

Oklahoma botches first execution in 80 years - jwise0
http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-oklahoma-execution-20140429,0,7854122.story

======
chroma
I'm against the death penalty, but I dislike many of the arguments made by
many who agree with me. My position is straightforward: I assert that the
state should not have the power of life and death over its subjects. That's
it. No need to address implementation details involving racism and cruelty and
deterrence.

Really though, politics is the mindkiller[1] and this article isn't going to
change anyone's position. I'm glad it will soon fall off the front page. (Even
if it gets upvoted, I trust the moderators to bury it.)

1\.
[http://lesswrong.com/lw/gw/politics_is_the_mindkiller/](http://lesswrong.com/lw/gw/politics_is_the_mindkiller/)

~~~
mikeash
To me, your argument is simply a restatement of the conclusion. To be a real
argument, it needs to add something.

~~~
chroma
I don't disagree with you, and in fact I never said my position was an
argument. Most of us use assertions when it comes to human rights. For
example, most of us would agree that the state doesn't (or shouldn't) have the
power to enslave or torture, no matter what crime one may have committed.
There may be very good arguments for doing these things (deterrence, saves
more lives than it destroys, punishment proportional to the crime, etc), but
we outright reject any system that would allow, let alone engage in, these
horrific practices.

~~~
mikeash
We can still talk about _why_ those things are worth rejecting. You don't seem
to want that.

~~~
chroma
I don't mind the discussion, but I think the arguments on both sides are
typically rationalizations. People have quick, visceral responses in which
they form conclusions on these matters, then they think of reasons why those
conclusions must be true. That process seems to happen in a lot of areas, but
none more so than discussion of politics and morality.

By the way: Thank you for your responses. I like how you've managed to be
concise, civil, and probing.

------
iandanforth
I can only say I hope to live to see the day the death penalty is abolished
once and for all in the United States.

~~~
b6
I hate injustice. I hate the idea of an innocent person being put to death. I
hate strange inventions like the electric chair, which must be an absolutely
excruciating death.

But sometimes people do terrible things and incur a debt that they can never
repay. In one particular case I remember, the guilty party abducted a child,
raped her repeatedly, put her in a trash bag, and buried her alive. There's no
doubt he was guilty because he led police to her grave.

The perpetrator could never ever walk among normal people again. What do you
propose to do in these situations? Is it somehow useful for these people to
languish in prison at the expense of the public? Would that somehow be more
correct, helpful, or humane? This is not a fake question where I'm attacking
you -- this is a real question I struggle with.

~~~
thatswrong0
Many who sexually abuse others were themselves sexually abused. This is not
excusing their actions, but it absolutely should be kept in mind when
considering the punishment for any sort of crime. From petty to heinous, many
people who commit crimes come from very shitty situations. And even those that
don't often simply have mental issues.

What about the truly evil? Should we not consider them 'sick'? The problem is
that justice is seen entirely from a punitive perspective. I hope, in the
future, that most crimes will be treated with not a punitive hand but a
rehabilitative one. Drug abuse should be met with rehab, not mandatory
minimums. Likewise, hopefully it will become the case that we will try to
treat violent offenders instead of just carting them off to prison to rot or
commit crimes again upon release. Prisons wouldn't disappear of course, but
hopefully they would become options of last resort instead of the first
solution.

------
themartorana
Not trolling - actually confused - why would you resuscitate a person you're
attempting to kill? So you can kill them again later?

So much wrong with this. The death penalty to begin with, the "experimental"
method of carrying out the execution, and the attempts to save his life - the
whole thing is utterly mind-numbing.

------
jakejake
I'm not expressing any opinion on the death penalty itself but I found it odd
that his execution was "botched." The crime he was convicted of committing 15
years ago was a "botched" murder where the gun malfunctioned, leaving the
victim injured and requiring some repair to his gun in order to finish the
job.

------
BorisMelnik
I heard about this on NPR last week. Apparently a lot of states have been
running out of the drug that is used in lethal injection and lawyers are
actually able to postpone death sentences because of the fact that new drugs
are not approved.

This news will not boast well for future States attorney's.

------
bruceb
Most people who face the death penalty are guilty a few are not. Is it worth
killing the innocent to serve up "justice" to the guilty? No.

------
geeknik
The title says first execution in 80 years, but it was supposed to be the
first double execution in 80 years.

------
powera
The inmate still died. It's almost double-talk to call it "botched" when you
accidentally kill someone a different way than you were intending to kill
them.

~~~
freehunter
What seems odd to me is that, of all the ways humans know how to kill each
other, the government is having a hard time trying to find a reliable way to
do so now that they can't get the same drug they used to. There's no reason to
have a "botched" execution when killing someone doesn't really take that much
effort in the first place. And then calling off the execution after the drugs
have been administered? Yeah, something is terribly wrong.

~~~
jack-r-abbit
The issue is not that they don't know of any ways to kill a person. The issue
is they are required to do it without pain and suffering. And we don't know if
this went wrong because of the drugs or because they were administered
incorrectly. It is possible that even if the old drug was used here that the
same problem could have happened. It might just be a stupid coincidence that
the IV was placed improperly during the same execution they used these new
drugs for the first time.

