No it is not - because it doesn't fall under the term unusual which is a requirement for the 8th. Having your thumbs screwed off before execution would probably apply however.

-S

It could be considered cruel.

The object of capital punishment is the death of the criminal, not the painful and drawn-out death of the criminal.

Have you guys read Starship Troopers, because this is one of the great debates in the book.

Is it more cruel to lock someone in a cell for 5 years or give them 30 lashes with whip and let them go? And which is more a deterrant.

A little off topic but look at the military. Is it better to take a misguided private behind the barracks and give him a beating, or give the guy an Article 15 and maybe ruin his career?

Well I might prefer the 30 lashes over 5 years incarceration but we shouldn't mix punishment for murder and other capital crimes with lesser offenses. IMO there are some crimes which invalidate any efforts to rehabilitate the perpetrator.

As Tchocky says the object of capital punishment is the death of the criminal. I agree that should be done in the most painless method available, but, lacking a totally painless method (if one indeed exists) then next least painless method should be applied.

I have read some real horror stories about lethal injection. It does seem to not be a very nice way to go, but then again, that's death for you. Electric chairs cook you, nooses fail, you'll choke and cough in a gas chamber... I'm against capital punishment for its ineffective deterrent capacity, its cost, its inhumanity, etc etc but if I had to go, I'd take the firing squad. But even that has a lasting psychological impact on the executioners.

Not really, because none of them know who fired the killing bullet - some were given blanks, and some real bullets. None knew which they had when the trigger was pulled, and simply aimed to make sure the person being executed didn't feel much.

You guys do know that a bullet only costs about 7 cents U.S.? Much cheaper and just as efficient as chemicals, electricity, and ropes etc.

Really? Where are you buying your bullets because I must be buying them in the wrong place. 50 rds of .45 costs me about $12 for FMJ. That is over 3x the price!

30 cents per rd for LC 5.56 is normal too. Where do I find this 7 cent deal? .22 caliber?

Dillon reloading press, and gunshow deals (harder to find nowadays though).

Although that's the custom I don't believe it is a valid remedy, however I think a belief in justice, IE that the condemned deserves to die for his crime, would be.

Besides, nobody is ever forced to be in a firing squad, at least not in the US and certainly not in a civilian execution. They would all be volunteers and therefore likely to believe in what they are doing.

And yeah Fatty, I'd take a firing squad over any of the other means of execution if I had to make the choice as well.

Im not american so why would i care in the slightest about their constitution ?

In my view a murderer does not deserve to live. We certainly dont want them stuck in prison all their natural life - it costs far too much.
Better clean up the scum and get rid of them. Execution should be performed by the cheapest and easiest in terms of logistics method possible. No other factors should have a say in it.

Actually, thinking about it, the metal bolts they use for cattle should be cheap, effective and reusable.

Its not just about the American constitution. I don't think that there is a single western constitution that says that criminals don't have a right to not be tortured.

Though some here seem to have a sick desire to see others suffer terrible pain, the argument that because they are criminals it doesn't matter, is barbaric and completely against the spirit of constitutional law. Every nation that holds human rights dear guarentees them above retribution.

If ending a criminals life is considered constitutional then the goal of the punishment is to deny him life. Any part of the American constitution does not condone the intentional or ancillary effect of torture or unncessary pain. The purpose of capital punishment is simply to deny life, and nothing more. All constitutions in the western world are similar in this case where they allow for execution.

The argument that you don't care if they feel pain or not is moot since it is already a legal precedent that they should not. Skybird pointed this out in his first post. Personal opinion is irrelavent anyway since the constitution is above ideological viewpoints.

Concerning whether its possible to die without pain, I don't know why lethal injection uses the chemicals that it does. What about morphine? I've read that death by morphine overdose is calm and painless. Doctors that help terminal patients die use this drug. Also doctors often place patients in medically induced comas. This is also done without pain. Certainly then if an inmate were in a coma he wouldn't feel pain.

There are obvioulsy ways to end a person's life without pain. Arguing that they don't have that right is to therefore argue against constitutionally guarenteed rights. And even if you argue that there is some 'wiggle room' in terms of how much pain can be allowed, if there is a means to avoid it then there is no reason not to.

:/\\chop

I must agree on both. The first, because my understanding of penalty being an effort to change the behavior of an offender in the future (and/or that of others who watch his example) leads me to conclude that some people may be immune to rehabilitation and and alteration of behavior. The second - well, that is clear.

Easiest solution: simply use an anesthetic like during surgery, and then do whatever is considered to be necessary. Or use overdosed Morphine.

Because the constitution is part of the problem being adressed in this thread. Maybe it's the thread then that you are not interested in.


P_Funk,

great answer of yours, that almost totally summarizes my views.