Torturing Murderers to Death for the Greater Good

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam. He is completing a book on the international challenges America faces in the 21st century.


Electric Chair DoctorThe return of the electric chair has death penalty opponents papering the walls with outraged press releases even though they’re the ones responsible for bringing ‘Old Sparky’ back.

Opponents of the death penalty made the most of Clayton Lockett’s prolonged death, but it wasn’t the state that made his death slow and painful. The liberal activists who rushed out to claim that Lockett’s death proved that the death penalty was a cruel punishment had deliberately made it that way.

Oklahoma was forced to use a new and untried drug cocktail to put down the brutal murderer and rapist because death penalty opponents had cut off the supply of reliable pharmaceuticals. Due to pressure by domestic activists and the European Union on pharmaceutical companies, states have been forced to secretly assemble drug cocktails of medications without the knowledge of their manufacturers. Each lawsuit filed by the pro-criminal lobby risks revealing the means by which a medication was obtained and shutting down its supply channel.

Executions in the United States are rare and a tiny part of the market for pharmaceutical companies who would rather please liberal regulators and the medical establishment.  While prison systems work to ease the suffering of condemned prisoners, the death penalty activists who claim to care about them labor night and day to make their executions as painful as possible.

There is a method to their cruelty.

In 2008, the Supreme Court ruled that lethal injection did not represent cruel and unusual punishment. The question hinged in part on the risk of pain through the procedure. In 2010, the American Board of Anesthesiologists warned it would decertify any anesthesiologist participating in the death penalty. Then the supply of sodium thiopental, the medication mentioned in the ruling, was cut off.

The goal was to raise the “substantial risk” of serious pain in lethal injections and move the Supreme Court toward outlawing or suspending the death penalty. The worse an execution went, the more likely it was that future executions would be stopped based on the risk of it happening again. By making lethal injection as messy as possible, the pro-criminal lobby was torturing killers now to save future killers.

Lockett’s execution showcased the left’s warped morality and brought its goal closer.

European countries continue to use sodium thiopental, whose export to the United States they refuse to allow because of the death penalty, to kill their own people.

Belgium, which uses sodium thiopental for euthanasia, voted to euthanize children. The Netherlands, which employs sodium thiopental for the same purpose, permits killing children over the age of twelve. The last “minor” executed in the US was a man in his thirties who at the age of seventeen had set a couple on fire after locking them in the trunk of their own car.

In the UK, which was the first to cut off the supply of sodium thiopental, the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists proposed “active euthanasia” for disabled children because, “A very disabled child can mean a disabled family.”

European countries condemn the cruelty of lethal injection for murderers, but use the same method to kill their children. Despite their posturing over the death penalty they are not our moral superiors. Like their Third Reich counterparts who also murdered sick and disabled children, they are on the same moral level as the murderers we execute.

It’s no wonder they oppose the death penalty.

Driven by that same foul mix of self-righteousness and sadism, death penalty opponents want to make executions appear as grotesque as possible so that voters, politicians, judges and juries will be more reluctant to follow through when the electric chair replaces the needle.

But they don’t intend to stop there.

While some opponents of the death penalty act on religious grounds, most are pro-criminal advocates. Their agenda is to damage the justice system as much as possible through lawfare that exploits its weak points. They believe that the criminal justice system is a capitalist tool for protecting private property and oppressing minorities. Their lawfare seeks to overload the criminal justice system and make every phase of it as expensive and burdensome as possible so as to discourage and limit its use.

Outlawing the death penalty is only one step in their campaign to free as many criminals as possible.

After California’s death penalty was shut down by a Clinton judge, more Federal judges stepped in ordering California to release 46,000 prisoners after ruling that prison overcrowding was, like the death penalty, cruel and unusual punishment.

Supreme Court Justice Alito warned that “the majority is gambling with the safety of the people of California.”

A quarter of California prisoners are lifers and so the state has gone from tough sentencing laws supported by the voters to a judicial activism forcing it to free 1,400 lifers in the past three years.

81% of California lifers are murderers. 10% are attempted murderers. 6% are rapists.

After 2008, 3,000 lifers were freed; over 1,000 more than had been freed in three decades. Governor Jerry Brown has been responsible for the lowest rate of parole denials of all three previous governors.

The overcrowding ruling was a means of extracting murderers from prison, just as the death penalty ruling was a means of keeping them alive. The endgame for the pro-criminal lobby, whether its members call themselves death penalty opponents or prison reform activists, is to free criminals.

California shows that for the pro-criminal lobby the next step after the death penalty is revolving door prisons for murderers and rapists. Obama has been doing his part to help free drug dealers and crackheads through what his attorney general, euphemistically, calls sentencing reform, but at the state level this is a war fought by leftist lawyers and radical foundations against the families of their victims.

Violent crime rates in the US have dropped sharply because increased prison sentences took career criminals off the street. Average time served for violent criminals increased by 37%. The $10 billion cost criticized by the pro-criminal lobby was modest compared to the savings in human lives and budgets when the murder rate was nearly cut in half.

There were 20,000 fewer rapes, 300,000 fewer aggravated assaults and 270,000 fewer robberies.

These successes gave the public a false sense of security leading to decreased support for the death penalty and increased support for pro-criminal leniencies. Like a patient who wants to stop taking antibiotics because he feels better, some forgot that crime hadn’t been solved; only locked behind bars.

Once crime rates rebound under the impact of the pro-criminal “reforms”, the backlash will lead to a return to harsh penalties. Meanwhile tens of thousands will suffer until the effects kick in on a large enough scale to destroy any public support for the pro-criminal lobby and its killer clients. And then the only legacy of their efforts will be the corpses stacked in morgues and rape victims in hospitals.

Victims of their cruel war against life sentences and the death penalty.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Subscribe to Frontpage’s TV show, The Glazov Gang, and LIKE it on Facebook.

  • truebearing

    If we requested sodium thiopental for the purpose of euthanizing children, perhaps Europe would relent and let us have some, as long as we promise to not use it on any viscious murderers. I’ll bet if John Holdren wanted some to put in the drinking water of Global Warming Deniers, Europe would send it over by the oil tanker load.

    There is no coherence to the Left. They routinely oppose foreign wars, but in the 20th Century, engaged in prolonged domestic wars where they killed 100,000,000 million people living in leftist regimes. They oppose putting deranged psychopaths to death, but use socialized medicine to kill people by denied care, or in some cases, by euthanasia. They celebrate the evil and destroy the innocent.

    There is an arbitrariness to the things the Left opposes and the things they do when in power. They seem need to see people suffer or die to validate their exertion of power, and they identify with criminals, not victims, despite all of their posturing. This consistent need to express power in an arbitrary and destructive manner is evil. The Left is a cult of malignant narcissism.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      The left is drawn to evil. It believes that morality is aiding and loving evil and hating and being cruel to the innocent.

      • truebearing

        They will evil, therefore they are evil. It has kind of a Cartesian ring to it. If I knew latin I could help the Left with their own signature “cogito.”

      • nomoretraitors

        The left is drawn to evil because they ARE evil

    • Wolfthatknowsall

      Somehow, I missed your comment, which I wholeheartedly agree with.

      One of the main reasons the Left defends evil is because they cannot attain absolute power without evil’s consent.

      On an old Simpsons episode … a show I don’t watch anymore because I seriously hate the little girl, and want to shoot her – a problem when the “little girl” is a cartoon character … the local GOP committee met to formulate their plans. Among them were Hitler, Rush Limbaugh, the guy who runs the nuke plant, Homer, Richard Nixon, Dracula, and Satan. The message of the producers was clear. The GOP is evil.

      But the producers made a mistake. They are Leftists. They did a little projecting, I think …

      • truebearing

        It never ceases to amaze me when I look at the thinking of the Left. They consider it “barbaric” for the state to prosecute and execute depraved murderers, yet want a form of statism that has murdered tens of millions of innocent people for simply having a political opinion that doesn’t suit them. The inevitable corner they paint themselves into is that: nothing is justifiable unless they are in power, but if they are in power, the state can do no wrong. This is the hallmark arbitrarianism of people who operate without a moral code.

        You can see how morality informs rationality by looking at the Left’s absence of morality. Rationality soon morphs into twisted rationalizing once the guidelines of morality are gone.

        • Wolfthatknowsall

          I am absolutely convinced that the Left has millions of murders in mind for America, when they come to power. What would they do with someone like you or I who absolutely refuse to submit to them?

          Truebearing, I cannot be re-educated, so they just as well do away with me, before I infect young people with the love of liberty through fundamental rights and law. They will do it “for the children” …

          • truebearing

            I just assume the Left will be like the Left of the 20th Century, with some subtle changes. They will use situations that they create to eliminate people, such as death panels. I call it “situational negative eugenics.” That is exactly what Daniel pointed out in his post. They created a situation where they manipulated things to block the supply of Sodium thiopental to make executions seem more abhorrent. They are sneekier than the blundering, blood thirsty Bolsheviks or Mao’s psychotic mobs, but more cowardly, too.

            If they win, they will give us the death penalty…you know…the one they pretended to oppose.

            All I can say is “go down swinging.” You know the Left’s history. They don’t suffer resistance kindly. If we don’t prevail and they come a knockin’, make them earn their power. I was planning on dying someday anyway.

    • drthomasedavis

      Well stated, truebearing. I like your style.

      • truebearing

        Thanks.

    • Lightbringer

      Great observations as always, Truebearing. But I think that you mean vicious murderers in your first paragraph, as their viscosity or lack thereof doesn’t seem especially relevant to their behavior. ;-)

      • truebearing

        Good point. It is the Left that is viscous and reminiscent of a tar pit. I’ll correct that.

    • tagalog

      Keep one interesting apparent principle of the left in mind: if murdering huge numbers of people within a nation is something that must be left to the people of the nation, and if righties are as evil and fascistic as the left thinks they are, lefties in America are at great risk, aren’t they?

    • nomoretraitors

      Criminals are the left’s class allies

  • http://www.acadp.com/ ACADP (Australia)

    The major reason why European countries, Canada, Australia, etc. abolished the death penalty long ago, is because the system is flawed, racist, discriminative and often corrupt. Meanwhile, the USA (5th top world executioner behind China, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia) should hang their heads in shame for the fact that 144 prisoners have been released from death row in the last four decades alone, after evidence emerged of their wrongful conviction. Just how many people have been wrongly executed is anyone’s guess. As for the gruesome spectacle of many botched executions, it just goes to prove that the USA is incapable of getting their criminal justice system in order – a broken system that is rotten to the very core.

    In the words of former Illinois (USA) Governor George Ryan … “Our death penalty system is haunted by the demon of error – error in determining guilt – and error in determining ‘who’ among the guilty deserves to die.”

    • http://www.chaverimisrael.org Norbert Haag

      Flawed, racist and often corrupt?

      Is that your judgment about the judicial system in the longest democracy which has its roots in the common law, individual freedom and self-responsibility?

      What kind of law do you prefer? The law of the tyrants, socialist, society, oligarchs?

      Your forefathers and you too, lived in an empire where the upper class and the king determined what the law is. Your countries prefer government to rule, i.e. control its subjects.

      The Americans prefer to rule over the government.

      Big difference.

      • masteradrian

        “longest democracy”?
        Get your history lessons back please!

        • American Patriot

          The Soviet Union had the longest dictatorship in modern history with roughly 74 years. Communist Cuba has the longest dictatorship in the Western Hemisphere with over 55 years. North Korea and Communist China each have the longest dictatorship in modern Asia with around six and a half decades each. In all of those regimes, capital punishment was/is a way of life. Why don’t you condemn that?

        • http://www.chaverimisrael.org Norbert Haag

          Oh really, you tell me the truth now, don’t you.

          Which country has the longest history of democratic rule?

          If you come up with one existing longer than the USA I will concede you have a point.

          You won’t.

    • Jakareh

      “Just how many people have been wrongly executed is anyone’s guess.”

      As how many have been proven to be innocent, that’s not a guess. The number is zero. Something else that amounts to zero is our respect for liberals who coddle heinous criminals but support murdering the innocent through abortion and euthanasia.

      • masteradrian

        144 people turned out to be innocent, and were released from death row! 144 people who were wrongly convicted, and thus innocent of the crime they were accused of!

        And go somewhere were the sun doesn’t shine with your religious based opinions on and about abortion and euthanasia!

        • Daniel Greenfield

          And what of the people who ‘choose’ death because they are depressed.

          Do they get a chance to change their minds once they’re dead?

          http://www.nbcnews.com/news/other/painless-death-or-precipitous-cliff-transsexual-chooses-euthanasia-after-failed-f8C11339134

        • objectivefactsmatter

          “144 people turned out to be innocent, and were released from death row!”

          Um, no. That’s not how it works.

        • Jakareh

          Here’s a good bit of advice: ending every sentence with an exclamation point doesn’t make you even slightly more persuasive!

          If 144 probably innocent individuals being sent to death row but not executed is an argument against the death penalty, then a much larger number being sent to an ordinary prison is an argument against incarceration. After all, it’s horrific for an innocent person to be kept in prison. In other words, liberal shit-for-brains like you don’t want criminals punished.

        • JayWye

          actually INNOCENT,or were there technicalities that resulted in their being freed? I suspect that many if not most reversals are due to ridiculous technicalities or recantations due to the long passage of time.
          OTOH,I fully support awarding the same penalty the wrongfully accused received to anyone found to have perjured or falsified evidence that resulted in the wrongful conviction of a person.

          but,at least in the US,no executed person has been later found to have been innocent. and the liberals would be screaming any case where that was true,if any existed. That hasn’t happened.

          • masteradrian

            1. Someone who is wrongfully convicted IS by definition innocent, even when that “wrongfully” is based on a technicality! The reason for the conviction was a wrong one! THAT is the point.

            2. Apart of the sick reference towards liberals (or what is referred to as liberals but often if not always are people with a sole interest in human rights and are mostly even without any party connection!) I wonder (and that is a serious question!) IF there has been any investigation into cases were the execution has taken place but doubt was existing about the guilt of the executed individual! I don’t know and I am sure there people around who w/could know the detailed answers to this question!

    • Gislef

      “As for the gruesome spectacle of many botched executions”

      How many botched executions in the U.S. have their been?

      FYI, every execution succeeded.

      • Wolfthatknowsall

        I remember the scene from The Green Mile when an execution was purposely botched by one of the guards. When an angry prison wardon was asked what they would say, he said it was a successful execution. The man, in question, was dead.

        By the way, all of the executions at Nuremberg were purposely botched by the hangman, who had successfully hung over 300 criminals. Sometimes, a little torture is justified …

        • UCSPanther

          That monster whose botched execution they were all up in arms about: He would have been a fitting candidate for the old “breaking on a wheel”.

          That method would make any kind of botched lethal injection look humane in comparison…

        • masteradrian

          Come over, and we have a justified little torture…… You will like it!

          • Drakken

            Silly little children like you shouldn’t try to bark with the big dogs son, stay on the porch with the pups where you belong.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            That’s the point: If you think you’re at risk from our law enforcement, stay away.

          • truebearing

            Reading your nonsense is a little torturous. Maybe you should be banned.

    • Gislef

      “Meanwhile, the USA should hang their heads in shame for the fact that 144
      prisoners have been released from death row in the last four decades
      alone, after evidence emerged of their wrongful conviction.”

      So it’s shameful that the U.S. didn’t execute 144 prisoners.

      That would seem to be proof that the system, with all of its delays, works.

      It also contradicts your argument “Just how many people have been wrongly executed is anyone’s guess.”

      • masteradrian

        144 people were wrongly convicted and released from death row, and if their innocence would not have been found they would have been murdered, based on false statements and what more!

        • Daniel Greenfield

          It takes a long time to put anyone to death. By that time every piece of evidence has been turned over 500 times.

        • American Patriot

          What about the people who were wrongfully acquitted?

          • Daniel Greenfield

            and then went on to kill again…

          • American Patriot

            At that point, they can’t be tried again for the same crime because of double jeopardy. Not many countries have double jeopardy. The case of Emmett Till’s killers was one of many examples of how double jeopardy had gone wrong. If anti-capital punishment advocates like masteradrian had everything they wanted, James Byrd, Jr.’s killers would have walked free instead of on death row. But of course, the left ignores those details.

          • bigjulie

            Hey…Barky just released what? 38,000 convicted felons because they were so-called “illegal aliens”. Gone! Scott free!! Many were murderers and rapists. And, as we speak, they are walking around free on our streets, looking for more victims.

        • objectivefactsmatter

          Wrongly convicted does not necessarily equal innocent.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      How many children have been released from euthanasia in Europe?

      None? Well clearly your system is superior.

    • Wolfthatknowsall

      My friend, I live in Illinois. The main reason he did away with the death penalty, in this state, is because he had committed crimes that he was likely to be imprisoned for, and he wanted the assistance of Mayor Richard Daley, of Chicago, and Mike Madigan, the majority leader in the State Legislature, in making those things go away.

      Once the DEMs got what they wanted, they put Ryan right where he belonged … in prison. Another of a long list of Illinois governors who have ended up in similar circumstances …

      And for those of you who are on the Left, it always boils down to “racism”, doesn’t it?

      • truebearing

        They can’t think. What else do they have?

    • UCSPanther

      You Australians are just as bad as the Swedes when it comes to defending your warped socialist systems…

    • American Patriot

      And do you think every country in the world should support abortion? By the way, many other countries use capital punishment besides the United States. Unlike America, almost all of the capital punishment cases in other countries involve convicting people whose sole “crime” was being a political dissident, a homosexual or refusing to support the regime’s policies. Why don’t you denounce capital punishment in Communist Cuba?

    • liz

      Typical leftist response to every problem – rather than reform the system and correct the problems, replace the entire system with one that makes the problems infinitely worse.

      • JayWye

        they demand a PERFECT system,well knowing that no such perfection can be achieved.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      “Meanwhile, the USA (5th top world executioner behind China, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia) should hang their heads in shame for the fact that 144 prisoners have been released from death row in the last four decades alone, after evidence emerged of their wrongful conviction…”

      Because they were released and we have such a high burden for proof?

      I don’t think so. It shows the system works and we take great pains to ensure that we don’t punish innocent people. Your statistics only show that the appellate process some times let’s people go after review. That’s it.

    • JayWye

      You’re demanding that any system created by humans be PERFECT,and kill -only- those who are “not innocent”. and in doing so,you’re willing to tolerate many others killed or maimed by those who should have been executed. That includes guards and other prisoners,along with those killed during escapes. I’m glad you’re in Australia,and not in the US.

      • http://www.acadp.com/ ACADP (Australia)

        Oh yes, we agree that we are happy, and proud too, to be in Australia and not in the USA. Your death penalty system is not only broken beyond repair, but has created a brutalizing affect on your society. Do your research and you will awaken to the fact that the USA continues to have the highest crime rates per capita, and the highest incarceration rates per capita, than any other country in the world. (Australian has no death penalty and yet has below world average crime rates). Then there are America’s school children shooting each other dead, and I could go on, but I’m sure you must be embarrassed enough already.
        http://www.mapsofworld.com/world-top-ten/countries-with-highest-reported-crime-rates.html

  • 95Theses

    This article originally appeared 14 years ago in the National Review.
    Unfortunately, it cannot be accessed from their website archives. But since
    very few people seem to be aware of this method of execution, I am posting it
    here in its entirety. I hope you will excuse my taking the liberty.

    Killing with Kindness – Capital Punishment by Nitrogen Asphyxiation
    Capital punishment needn’t be cruel or unusual — especially if you use nitrogen
    asphyxiation to put people to sleep.
    1995, September 11 | Stuart A. Creque

    Last October, Judge Marilyn Hall Patel of the 9th U.S. District Court ruled that
    execution in California’s gas chamber is a form of cruel and unusual
    punishment, the first ruling ever by a state or federal judge to invalidate a
    method of execution on Eighth Amendment grounds. She noted that the evidence showed that the condemned man might remain conscious for several minutes, experiencing the emotions of ‘anxiety, panic, terror,’ as well as ‘exquisitely painful muscle spasms’ and ‘intense visceral pain.’

    On its face, Judge Patel’s ruling applies only to the gas chamber, but every method of execution in current use involves toxic chemicals or physical trauma to induce death — and every method can go awry. An ideal hanging snaps the condemned man’s neck cleanly; a botched one either strangles him slowly or severs the head entirely from the body. A firing squad that misses its mark leaves the condemned man conscious as he bleeds to death. In the electric chair, according to eyewitness accounts, some condemned men have literally been cooked until their flesh was charred and loosened from the bone; some had sparks and flame emanating from their cranial-cap electrodes.

    Besides society’s concern for the condemned man’s physical suffering, all of these methods implicitly require an executioner to inflict some degree of trauma upon the condemned. Concern for the executioner’s conscience drives such customs as loading one of the guns for a firing squad with a blank cartridge, so that each member of the squad can imagine that his will be the non-lethal shot. And with lethal injection, the executioner’s use of skills and procedures normally
    devoted to life-saving poses ethical questions for medical caregivers.

    Given these defects, abolitionists will presumably press to have each of these
    methods declared ‘cruel and unusual.’ The intended result of these efforts is to make the death penalty unconstitutional in practice, even if it remains constitutional in theory.

    It is in fact possible to conceive of a method of execution that would cause neither pain nor physical trauma, require no medical procedure (other than pronouncing death), and use no hazardous chemicals. A case of accidental death suggests such a method.

    Early in the Space Shuttle program, a worker at Kennedy Space Center walked into an external fuel tank (a vessel nearly as big inside as a Boeing 737) to inspect it. He was not aware that it had been purged with pure nitrogen gas to prevent oxygen in the air from corroding its interior. Since nitrogen is the major
    component of ordinary air, pure nitrogen has no distinctive feel, smell, or taste; the worker had no indication that anything was out of the ordinary. After walking a short distance into the tank, he lost consciousness and collapsed. A co-worker, not realizing that his collapse had an external cause, ran in to aid him and succumbed also. By the time other workers realized what was happening, the two men were dead.

    More recently, a bizarre accident involving nitrogen killed two people in the Bay
    Area. They had stolen from a hospital a gas cylinder containing what they
    thought was laughing gas. However, the cylinder contained not the anaesthetic
    nitrous oxide but pure nitrogen. When the two men stopped their car to partake
    of their booty, the nitrogen gas displaced the air in the car, leaving them
    without oxygen. Had they had any indication of the problem, they could have
    saved their lives simply by opening the car doors.

    These deaths were similar in cause to a relatively common drowning accident known as shallow-water blackout, mentioned specifically in certification classes for recreational scuba diving. When a person is skin diving (that is, without scuba gear), his bottom time is limited by how long he can hold his breath.
    Occasionally, a skin diver will attempt to lengthen the time he can stay under by hyperventilating before a dive. Unfortunately, this can lead to his losing
    consciousness underwater, sometimes only a few feet before reaching the
    surface.

    The connection between nitrogen asphyxiation and shallow-water blackout lies in human respiratory physiology. When you hold your breath, you begin to develop a powerful urge to breathe. This is caused not by the depletion of oxygen from your body, but by the buildup of carbon dioxide in your bloodstream, which changes the pH of the blood. The ambitious skin diver “blows off” most of the carbon dioxide in his bloodstream when he hyperventilates; as a result, he notices the urge to breathe much later than he normally would, at a point when his blood oxygen is dangerously low. If his blood oxygen falls too low before he reaches the surface, he blacks out and drowns. Because the Kennedy Space Center workers continued to exhale carbon dioxide with each breath, neither of them noticed an unusual urge to breathe, even though they were completely deprived of oxygen.

    Nitrogen asphyxiation is a unique way to die. The victim is not racked by a choking sensation or a burning urge to breathe, because as far as his body knows, he is breathing normally. Carbon dioxide is not building up in his bloodstream, so he never realizes that anything is wrong, nor does he experience any discomfort; he simply passes out when his blood oxygen falls too low.

    Nitrogen asphyxiation is therefore a perfect method of execution. It uses a cheap and universally available working medium that requires no special environmental precautions for its storage and disposal. Its first symptom is loss of conscious sensation, a primary goal in a humane execution. It involves no
    physical trauma, no toxic drugs; the executed man’s organs will even be
    suitable for donation, a factor cited in a recent stay of execution for a
    Georgia killer.

    Assuming that the prisoner’s guilt has been sufficiently proved, nitrogen asphyxiation is perhaps the most gentle way to deal with him. A condemned man awaiting death by nitrogen asphyxiation would experience no more pain or suffering than he created in his own mind.

    COPYRIGHT 1995 National Review, Inc.

    http://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=470491
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inert_gas_asphyxiation#cite_note-Creque-18

    • Lightbringer

      Great article. Thanks!

      • 95Theses

        Thee is welcome.

      • 95Theses

        I don’t understand why this option is not now even being considered. It would end the debate about the inhumanity of capital punishment by sucking the wind out of every “cruel and unusual” objection. Not to mention that this process would completely eliminate any possibility of unintended complication(s) because the end is assured 100% of the time — and all the while being cost effective. What’s not to like? Even from the condemned man’s point of view, I think this is the logical choice.

        • Lightbringer

          Nitrogen narcosis, called “the rapture of the deep” by divers, isn’t such a bad way to go.

          • Guest1

            FWIW, this isn’t the same thing though. There is no rapture here, just a passing out.

    • Guest1

      This, nitrogen asphyxiation, has the great advantage that it is also a virgin-denying method of execution. If Jihadists are executed this way they don’t get their 72 virgins, because no blood is drawn. Execution by lethal injection, because it draws a little blood, is virgin-supplying, not considered virgin-denying. If Jihadists are to be executed, they should be executed in a virgin-denying manner.

      The deterrance effect of execution is important — the incentive effect of virgin-supply should be neutralized.

      • 95Theses

        The things I learn here! Thanks.

        And I’m definitely not interested in accepting one of their organs should the need for a transplant ever arise. Does that sound … heartless?

  • Hktony

    Sometimes I have got to give it to muslims. They just chop and it’s over. The liberals love them so much why don’t they support that??
    I dont believe in killing people seems wrong somehow. An eye for an eye and all that, very islamic and old testament. Thought we’d moved on?? Maybe not.

    • Elliott

      The “an eye for an eye” that you say comes from the Old Testament cannot be taken literally. At the end of Leviticus the Bible (In Hebrew “Torah”) refers to the Jewish Law as “Torot” – i.e. in the plural. This is a reference to the fact that the rules and regulations in the Written “Torah” (the Five Books of Moses) CANNOT be take at face value; they have to be clarified by the Oral “Torah”, which gives an example of why the “eye for an eye” is NOT literal.
      The Oral “Torah” asks the question: If a one-eyed man pokes out the eye of a person with sight in both eyes, do you square the balance by poking out the remaining eye of the one-eyed man? Although the guy with two eyes now only has one eye functioning – HE CAN SEE. If you remove the sight from the one-eyed man’s GOOD eye HE IS NOW BLIND = total inequality of the deed and its punishment. The “Torah” DID NOT INTEND THIS. The Oral “Torah” clarifies it quite logically.

      In addition, NONE of the punishments listed by the “Torah” can be carried out today. Israel does not have the death penalty on its statute books. If I’m not mistaken eichmann was the sole exception.

      • Lightbringer

        Eichmann was not an exception; there is a death penalty on the books for genocide.

        As to the “eye for an eye”, limb for a limb, etc. punishment, that has been interpreted since earliest times as meaning monetary compensation for an injury that you caused. For example, if you are roughhousing or actually fighting with a man who makes his living as, say, a scribe, and you disable his dominant hand and arm, the court can compel you to support him and his family until the hand and arm heal or, in the case of permanent disability, for life.

        • objectivefactsmatter

          An eye for an eye basically means stop the endless escalations if you want justice. Compensate like for like and then end the conflict. Don’t chop off both arms and legs just because someone caused you to lose an eye.

          And certainly there is nothing wrong with determining that a murderer must exchange his life for the life or lives that he took. But the ultimate call is for justice, so we don’t just ambush and hang people. We give them trials and bend over backwards before deciding that anyone is irredeemable by man’s actions.

          • Lightbringer

            I agree with you on capital punishment being appropriate in cases of deliberate murder. As you say, the ultimate call is for justice. The “eye for an eye” punishment involves compensation for accidental or negligent loss, be it an eye, a limb, or a life.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            Right. It’s establishing like for like justice. Don’t go around looking for “punitive damage” awards for no reason.

      • Douglas J. Bender

        “Eye for an eye” means exactly that. When possible. The “spirit” of the “rule” is that the most equal and equitable and similar punishment be given out, that was “administered” to the victim by the guilty party. If a person has no eyes, and pokes out one of the eyes of his victim, of course an “eye for an eye” cannot apply. But something of roughly equal value could be taken from him — perhaps a hand, or a foot. But when there is the possibility of exactly equal punishment, that’s what should be meted out (regardless of someone becoming blind or not, in this case, for instance).

  • masteradrian

    What an repulsive piece of rubbish, full of,lies and misleading so-called info!

    - No country of the European Union has the death penalty!

    - Euthanasia is nit killing people, nor murdering people! No one in the European Union dies without choosing it!

    - The end on exporting lethal substances to be used for carrying out the death penalty was forced upon the companies creating the lethal substance, but was a decision by the companies themselves!

    - The fact that the United States of America, a supposed civilized country, is murdering citizens for their crimes equals the death penalties of for instance Iran, North Korea, Belarus, China and other countries were dictators rule!

    It is incomprehensible that someone with any common sense is still promoting the death penalty, especially a country that claims to be the defender of freedom and justice, considering the fact it has become a practice of errors, racial reasons and injustices!

    The fact that America still allows the death penalty shows its backwardness, its utter contempt for human life, as well as its stupidity by refusing to acknowledge its errors!

    America should be banned from all international fora, as the world has banned several countries from international fora because these countries maintain the death penalty!

    • objectivefactsmatter

      No need for you to visit then.

      No problem on this end.

      • masteradrian

        I am visiting the US on a monthly basis, and your end doesn’t interest me, for sure!

        • truebearing

          Well, as much fun as it has been, please go back to the dysfunctional mess you came from and stay there. We have enough idiots in this country without regular visits from their relatives.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            He probably dips in and out of the UN. He’s just the kind of moron that siphons off of our resources while spitting on us. Perfect for UN duty.

          • truebearing

            Good point.

            What a joke. The UN is such a failure it should have been ended before it started. Masterdrain thinks poorly enough to be a UN ambassador.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            And probably thinks you just complimented him.

        • objectivefactsmatter

          That’s a real shame.

    • liz

      Actually, it’s people who oppose the death penalty who show their utter contempt for human life – the life of the victims of murderers.
      It’s not “justice” to allow murderers to live.

      • masteradrian

        In other words, retribution and revenge is justice…… Instead of re-socialization and re-education isn’t…….
        The Wild West has passed, is history!

        • liz

          Your concept of justice as “re-socialization and re-education” fits right in with the rest of the socialist Utopia pie-in-the-sky. It’s based on false assumptions that don’t line up with reality, and in the end it causes more harm than the mess it was intended to fix.

        • Wolfthatknowsall

          You’re wrong. At the heart of justice is retribution. The State and the victims (or relatives) should have a say in what the retribution might be.

          The Wild West has passed? Tell it to the inhabitants of countries from Algeria to Indonesia …

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “The Wild West has passed? Tell it to the inhabitants of countries from Algeria to Indonesia …”

            You’re talking to a paternalistic politically correct racist. We in the United States must be held to the highest standards…because if we can’t deliver Utopian paradise to the world then obviously communism is the only other choice.

        • truebearing

          “Re-socialization and re-education”? Those aren’t working theories of modern psychology or psychiatry. That is the psycho-babble of sociology, and in particular the lies of political correctness.

          I propose an experiment. You will be sentenced to participate in this experiment due to your undying faith in the redemptive powers of “re-socialization and re-education.” You will be placed in a maximum security prison, in a cell with a death row murderer who has shown the indisputable characteristics of psychopathy. You will be provided all of the teaching materials required to redeem him. You will be locked up with him until you succeed, or are killed by him, whichever comes first. Such a sentence for you is added incentive to “give it all you’ve got” in re-educating the murderer. If you need some other people to create a better social environment, just give us a list of people you know who hold the same self-righteous and idiotic beliefs. We will deliver them to this skull breaking….err..groundbreaking experiment. I’m sure you know about the “soap in the shower” warning, being as enlightened as you are.

          • Drakken

            I can see him sputtering and spilling his tea from here. I’ll bet you a cool grand he doesn’t do it?

          • truebearing

            There is always hope.

        • objectivefactsmatter

          “In other words, retribution and revenge is justice…… Instead of re-socialization and re-education isn’t…….”

          No, “re-socialization” when it’s judged the convict is worthy. Not for every last soul. Some must day.

          “…retribution and revenge is justice…”

          Retribution and revenge are not ipso facto incompatible with justice. But justice is the highest objective in our justice systems. That’s why we refer to them as…never mind.

        • truebearing

          “re-socialization and re-education”

          Are you going to take these criminals back in time and rearrange their lives so that they can experience normal childhood development?

          And what about their genetics? If the inherited narcissistic genes, or other mental illnesses, are you going to fix that in your time machine, too?

          Your ideas are ridiculous.

        • Debbie G

          Capital punishment can be applied without the emotional factor of revenge. If the law of the land says premeditated murder will be punishable by death, it’s plain and simple, you die.

          • masteradrian

            OK… you then also approve of the Law of the Land when it says that women will be stoned to death when they marry a person of another faith!
            Really?
            Honestly?
            Are you sure that the Law of the Land is always right?
            Or that it should perhaps be altered when there is proof it’s not a right and just law after all?
            (I assume at least that you are NOT approving of a Law of the Land that allows/prescribes stoning women who are marrying a person of another faith…… as when you actualy do approve of such Law of the Land that allows/prescribes stoning of women who marry a person from another faith I think and feel that you are as sick as those who enforce such law! And as retarded at that!)

          • Debbie G

            I thought we were talking about laws in the USA. What would you like me to do about Sharia law? Stick to the subject.

          • masteradrian

            Law of the Land is an expression that YOU brought in, not I!
            America is not the only country with Law of the Land definition(s)

            And as far as sharia law is concerned and what one can do about it… very simple: oppose it!
            Were and whenever possible!

            And as to sticking to the topic (subject): the topic of the death penalty (or capital punishment) is an international topic (subject), if you are not able to grasp that, sorry!

          • Debbie G

            I accept your apology.

          • masteradrian

            What apology?
            I did NOT apologize to you for anything, perhaps you did misread the word “sorry” at the end of the line “if you are not able to grasp that, sorry” as an apology… let me clarify:
            THAT sorry was intended to make clear that I would be feeling sorry for your mental inability to see the international aspect of the subject of the death penalty, IF you failed to see the international aspect of the topic of capital punishment.

            NO apology for anything I said!

    • Randy CA

      “No one in the European Union dies without choosing it!”

      No murderer in the US is executed without excepting the risk of being condemned to death.

      • masteradrian

        Ah.. in other words, those who commit crimes that carry the capital punishment are choosing for the death penalty…… that is what you are saying?
        I think that people with for instance people with incurable cancer, or dementia, or not wanting to have an inhuman existence, have another and more valid reason for choosing euthanasia!

        • Daniel Greenfield

          Especially when the choice is made for them…

        • bigjulie

          And who chose you as the ultimate judge of “validity” for “choosing” euthanasia? How “valid” is any decision made by a person with dementia about anything? I don’t know what “master Adrian” has mastered, but it certainly is not the ability for critical thinking.

          • truebearing

            LOL!

    • alericKong

      -London has a much higher crime rate than any US city because it sympathizes with criminals, not victims

      -Death penalty cases have much more scrutiny than euthanasia. Medical companies profit off it.

      -If you plea bargain, you avoid the death penalty.

      -Death penalty is only used in cases of extreme evil, like torture and child murder and the murderer usually admits with absolutely no remorse and often asks for the death penalty.

      -Guards and other prisoners have been murdered horribly by murderers kept alive by death penalty advocates. Victim families have been taunted and tried to be killed by murderers who got off by moronic liberals. The murderers continue to fantasized about raping and killing children while serving life sentences.

      -Murderers are often released back on the streets. Average time served for murder is about 7 years.

      -Not too long ago we didn’t have this problem and Detroit and Chicago were beautiful places to visit. Communists who called themselves liberals found out they can profit selfishly if they destroy those cities by subsidizing broken families and drug addiction and that’s how we got where we are today.

      • fiddler

        “Death penalty is only used in cases of extreme evil”

        The problem is they don’t seem to have a category for evil. To them it is merely a social construct. That provides and out for them as they like to accuse others of being less moral than themselves. Their ambivalence provides the convenient shoulder shrug.

        • Wolfthatknowsall

          The Court system generally can identify evil, when they see it. Even in cases of armed robberies gone wrong, when someone innocent has died, plea bargains are usually offered to offenders.

          But when a prosecutor sees an evil act, there is generally no way he or she will allow a plea bargain, and will seek the death penalty.

          • masteradrian

            Evil is when a system allows a prosecutor to withhold evidence that is in favor of the accused, or a jury declares an accused guilty on basis of his or here skin-color!

            Evil is when judges are part of child-abuse circles and sentence minors to institutions were the same judges have sex-orgies!

            If that is YOUR able court system….. then it is unworthy to even be allowed in a fourth world country!

          • Judahlevi

            Like most leftists, you are extremely judgmental and intolerant of opposing views. To me, this is a sign of infantile emotions and/or lack of maturity.

            Your knee-jerk reactive posts add nothing to this discussion. We don’t take our moral lead from Euros – who have demonstrated quite clearly they can’t even defend themselves.

          • Daniel Greenfield

            Ah so you are familiar with Belgium.

            Funny how a country whose leading figures molest children are so willing to euthanize them.

          • American Patriot

            That happens in Zimbabwe. Anyway, what do you think about the OJ Simpson trial, where the defense attorneys stated this infamous line: “If the glove doesn’t fit, you have to acquit”? How about the fact that the criminal was acquitted by a jury solely because of his race? You are simply a race-obsessed Communist.

          • Lightbringer

            Where on earth do you get your information? You clearly don’t know any more about the U.S. than you do about correct English usage.

          • masteradrian

            Sure, and you are the biggest expert on both…… it shows…

          • Debbie G

            The race card has now been dealt. Please stay in Europe.

      • masteradrian

        Ah! A anti-communist! You should have lived in the era were communists were killed for just being communist! Would have been a great time for you! The McCarthy trials…. remember?

        • Daniel Greenfield

          McCarthy didn’t kill anyone for being a Communist.

          Communists however killed millions for not being Communists… or for being the wrong kind of Communists.

        • American Patriot

          The Rosenbergs weren’t executed for being Communists. They were executed for being traitors to their country by stealing secrets on behalf of a hostile power. It was called treason. And by the way, don’t even try to get into an argument on who killed more people in peace time because Communist dictatorships in different parts of the world with a record of somewhere between 100 and 120 million innocent people killed by Communists in peace time. Communists were simply paranoid about anyone or anything perceived as a threat to their monopoly. Communist dictatorships often accuse pro-democracy dissidents in those countries of being “fascists”, “colonialists”, “counter revolutionaries”, “agents of imperialism” and, in the case of Communist dictatorships in Latin America and the regimes’ proxies, “pitiyanquis” (meaning “Yankee bootlickers”. In other words, US lackeys). Very often, the charges made against opponents of Communist dictatorships were false. Yet, you don’t discuss that because you support Communist dictatorships. You have a double standard on world politics.

        • alericKong

          Nope.

          Joseph Duncan and Wesley Dodd, you would pay for their food, housing, medicine and guards? What about the high probability they will get out again because of criminal advocates?

          You have no problem with Khaled Sheikh Mohammed getting fat off of gourmet food and watching movies in aircoundtioning while hundreds of firemen die coughing up blood?

        • truebearing

          “You should have lived in the era were communists were killed for just being communist!”

          If only…

          You are long on hysteria and incredibly short on facts, but don’t let that stop you from making a fool of yourself. You can say whatever you want. It adds more evidence to the mountains that evince the Left’s utter lack of moral clarity or rationality. Toss in some lies whiile you’re at it. Make it a vintage post from the Left.

        • Lightbringer

          What “McCarthy trials”? There weren’t any. If there had been I would remember, and people born after me would have read of it. I suppose the vast right-wing conspiracy suppressed that information from the American people.

    • Gislef

      “No one in the European Union dies without choosing it!”

      so you’re saying that no developmentally disabled children above the age of 13 have received euthanasia?

      ” was forced upon the companies creating the lethal substance, but was a decision by the companies themselves!”

      If something is forced on someone, it’s not their decision. Which is it?

      • masteradrian

        In what European country have 13 year old developmentally disabled children received euthanasia? Facts please!
        If that has happened, I personally will hunt the ones doing it!

        As to the line you quote: the word NOT was left out in error!
        The line should read: “was NOT forced upon the companies creating the lethal substance, but was a decision by the companies themselves”.

        And besides, the cooperation with an illegal act is punishable, and the death penalty is an illegal act in the European Union, so in a way the companies creating the lethal substance were obligated (legally obliged one can say) to stop exporting the substance to the USA.

    • Gislef

      “No one in the European Union dies without choosing it!”

      Yes, but that’s because they say minors are competent to make choices about killing themselves.

      http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26181615

      • masteradrian

        The “but’ in your comment implies that you disagree, and that you deny minors the right to make their own decision in matters of their own life and death ………….

        • Daniel Greenfield

          Do you feel that a 12 year old is mature enough to make life and death decisions?

          Would you feel comfortable with a 12 year old joining the army?

    • LibertyWriter

      I can recognize bullshit when I see it.

      • masteradrian

        Looking in the mirror?

        • LibertyWriter

          You have to do better than that but then again… you didn’t disappoint me.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Really? Babies who choose to die? Twelve year olds who choose to die?

      America executes the murderers of children. Belgium executes children.

      • masteradrian

        And were are babies euthanized then?
        And 12 year old children with for instance incurable cancer are very well able to know and choose, and were are 12 year old children allowed to choose euthanasia anyway?

        • Daniel Greenfield

          In the Netherlands.

          Do you believe that 12-year olds can vote or drink or join the army?

          Do you believe that they should be tried as adults in criminal cases?

          • masteradrian

            1. Any proof of babies being euthanized in the Netherlands?

            2. No, I do not think that 12 year old children can vote, drink or be joining the army, BUT I do think that 12 year old children can be mature enough, or can have developed so much maturity that they can decide on and about their own lives, in cases of as given the example of incurable cancer.

            3. Under certain circumstances I can agree with a 12 year old being put on trial as an adult yes, depending on the severity of the committed crime and the mental abilities of the child!

            A death sentence would be out of the question, as far as I am concerned.

          • Daniel Greenfield

            1. http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/paediatric-neurosurgeons-criticize-dutch-practice-of-euthanasia-on-babies-w

            2. You don’t think that a 12 year old is mature enough to fight in a war, but is mature enough to agree to let a doctor kill him because he’s in pain?

          • masteradrian

            1. Did you read the full article?
            When the answer is affirmative, and you still feel that euthanisia should not be carried out, you are, in my opinion, none better then mengele, the doctor who carried out excruciating painful medical experiments on human beings in camps during WW2!
            When people, human beings are suffering so much that only and or through by severe medication some pain relieve can be achieved to create a form of acceptable life for that person, then in my opinion it is acceptable to offer euthanasia, yes.
            Allow me to suggest to not to talk about others, but turn the question to yourself, would you be accepting it that you could only live while being so deeply sedated that you would not be able to acknowledge your surroundings, not recognize your family members anymore, that you would be unable to eat but through tubes, that your breathing would be controlled by a machine, that your feaces and urine would be handled by machines because your bowels don’t function anymore? That, in other words your life would have turned from normal to a vegetative state, with no realization of life and being anymore?
            I would appreciate it when that question would be answered.

            2. No, I do not think that, in general a 12 year old child is mature enough to know the difference between for instance good and evil, and thus should not be subjected to military indoctrination, or be allowed to take part in military actions, like fighting wars.

          • Daniel Greenfield

            Mengele killed children. You support killing children.

            If anyone in this conversation is like Mengele, it’s not me.

            The Third Reich was big on euthanasia. Its modern supporters are carrying on its work.

          • masteradrian

            Wrong… Mengele EXPERIMENTED on and TORTURED children, by letting them SUFFER from and by medicines, operations and enduring their pain!
            And though mengele was held responsible for adding suffering to the children, there was and is no evidence of him actually killing any children, he caused the death yes, but did not cut any throats, or stabbed any child with a scalpel or a knife, or ripped out any hearts!

            What I said was, that IF you support children with incurable diseases (like cancer) and other severely dignity and well-being decreasing abilities to continue and even increase their suffering, you would equal to this mengele!

            If you start and keep on twisting my words you only show your sick mind, and your even sicker mentality!

            Were some people in 2014 are in favor of letting children suffer by denying them vaccines, because of for instance religious reasons, I fully and completely support giving children healing and protective vaccines, and I do condemn with all my heart and soul those who deny their children to be vaccinated!

            When God has created suffering and illnesses, God has also created in people the ability to create vaccines, and thus vaccines should also be accepted by people who on religious grounds deny their children a better and healthier life!

            IF you support denying children healing and or preventive vaccines you are in fact endangering the health of children, and then indeed you are as mengele, as well a murderer, a child-killer and a person I feel only the deepest contempt and disgust for!

            And last, I do NOT support killing children, I support fully and wholeheartedly every effort of helping children minimizing as much as possible their suffering, present and possible future suffering!

    • Webb Cook

      Our 2nd Amendment obviates the death penalty in many instances. Michael Kirby, a chief justice from Australia, scolded my law school class that the USA would never be taken seriously as long as we clung to our barbaric 2nd Amendment. Not long after that, back in Australia, Kirby was arrested for picking up rent boys. You can’t beat being hectored by a perv.

    • L.S.

      Euthanasia is done even to people who do NOT choose it. Please get informed about this happening in the EU (Liverpool Care Pathway) and even in our own country by way of hospice.
      It happened to my Dad in a hospice facility. They gave him a cocktail of 5 drugs even though he never had any pain whatsoever. Then they falsified the records. He never had a chance! (They had even promised that NO drugs would be given while he was there on a Respite. We asked for the records after his death.)

      • masteradrian

        That what happened to your Dad was not euthanasia!
        That was murder! And you know it!
        Simply the falsification of the records makes it a crime, and thus not euthanasia!
        Get your labels straight, and do not mix up different matters!

        • Daniel Greenfield

          Actually it’s the common ‘unofficial’ practice of euthanasia.

        • L.S.

          Are you speaking from experience about murder/killing and/or euthanasia ? …or is it just an opinion?
          Check out Stealth Euthanasia by Ron Panzer. Mercy killing, murder, covert/quiet euthanasia……it all involves taking a life.
          Maybe the labels overlap a bit – but in my opinion they can be the same. In World War II “mercy killings” were labeled “euthanasia.” That sounds like murder to me.
          Falsifying records is a felony but can be covered up by an experienced facility.

    • American Patriot

      Zimbabwe uses capital punishment as well and unlike America, Zimbabwe has a racist dictatorship. All of the countries that use executions use it far more often than America. Unlike America, the majority of people executed in tyrannical countries did not commit any crime at all other than the fact that they were either homosexual or a political prisoner. In Iran a few months ago, a man who was lynched in public by the mullahs was denied the right to see his mother right before the gruesome execution took place. Yet, the left doesn’t complain about that because the execution occurred in Islamist Iran, which the left supports. The left has a huge double standard regarding capital punishment in different countries around the world. Another case where the left either ignores or supports capital punishment in is the case of Gen. Arnaldo Ochoa in Communist Cuba. Ochoa was accused of participating in the international drug trade, which is hypocritical on the part of his country’s dictatorship considering the fact that the Castro family dictatorship participated in the drug trade (the Castro dictatorship had connections with the Colombian drug lord Pablo Escobar, who was also connected with the Communist dictatorships in Nicaragua and Panama). The Castro family dictatorship decided to get rid of Ochoa in order to 1. Maintain full control of Cuba (Ochoa was a high-ranking Cuban army general who was well-liked by the Politburo in Havana) and 2. Cover up the dictatorship’s involvement with the international drug trade. In other words, Arnaldo Ochoa was Cuba’s Leon Trotsky. Yet, the left either ignored or supported the what the Castro dictatorship did because of shared ideology. That’s why the left always has a double standard on practically every issue.

      • masteradrian

        What is “the left” to you?
        Socialists are not communists!
        Learn the difference and come back!

        • UCSPanther

          Oh yes they are.

          We aren’t stupid like you.

        • American Patriot

          So in your view, what do you think about abortion in comparison to capital punishment?

        • Daniel Greenfield

          Do you mean National Socialists or Socialists?

          • American Patriot

            While there may be minor differences between National-Socialists and Socialists/Communists, the major key difference between the two is the issue of nationalism vs. internationalism. Almost everything else, the two have in common.

        • Drakken

          Socialism is nothing more than communism with a smiley face. Keep up the great work ya commi, your making that backlash you fear come that much sooner.

          • masteradrian

            You no doubt were the brightest at school hey?
            How high did your education get? Maximum was no doubt kindergarten!

          • Drakken

            Oh gee whiz golly, I guess that double Master’s Degree I have means nothing huh Sparky?

        • bigjulie

          Ahhh…now I see! You think you are the master of splitting political definitions of the kind intended to create nothing but endless, boring, empty discourse over…NOTHING! You are obviously from Europe…probably from Holland and likely a buddy of Geert Wilder’s older brother.

    • fiddler

      Tell me, what sort of punishment did the man in Britain with bloodied hands holding a meat cleaver deserve who who hacked the head off of someone he didn’t know simply because he was (as I recall) in the military? He then stood there while filmed and boasted about it. What does this man deserve? Does he deserve the chance to have others protest for his release? That can happen! Perhaps you like hand-wringing because you are ambivalent about ultimate justice.

      • masteradrian

        THAT man deserves (in my opinion) a life sentence without any possibility of parole (and the certainty that he will die in prison!)!
        And every individual has the right to protest against anything and everything, but such a protest does not need to anything!

        A question in return: would you agree with the death penalty of those American soldiers who raped and murdered in cold blood those children in Afghanistan?
        I would not, life imprisonment without any parole would be fitting, then they could think about their sick crime, and suffer in jail!

        • liz

          Oh, I thought justice was not supposed to be about “retribution and revenge” (according to your comment below). Just letting them “suffer in jail” isn’t about that, I guess.

          • Daniel Greenfield

            Don’t expect moral consistency from leftists. They’re incapable of it.

            They posture for the moral high ground.

        • Drakken

          American soldiers did not rape anyone in asscrackistan dumbazz, and killing in a war zone is like handing out speeding tickets at the Indy 500. So your making the case that anyone in uniform is a criminal? How quaint.

        • American Patriot

          I have a question for you, you Communist lunatic: do you think the 9/11 attacks were justified or not? If you believe they were, then you are probably either a high-ranking member of the Communist Party of whichever country you are from, a spokesman for the Taliban or for the former dictatorship of Saddam Hussein in Iraq or a radical left-wing academic who supports Islamism.

          • masteradrian

            My answer is simple: No, I do NOT think or feel that the 9/11 attacks were justified!

      • UCSPanther

        Breaking on a wheel would be a fitting punishment…

    • Wolfthatknowsall

      A person with “common sense” supports the death penalty. After all, someone who wants to have a life, and doesn’t want to die, won’t go after some of the trolls who comment here …

      I always find it strange and repulsive that the rest of the world wants these United States to emulate them … especially, the European countries.

      And what makes you think that Mr. Obama is not a dictator (or seriously wants to be)? Thank God that he doesn’t have the guts …

    • operanerd1986

      Japan still has the death penalty. Is that country also barbaric and uncivilized?

      • masteradrian

        1. For your obviously needed information: Japan is not in Europe!
        The reference was to Europe!

        2. In answering your question, a return question: is the death penalty carried out in in Japan? The answer is: No!

        3. Is the death penalty used in Japan as a sentence?
        the answer is: No!

        So, even the ones who committed the foulest atrocities in the Prison camps in SE-Asia have learned from their history, the Victors from WW2 have not!

        • Daniel Greenfield

          Hamida Djandoubi was the last person to be executed in France. He was a Tunisian immigrant who had been convicted of the torture and murder of 21-year-old Elisabeth Bousquet, his former girlfriend, in Marseille.

          Djandoubi appeared in court on charges of torture-murder, rape and premeditated violence on 24 February 1977.

          On 25 February he was condemned to death. An appeal against his sentence was rejected on 9 June, and in the early morning of 10 September 1977, Djandoubi was informed that he, like the child murderers Christian Ranucci (guillotined on 28 July 1976) and Jérôme Carrein (guillotined on 23 June 1977), had not received a reprieve from President Valéry Giscard d’Estaing. Shortly afterwards, at 4:40 a.m., he was executed by guillotine at Baumettes Prison in Marseille.

          … isn’t it wonderful how France recently became “civilized”

        • operanerd1986

          The most recent executions in Japan happened on December 12, 2013, when Mitsuo Fujishima and Ryoji Kagayama were both hanged.

          • masteradrian

            And you got a link to that effect?

          • operanerd1986
          • masteradrian

            Thanks, I checked and read the 1st article, the 2nd wasn’t existing according to my browser.
            In reaction: I condemn the executions in Japan equally as those in the USA, and do so all executions worldwide!

            I agree that murderers must be punished, but life sentences without parole are equally effective, and probably are more efficient too!
            Once hanged, shot or electrocuted, or given a lethal injection, the convicted murderer is gone, and the so wanted retribution is lost on him/her.
            As to the efficiency…. a prisoner sentenced to life imprisonment is cheaper then all the court cases and appeals that come with a death sentence, and there is the advantage that when it proofs to be a wrong conviction the person can be released, were a wrongly executed person can cost billions of dollars, in compensation!

    • unionville

      I couldn’t get past this in your post. It really is breathtakingly brilliant.

      “Euthanasia is nit killing people, nor murdering people! No one in the European Union dies without choosing it!”

      There are countries that have moved heaven and earth to stop the “murder” of murderers. Yet instead of moving heaven and earth to find a way to ameliorate what ails an innocent human being who sees life as too great a burden for them to wish to go on, they provide them with the means to end their life. But it’s okay. Because they choose it. Life really is profoundly important to you, isn’t it.

    • Drakken

      Hate to burst your little libtarded socialist moment, but there are people in this world that need a good killing because they bloody well deserve it. Useful idiots like you who are in England especially slap murders and rapists on the wrist and are surprised that they do it again, so Sparky, you can take that high moral ground until they bury you in it as far as I am concerned.

    • truebearing

      So, are you calling for a ban of all Muslim countries as well? They kill people for adultery, even when unproven. Do you have the courage to call for condemnation of 1.5 billion people, many of whom would slash your head off in retaliation, or are you spouting off about the US because you know we aren’t the barbarians the Muslims are?

      • masteradrian

        I call for a ban of the death penalty worldwide, and that includes all muslim countries ofcourse.
        And I did not and do not call for the condemnation of 1.5 billion muslim people, the condemnation of a specific penalty in a judicial system is something different then calling for the condemnation of people with a specific faith.

        • Drakken

          So it’s rainbows, unicorns and kumbaya for everyone?

        • American Patriot

          Do you call for the legalization of abortion worldwide?

          • masteradrian

            1. we are talking/discussing the death penalty here, and you bring in abortion into the discussion, were I feel that to be inappropriate!
            The death penalty is, in my opinion, a totally different topic and subject then abortion, were legalization yes or no of abortion is subject to a huge number of possible conditions and prepositions, among them religious convictions

          • American Patriot

            Abortion is an appropriate topic to discuss when discussing the issue of capital punishment considering the fact that many opponents of capital punishment often support abortion. At least 50,000 unborn babies perished in the decade following abortion’s legalization because of Roe vs. Wade. Again, answer my question: do you support abortion or not?

          • masteradrian

            And who do you think you are to order me to answer a question?

            The discussion here is on and about the death penalty, and your dragging into the discussion the topic of abortion is your choice, not mine!

            I feel that were we discuss the topic of the death penalty the topic of abortion is inappropriate!

            A discussion on and about abortion is of a total different magnitude and importance, which I am happy to be part of, but not while discussing the death penalty!

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “I feel that were we discuss the topic of the death penalty the topic of abortion is inappropriate!”

            You called for global bans, not selective bans. Now you’re being selective. Why?

          • bigjulie

            How do you possibly take the purposeful killing a a human being as something apart from whatever YOU consider the “Death Penalty” to be? Here, we are talking about the purposeful killing of a human being that has done nothing to warrant the “death penalty” on a decision from that human being’s own MOTHER!!

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “The death penalty is, in my opinion, a totally different topic and subject then abortion, were legalization yes or no of abortion is subject to a huge number of possible conditions and prepositions, among them religious convictions”

            Abortion is coerced euthanasia. The death penalty is coerced euthanasia after constitutional guidelines for judgment and sentencing after trial.

            You have a problem with coerced euthanasia even after due process, but…the left says aborting fetuses is OK because…”my vagina”…or something like that. In reality it’s just a way for international leftists to attack successful capitalist nations.

            Very sensible.

          • masteradrian

            (I pressed in error enter key!)
            and opinions.
            The topic is death penalty and not abortion.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “The topic is death penalty and not abortion.”

            And the reason is that you’re a big fat hypocritical dupe.

          • bigjulie

            Ye Gods, Man! Abortion IS the death penalty in action!

        • truebearing

          I have to say, you are most accommodating. Thanks for stepping into the bear trap.

          Islamic law calls for the killing of apostates, infidels, adulterers, etc. Islam allows husbands to commit honor killings. It allows for men to keep slaves. It condones men beating their wives. Shariah is their code of “justice” and it gives individuals the right to execute those who they claim violated Islamic law.

          Since they dole out the death penalty, and you oppose the death penalty worldwide, do you still refuse to condemn those who issue infinitely more death penalties than every other nation, or combination of nations, on earth?

          Remember, all Muslims believe what the Quran teaches, therefore endorse the consequences of violating those teachings. They are educated and socilaized to believe these things…that you condemn.

          Be careful how you answer. You’re on the precipice of admitting both your hypocrisy and cowardice.

          • masteradrian

            In reply to all the references you make to the koran and the conservative or fundamentalist interpretation of the koran being the sharia I must say that when I read the bible adulterers are allowed to be killed too, that it condones men to beat their wives too, that it allows people to keep slaves too…

            The sharia is not a commonly accepted enforcement of the koran, as you no doubt will know, the fundamentalistic muslims enforce the sharia!

            I do not condemn “those who issue infinitely more death penalties than every other nation, or combiantion of nations, on earth”, I do condemn the death penalty, worldwide, were and whenever!

            I know and am aware that some groups of muslims take the Quran literally as do some christian groups take the Bible literally!

            You be careful how to react too, as you are on the edge of showing your own hypocrisy and stupidity!

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “In reply to all the references you make to the koran and the conservative or fundamentalist interpretation of the koran being the sharia I must say that when I read the bible adulterers are allowed to be killed too, that it condones men to beat their wives too, that it allows people to keep slaves too…”

            Here we go again…

            The Bible does not lay out laws for man to be used to govern and to be kept for all time. It lays out laws for believers, and for a period of time it laid out laws for a people with a set of missions.

            The koran lays out laws to be followed for all time through coercion or any means necessary.

            IOW, you don’t know what you’re talking about.

          • truebearing

            “In reply to all the references you make to the koran and the conservative or fundamentalist interpretation of the koran being the sharia I must say that when I read the bible adulterers are allowed to be killed too, that it condones men to beat their wives too, that it allows people to keep slaves too…”

            First of all, you’re dodging now because your position is untenable. You arrogantly pronounced your opposition to the death penalty, worldwide, and now you’re too big of a chicken to denounce Muslims en masse, even though you had no problem judging the entire United States as barbaric. The latter proves you have no problem condemning groups as a matter of principle, it proves you are an abject coward.

            Second, you are trying to crawfish out of your polemical hole by doing what leftists always do when they are getting whipped in a debate: try to create a false moral equivalency. Instead of answering my question about the sincerity of your conviction on the death penalty, you rather stupidly brought up the Bible, without specific references, and then claimed that Christians do or did the same things Muslims are doing and have been doing since Islam’s inception. This obviates, in flashing neon, that you don’t know a dam thing about the Bible or Christianity. Your false equivalency was a ridiculous attempt to avoid admitting the tens of thousands of death penalties at the hands of Muslims. You don’t know anything about Christians other that it is safe to accuse them falsely, but you are scared to death of saying anything, truthful or not, about Muslims. We get it.

            “I do not condemn “those who issue infinitely more death penalties than every other nation, or combiantion of nations, on earth”, I do condemn the death penalty, worldwide, were and whenever!”

            Another bold self-contradiction. You condemn the death penalty but not the people who practice it the most? You condemn the death penalty but not the only religion on earth that prescribes death as a penalty for all sorts of offences, or simply because a person is a non-believer? You don’t condemn the Muslims, who most frequently practice that which you condemn, the death penalty, yet you posture mightily about the death penalty itself. Those chicken feathers are really starting to show, not to mention that hypocrisy i warned you about.

            Only “fundamentalistic muslims enforce the sharia!” Really? Wrong. All Muslim countries enforce Sharia to some extent.

            http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_countries_use_Sharia_Law

            Humph! It looks like you’ve established your hypocrisy beyond a shadow of a doubt, your cowardice quite convincingly, your dishonesty with great deftness, and, frankly, your stupidity to the point of embarrassment. You shouldn’t debate topics you know nothing about and you shouldn’t make sweeping moral pronouncements until you have considered the consequences.

            Do you care to opine on slavery. women’s rights, or individual freedoms of any kind?

          • hiernonymous

            One can only imagine your Muslim counterpart, triumphantly holding up Leviticus 20:10 (adulterers are to be stoned) and Matthew 5:17 (“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets”) and he will have proved, with more clarity and precision than you have so far exhibited, that Christians are, indeed, obligated to stone adulterers. Remember, all Christians believe what the Bible teaches, therefor endorse the consequences of violating those teachings.

            “Remember, all Muslims believe what the Quran teaches…”

            Remember, they believe what they believe it teaches, not what you assert that it teaches. There’s a world of difference.

  • DontMessWithAmerica

    I have a number of very liberal friends and relatives who are also quite intelligent but have certain crevasses in their craniums which when filled with emotions produce pronounced illogical thoughts and actions. I describe them as good people who would wildly throw on the brake while driving to avoid running over a frog crossing the road and, in the process they forget to look in the rear-view mirror which leads to a four car pileup. Liberals tend to be myopic and seldom have any perspective.

    • DaCoachK

      I have NO friends who are liberals or leftists. I refuse to associate with the enemy. Period. I can do without their friendships. I also disown relatives over such a serious offense. I place liberals in the same category as child molesters and traitors because, first, liberals are supportive of homos, who are all pederasts, and, secondly, they have been trying to destroy the USA with their antics since the 1960s.

      • DontMessWithAmerica

        I have a few friends exactly like you, too, but while I’m in agreement with their politics I find them generally a pain in the butt – present company excepted if appropriate.

        • DaCoachK

          I am not a pain-in-the-butt, I don’t think. I do have strong opinions and beliefs. I don’t berate these people I disagree with; I simply refuse to have anything at all to do with them.

          • WhiteHunter

            I have a few liberal/leftist/Obama-defending friends, but not many; and our contacts with one another have dwindled to almost nothing because it’s virtually impossible to have a conversation with them that doesn’t degenerate into loud shouts–on their side, not mine.

            The list of “safe” topics for dinner-table conversation has diminished to about one: the food on the plate. Even that old, previously safe standby, “How do you like this weather?” is now off-limits, lest it trigger snarls about “climate change” and how “the Republicans want us to breath air poisoned with coal smoke and our children to drink toxic industrial waste…and of course how George Bush caused Katrina because he hates African-Americans, the racist!”

            Have you read Harry Stein’s wonderful book, “I Can’t Believe I’m Sitting Next to a Republican”? You should–it describes the problem we have with these “friends” perfectly.

          • DaCoachK

            I will get his book. I did read “No matter what it says, they’ll call this book racist.” Great book. He is a former Lefty, so he knows exactly the tactics and strategies of the infantile Left. That is why I am on this site. David Horowitz is the same. He knows the liberals because he was a communist once. If I meet someone and they say they are liberal in any way, that is the last moment I will ever share with them. The Left is so dishonest and vile that I refuse to associate with them at all. If I could, I wouldn’t breathe the same air as they do.

          • Boogie’s Daddy

            Why do people watch the Kardashians and Honey Boo-boo? Because :you can’t have polite talk about religion or politics. it used to be that those were not fit for the dinner table but now it’s as convoluted as the “separation clause” in the Constitution. Now, it seems there is no place for the discussion of the only two topics that really matter. I heard someone say it just this weekend “Never talk about politics or religion.” I quit! I am not going to back peddle and water down my opinions any longer. There is too much at stake to leave it to chance that someone who might still be open to learning might hear something real.

      • Webb Cook

        That’s exactly the stance I’ve taken. I got tired of always being on the defensive and tiptoeing around their emotions. I realized I was whoring myself for their approval. I’m much happier without them. It’s a huge weight lifted off of me. I find that I greatly enjoy being politically incorrect.

      • Douglas J. Bender

        My father’s current wife, my step-mother, and all her family except her one son are all liberals. And arrogant and ignorant and clueless ones at that. Holidays are a kind of torture.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          Sometimes we can’t avoid these people

          • Douglas J. Bender

            I know. I can remember one such family gathering back in 2008, before Obama was elected. I was politely (but fervently) telling my step-mother’s eldest daughter my opinion about Obama’s dangerous background, when all of a sudden my step-mother interrupted and said (and I quote): “I bet you love Sarah Palin!!”

          • Daniel Greenfield

            typical programming

          • Douglas J. Bender

            Yes. I was going to respond, “Thank you, CNN”, but I thought better of it.

          • Debbie G

            Especially if you’re married to one.

  • liz

    Yes, that’s why Charles Manson, who was originally sentenced to death, is still taking up space and wasting tax money in prison. I’m surprised they haven’t released him already. Sickening.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      give Jerry some time

      • truebearing

        Give Jerry a cell of his own — padded, of course.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          with extra aluminum foil and photos of the kids murdered by his pal Jim Jones

  • Masa

    Torturing Murderers to Death…………good!

  • El Cid

    I learned some things from this sensational article, even if it is a bit over-the-top. No doubt this is a contentious issue worthy of debate. And, that’s why we love Danny!

    Here is a suggestion that is only half joking…

    If no pharma wants to supply it, I wonder if it is not a business opportunity for Front Page Mag to go into the production of sodium thiopental as a means of supporting this site?

  • Wolfthatknowsall

    The death penalty really isn’t so hard. Several riflemen … all of them with a live round (when someone who knows how to shoot fires a blank, he knows it was a blank) … fire upon command at a target over the condemned’s heart. Then, the officer fires a pistol shot into his head,as a coup de gras.

    It’s fast, and it works every time.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      works reliably

      • Wolfthatknowsall

        That, it does, Daniel.

        The young “man” who went on a shooting rampage, over the weekend, should be introduced to the concept.

        • UCSPanther

          I think he saved everyone the trouble…

    • Vaud

      coup de grace: mercy killing

      • Wolfthatknowsall

        I know. It was coined at a time when military muskets were highly inaccurate, and such an act was needed – in most cases. Although with modern rifles, the “act of mercy” likely will not be needed, the coup de grace should still be applied.

        The last time I ever saw my father alive, he was in Hines VA Hospital, with cancer over 90% of his body. However, the only painkiller he would take was Tylenol-3. He was in good spirits, and determined that he was going to walk out of that hospital.

        That night, without Dad’s permission, and without informing the family, a “doctor” started pushing large quantities of morphine, killing this heroic defender of our nation (during WWII) … a man who was still showing his spirit.

        A mercy killing? Perhaps? Did I want the doctor dead? You better believe I did, which might explain why the VA transferred him to the Lefter Coast. No one will ever get me to walk into a VA facility (I’m a combat veteran, too … he was in Patton’s Third Army).

        A coup de gras at the end of a firing squad is the right thing to do, because the offender offended the dignity of the nation, at large. If he’s still conscious, it might be merciful. But either way, it’s the right thing to do …

        • L.S.

          O my! I am sorry this also happened to your Dad. My Dad was (involuntarily) euthanized in a hospice facility. (See one of my posts below.) He was given 5 different drugs — and this for a man who had no pain and never even took a Tylenol.
          A person cannot bring a case against a facility that does this to older people as according to the doctors/nurses (SOME are little Kevorkians) the person “was dying anyway.”
          Please check out the website by Ron Panzer — hospicepatients.org. for more information on what some hospitals and hospices are doing.

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            Thanks for your sentiments, and the information. I appreciate it.

        • Drakken

          A firing squad is reserved for semi-honorable folks, a good hanging is reserved for the lowest of the low.

        • truebearing

          That is appalling. I’m sorry to hear of your dad dying in such a way. It may sound strange, but in addition to the crime of ending someone else’s life, regardless of misguided “good” intentions, such an action deprives family members of some incredibly meaningful last minutes with a loved one.

          My grandmother was in the hospital for sepsis. My father received a call that she was dying and wouldn’t last long, not long after he was told she was “doing fine.” He raced 20 miles to see her before she died. When he got there, she had just passed, only a minute or two before. When he walked into her room he was struck with the happy expression on her face. He described it as “beatific.” He also described it as the expression of someone who was seeing a loved one who was very dear. He said he honestly had never seen her look so happy. She was a person of faith, which made all of us speculate on who, upon their meeting, made her so radiant in death. Her beaming expression was of great comfort to my father and my uncle, and to the rest of us as well. To deprive family members of this experience is at very least a sin.

        • Debbie G

          My condolences, Wolf. If it will help at all, morphine is given to terminal cancer patients for pain. But the staff should have told you they were giving it.

    • Drakken

      That is why God invented Rope, simple, easy, and all you have to do is kick the stool and let him hang around for awhile. Why waste perfectly good ammo ?

      • truebearing

        Because the Left hates guns. Nothing wrong with some capital irony.

        • Drakken

          Your point defiantly has some merit! Any time you have a leftist frothing at the mouth, you know your on the right track.

          • UCSPanther

            And you know definitely that you are on the right track when they are ranting about how they are the majority and you are need to be punished for failing to conform to their party line.

          • truebearing

            Don’t they always do that?

          • truebearing

            Not that I would intentionally vex leftists, or anything.

          • 95Theses

            All too happy to plead guilty to that charge. I LOVE to mock liberals!

  • WhiteHunter

    What they really want (and are moving us toward) is the only “death penalty” that they find “acceptable”: death by old age. After every means has been used to extend the convicted murderer’s life as long as possible and without regard to expense (something the VA and Obama’s death panels deny to ordinary, innocent patients, of course–on the basis of “cost”).

    While waiting for the “death [by old age] sentence” to be “carried out,” the convict would receive–at public expense, of course:

    Sex-change surgery and and gender-reassignment hormone therapy (as in the cases of Bradley Manning, traitor; and the convict serving “life” in Massachusetts for the first-degree murder of his (her?) wife–both of them beneficiaries of lunatic judges’ rulings that denying the “treatment” would, in and of itself, constitute “cruel and unusual punishment”);

    Kidney dialysis; cosmetic dentistry; radiation and chemotherapy; heart and lung transplants; and whatever else might be “necessary” to ensure a long, healthy, comfortable life.

    Here’s my recommendation, if we “must” use lethal injection: Get a textbook used in a first-year course at any veterinary school. Turn to the chapter on Euthanasia. Look up the chemical formulation used by veterinarians every day to euthanize cats and dogs, and turn to the table of correct dosages for the largest, heaviest breeds of dog, like St. Bernards. Double it, just to be sure. Order the drugs and needles from whatever veterinary supply companies the vets use. Stick the needle into the convict, press the plunger, and relax. Problem solved.

    • guest

      I’m surprised it took so long to get to the obvious solution. Bravo.

  • guest

    The liberal leftist is only capable of looking at
    one half of the equation. They see prison crowding,
    but they cannot see reduced crime rates.

    Leftists are the scum of the earth, and they’re stupid.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      They’re conditioned to look only at the issues their radical leaders want them to look at and ignore the “unseen” as irrational objections from people like us that have an “oppression agenda” or “false consciousness.”

      They’re conditioned to ignore anything that contradicts leftist narratives.

  • wileyvet

    More inverted reasoning from the minds of leftists. Executing a vicious criminal after years of appeals is barbaric, yet snuffing out the elderly and young children is enlightened humane and compassionate. How about we put these loser criminals in a Gulag and work them to death? It was OK for Uncle Joe, a man the same libs adored. Or we could just string them up or stone them the way the Mullahs do it. I don’t hear too many lefties haranguing Muslims and the Sharia, so they must be OK with it. Better yet just off them the way their hero Che Gueverra took care of his enemies. Quick and efficient. And as for the guilty party feeling a little pain upon being put to death, Boo Hoo! It is nothing compared to the pain caused to the victims, a lifetime of pain for their families, and the pain caused to society as a whole. I can think of no legitimate reason why despicable scum need breathe anymore air on this planet. They have forfeited the right to live in a civilized society, and the death penalty is simply the ultimate societal quid pro quo for their actions. How anyone can lament the passing of a sicko, loser dirtbag is beyond me.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    I think we should turn to the Guillotine to solve this issue. It’s quick and relatively painless.

    • UCSPanther

      A bit on the messy side, but it was certainly an improvement over the old broad axe and greatsword methods.

      It would be a fitting way to execute jihadis too, since they are obsessed with beheading their victims, and the world can never have too much irony…

    • Demo P. Seal; PouponMarks

      That’s so true. So is one bullet at close range in the back of the head.

  • Softly Bob

    Maybe the Left’s ideal form of death penalty would be to use the same method they use in abortions – after all, there’s no cruelty there. So they keep telling us.
    So, we should be seeing the next death-row inmate being locked inside a box full of fluid, and being dealt with by a kettle of boiling water and a pair of knitting needles.

  • juandos

    Electrocution instead of that idiotic injection dong & pony show is a good idea…

    Personally though I think they should dump the chair’s on & off switch and replace it with a rheostat instead and let the victim’s family work it…

    • Debbie G

      One shot to the head, point blank.

      • juandos

        That works…

        That would be the most cost efficient and in all seriousness maybe the most humane though some of these killers on death row showed no such compassion towards their victims…

        • Debbie G

          And since the government is stockpiling ammo, there should be no problem. Oh wait, those bullets are for conservatives, not criminals.

          • juandos

            Oh wait, those bullets are for conservatives, not criminals“…

            Now that’s funny but I don’t necessarily mean ‘ha! ha!‘ funny when one considers the actions of a parasitic bureaucracy like the IRS for instane…

  • http://www.MARVINFOX.com/ Marvin E. Fox

    1. There are liberals, and there are political liberals.
    1. A. The liberal wants to make changes for what he sees as the best for the people.
    1. B. The political Liberal has an Agenda to control the activities of our Republic within the parameters of a political agenda, which is not liberal.
    2. There are democrats and there is a Democratic Party.
    2.A. The democrats want a democracy that is controlled by the majority of the democracy’s free citizens; majority rule.
    2.B. If there is a case where the Democratic Party used the majority of our Republic’s free citizens to define its legislative effort, I have never found one.
    If you know of one instance where the majority of the free citizens of our Republic were consulted to establish ‘majority rule’ as a legislative principle, please give that information.
    Marvin Fox

  • Jeff Ludwig

    A grim article about a subject with which I am totally unfamiliar. Don’t these leftist lawyers, professors, bureaucrats, etc. have loved ones they care about and want to protect? Are they mentally ill as Michael Savage frequently says?

    • objectivefactsmatter

      They’re easily seduced by deceptive “greater good” arguments and are easy to manipulate with propaganda.

    • http://www.facebook.com/aemoreira81 aemoreira81

      If they’re locked up for life, it’s the same as a death sentence. If the death penalty were to be abolished, these people would get life without parole, and society would remain protected from these people.

      Where you see the protests is with nonviolent crime, primarily small drug offenses.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      The left tends to empathize with more with evil. They don’t consider the personal consequences until they happen to them.

  • HWGood

    No sodium thiopental available? Purify some of the seized heroin and use that. Plenty of people prove it’s lethal every year without intending to, so give the condemned one last high that they don’t come down from.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      ah, but that would be ‘unconstitutional’

    • JayWye

      some convicts,even a doctor can’t find a suitable vein to inject the drug,and then there’s the dosage;some convicts have built up a tolerance for drugs,so it’s nearly impossible to calculate the proper dosage. you can’t heavily overdose them,or they throw up,convulse,etc.

      a simple .22 bullet to the brain works every time.
      Readily available,cheap,simple,efficient. one bullet to the brain will kill a convict of any physical condition.

  • L.S.

    Short on sodium thiopental..??
    Just give the HOSPICE cocktail – a combination of morphine, Ativan, Haldol, atropine….and then when they can’t respond at all because they are “comfortable” …..top it off with a shot of Robinul.
    That should do it. They can then die “peacefully”.

    • L.S.

      Just in the news today in the Guardian –
      “Swiss organization will now allow assisted dying to elderly people who are not terminally ill.”

  • tagalog

    Bring back the electric chair! Hanging! The firing squad! Let’s get rid of that cruel and unusual lethal injection!

  • cxt

    What is the saying?

    “Kindness to the cruel is cruelty to the kind.”

    Something like that.

  • Docs357

    Public hangings no one wants to wind up on the end of rope. It worked then it will work again

  • nomoretraitors

    Here’s the solution: Let’s bring back hanging. No imports needed

  • Dolly

    A “dog & pony show”, hoping to turn execution of these brutal murderers into soap-opera drama,humanizing the killers. This is ALL by design. Forget about the grisly fashion they tortured & killed who knows how many.

  • JayWye

    NO need for “torturing” to execute criminals. Use a simple .22 cal. gun affixed to the back of a chair the criminal is strapped into,and the gun fires a single,inexpensive .22LR bullet into his brain. Quick,simple,100% effective,no problem with the physical condition of the criminal.
    the gun can be triggered by a lanyard,or use an electric system with 10 buttons pushed by a panel,and no one knows which button fired the shot.

  • SoCalMike

    Of the murderers released, how to track the rate and number that kill again?
    You can bet your bottom dollar the anti-death penalty activists masquerading as news writers would never let the cat out of the bag in a million years.