Oklahoma approves Nitrogen Executions

[Ralin]

Is there some problem with morphine? Besides just it being "too" pleasant?

Some addicts require twenty or thirty times the standard lethal dose to kill and it's possible to screw up and induce intense chest pains and then heart attack.

As far as injection based methods go it is a reliable method of killing a good 95% of the population. But for that 5% either you find out the hard way that they are simply immune to anything other than a bucket of morphine or you mess up and induce a heart attack, a not necessarily fatal heart attack at that.

Not only that, but medical personnel are legally required to either dispense or administer the morphine. The state of Oklahoma will find it difficult to obtain the necessary staff due to professional ethics.

Seems like they've already shown they're willing and able to change the law to facilitate executions?

[Vejut]

As I understand it, its less about "changing the law" and more about changing the ethics code requirements of a nationwide organization of medical professionals, and the individual doctors/pharmacists/etc themselves. I believe that's from an old thread here though, so grain of salt.

[bilateralrope]

Seems like they've already shown they're willing and able to change the law to facilitate executions?

The reason there are questions about if the current lethal injection drugs are allowed is not because of some new questions about the execution cocktail that's been used for decades. Instead it's because the drug manufacturers weren't happy to have their drugs used in executions:

But, in recent years, complications have arisen. In 2009, Hospira, Inc., the sole American manufacturer of sodium thiopental, stopped production of the drug at its plant in North Carolina. The company intended to shift production to Italy, but the government of that nation, which prohibits capital punishment, demanded a guarantee that none of the drug sold would be used for executions. Hospira felt unable to enforce the agreement—and claimed not to condone such use, anyway.

What followed was a black comedy of increasingly desperate attempts by prison officials to procure sodium thiopental. Under pressure from European authorities, legitimate pharmaceutical companies began refusing to provide it. For a time, officials obtained the drug from a middleman in London, who shared office space with a driving school. Then, in 2012, a federal court told the Food and Drug Administration to block its importation, because the source had not been properly certified. Some states had already moved to replace it with the barbiturate pentobarbital, but Denmark, the sole producer of that drug, had refused to allow its sale for executions. Missouri then adopted a one-drug protocol, seeking to inject an overdose of propofol, a well-known drug used in medical anesthesia. (Michael Jackson died of a propofol overdose.) Here, too, a manufacturer objected, issuing a statement that the use of propofol “in executions—regardless of its source—could lead to sanctions by the European Union that would threaten the U.S. supply of this indispensable drug.” Now seven states, including Missouri, have turned to the shadowy world of “compounding pharmacies,” which can obtain and create drugs without F.D.A. supervision. The risks of these substances being contaminated, or insufficiently effective, are considerable.

I expect that using morphine for executions would face the same problem of manufacturers wanting nothing to do with the death penalty.

[madd0ct0r]

I dunno, Isis are pretty in favour of it.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

I dunno, Isis are pretty in favour of it.

The shit has that to do with anything?

[General Zod]

I'm a big fan of the guillotine, but no need to rehash it. If you can't stomach a bloody execution maybe you shouldn't have them at all.

[Titan Uranus]

I dunno, Isis are pretty in favour of it.

The shit has that to do with anything?

He wants to tell us that he's so much more moral than we are.

Personally I object to executions on the grounds that firstly they are more expensive than life in prison and that secondly I consider life in prison the greater punishment. The fact that imprisonment gives you some ability to correct your mistake is a nice side benefit as well.

However, if you are going to execute people, then the exection itself ought to be as quick and messy as is reasonable, and it ought to be public.
In my opinion the best ways to achieve this in America would be the firing squad and execution with the goal of decapitation, as the guillotine is foreign to our shores.

If society wishes to kill a man because they are such a terrible threat to society or are so vile that decent folk cannot suffer him to live then society should not shy away from what they are doing. In my opinion it ought to be done openly and honestly, all else smacks of cowardice or censorship.

[Joun_Lord]

I have nothing against executions..............so long as there is no doubt about the guilt. I a case where some guy killed a couple people and its got video evidence or something along those lines, fry the fucker. When its a case where its flimsy evidence, easily mistaken eye witnesses, ambiguous DNA evidence, and the killer saying he didn do nuffin, may as well just lock his ass up incase some dun goofed.

A man in prison can be released if there is evidence exonerating him later on, a dead guy the best you can do is toss him in a pet cemetery and have Steven King piss on the grave.

Now I also think jail should be not about punishment and should be the last resort, other then death, of the justice system. Someone commits a crime they should pay restitution somehow, working off their debt to society, but just sticking them in a jail cell on the tax payer dime doesn't do shit.

It should also be about rehabilitation. Someone committing a crime will usually do so because they are desperate or know no other way. Society should be trying to work to make sure that the person doesn't get to that point again by giving him skills and help to ensure he doesn't hold up a convenience store or rob a little old lady. Just locking him up doesn't help him, will make him worse if anything so when he does eventually get out after making some corporate CEO of some for profit prison a shitton of money, he will get right back into that life of crime.

The only people who should be locked up for more then a few months are those who are a danger to society and in that case execution should be on the table. If they are such a danger that you can't ever let them back out, then whats the point of locking them up for the rest of their unnatural lives. Atleast give them the choice of dying rather then spending decades and decades of their miserable existence in some drab tiny cell that would drive even a sane man to insanity.

Now mind you I find any amount of time in jail or prison a horrifying thought, I've been there and would rather die then go back and I was only there for like a week as I was to broke ass to afford to get out while the cops figured out I was defending myself. Actually going back on a permanent basis, nah fuck that, no thank you sir I'll take a chalice of hemlock with a shotgun chaser thank you very much.

[Ralin]

I dunno, Isis are pretty in favour of it.

The shit has that to do with anything?

A quick look at Google says that ISIS is into opium and heroin trafficking, so I'm going to guess that it's a joke about how ISIS would be thrilled to sell morphine for execution purposes.

[madd0ct0r]

I dunno, Isis are pretty in favour of it.

The shit has that to do with anything?

He wants to tell us that he's so much more moral than we are.

Nah, it was just a crack about sourcing morphine for executions. Seeing as it's a big money spinner for the Taliban and Da'esh.