal to it.
A return to the days of firing squads would be nice.
Laura (36fa0c) — 2/23/2006 @ 2:08 pmHow is it unusual if it is used in just about every execution? As far as I’m concerned murderers deserve whatever cruelty we can think up, as long as it’s not unusual.
jvarisco (2c5028) — 2/23/2006 @ 10:04 pmHow about we tie them down, put them on a feeding tube, then pull it.
Kevin Murphy (6a7945) — 2/23/2006 @ 10:24 pmThat leads to euphoria when done by a patient’s wishes, but it may produce other, less desirable results when administered as a punishment. Just to be on the safe side, once the Morales guy becomes unconscious, let’s start a big P.R. campaign telling everyone that was what he wanted anyway. If any witnesses surface to argue the contrary, just cook up some bullshit excuse for ignoring them. If anyone calls bullshit, no problem; just deny having relied on your own bullshit in the first place.
Xrlq (2b6e32) — 2/24/2006 @ 4:09 amThe cruel and unusual part may be the false hope that repeated, and expensive, appeals incurs.
paul (8e5be1) — 2/24/2006 @ 5:23 amFor the ultimate penality of death three judicial reviews of the case should be required and completed within one year of the original conviction and sentencing. After which the victims family is consulted and the sentence carried out. The victim’s family may appeal on behalf of the criminal and that would be his/her only hope of reprive from death.
We must admit that a fair portion of the death penalty is retribution and the majority of that lay with the victims’ survivors. But once you’re done, you’re done.
I’m really tired of the “Cruel and Unusual” bushwa promulgated by the left and ACLU types. No method of execution used in the US is cruel AND unusual. The libs suddenly forget the definition and function of the word “AND” in the law and logic. It means both conditions. Execution is not unusual, period, therefore theit whole argument collapses.
PCD (f0ba66) — 2/24/2006 @ 8:59 amLethal injection certainly isn’t cruel… At least not compared to the acts committed by the the criminal on death row.
Unusual? Well, there you got me. It is a trifle unusual for a person to comfortably recline, and have a multi-drug cocktail slipped into one’s veins. It’s just not a usual way of cashing in the ol’ chips.
Therefore! I suggest: adapting the most ‘usual’ methods for death. Gunshot,rape/murder, car wreck, whatever.
heldmyw (a999cd) — 2/24/2006 @ 11:41 amSome prisoners, who have faced life without the possibility of parole, opted for death. So I guess getting raped repeatedly looses all of its charm after a while.
Psyberian (4aee78) — 2/24/2006 @ 12:38 pmPsy wrote:
And just how many of those are there? We execute less than 100 criminals a year, or only about one for every four murders just in Philadelphia. It’s not often that we hear about a volunteer for execution.
And hey, if they want to be executed, why go through all the fuss? Hand them a cyanide capsule and tell them to have at it. I am opposed to capital punishment, but if someone would rather commit suicide, well, it’s his life.
Dana (3e4784) — 2/24/2006 @ 1:25 pm“It’s not often that we hear about a volunteer for execution.”
That’s true Dana and a fair point. But you have to admit that ending your life is not something that most people are willing to consider. So even if a handful of prisoners are willing to give up their lives as opposed to languishing in prison, then their choice is noteworthy.
To be fair, I’m not sure how often rape happens in prison either, but “accepted wisdom” says that it occurs fairly frequently.
Psyberian (4aee78) — 2/25/2006 @ 9:21 amWhat kind of silly attempt at humor is this? What is medical insurance, a “right” or an “entitlement”? The implication that the American child has a smaller “basic chance” at a “healthy life” because medical insurance is not provided by the government, does that square with reality? Do American children have a smaller “basic chance” than European or Canadian children?
Chaos (27ce18) — 2/25/2006 @ 11:04 am