Slashdot Mirror
Utah Attorney General Tweets Execution Order
Kilrah_il writes "In an all-time low for Internet use, Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff used Twitter to announce to the public his approval of the execution of convicted murderer Ronnie Lee Gardner. 'I just gave the go ahead to Corrections Director to proceed with Gardner's execution. May God grant him the mercy he denied his victims,' the attorney general wrote. The AG's 7,000 followers retweeted the message further on and soon many replied concerning the awfulness of tweeting the execution of a human being. 'Mr. Shurtleff was doing nothing unusual; politicians and news organizations now routinely send out tweets to alert people to the latest developments. But as Twitter users digested endless breaking news flashes alerting them to the death of a man by firing squad in the United States, for some Mr. Shurtleff's remarks stood out from the rest.'"
Firing squad is deemed inhumane in 49 out of 50 states, the exception being Oklahoma, where it is used solely as a backup, should lethal injection or electrocution fail or become unconstitutional. Utah allows firing squads only in cases where the prisoner had chose it before it became unconstitutional. Therefore, Gardner, having been on death row for 20 some odd years, had chose death by firing squad before it was deemed inhumane.
I realize this is OT, but it really struck me as odd that Utah was still doing a death by firing squad. Interestingly enough, Washington State still allows prisoners the choice of their method of execution between death by hanging and death by lethal injection.
"Don't meddle in the affairs of a patent dragon, for thou art tasty and good with ketchup." ~ohcrapitssteve
Actually it was the Attorney General, not the Governor. And the rest of the world wonders why we think they're ignorant. They don't even bother to refer to the person who actually issued the tweet, and instead refer to the head of state for Utah.
"There is no reliable, scientifically sound evidence that [shows that executions] can exert a deterrent effect.... These flaws and omissions in a body of scientific evidence render it unreliable as a basis for law or policy that generate life-and-death decisions. To accept it uncritically invites errors that have the most severe human costs." (Discussion of recent deterrence studies).
I hope I didn't brain my damage.
Multiple gunshot wounds to the heart generally cause death (or at least unconsciousness that will lead to death) in a matter of seconds.
Lethal injections take several minutes to kill, and that's if they do them correctly. Remember - no actual doctor will do it as you can't violate the Hippocratic Oath much worse than that. There's been horror stories of paralyzed victims slowly losing the ability to breathe over 30-45 minutes, conscious, but unable to speak or move.
The only reason lethal injection became popular is that it makes the death LOOK painless due to the paralysis drug preventing the victim from expressing pain.
Given a choice, I can't imagine anyone choosing the needle.
Close. Actually, in Utah, only one has a blank, all the others have real bullets. See, e.g., http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100618/ap_on_re_us/us_utah_firing_squad
caritj.org
Widely held to be a mistranslation by whom?
By linguists. The Hebrew word "hariga" means killing, whereas "retzach" means murder. "Retzach" is the word used in the ten commandments. You're welcome to dislike the Bible, but this particular complaint is unfounded.
Isn't the difference between killing and murder just that one is forbidden and the other isn't?
Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord. -Romans 12:19
To me belongeth vengeance and recompense; their foot shall slide in due time: for the day of their calamity is at hand, and the things that shall come upon them make haste. -Deuteronomy 32:35
Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself: I am the LORD. -Leviticus 19:18
The bible's take on the subject is pretty clear. Reinterpreting scripture to get what you want isn't exactly a new phenomenon.
Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.
And what happens if someone is executed the day after the trial and exonerating evidence is found 10 years later?
Do you know of a case where this has happened?
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-and-death-penalty
Yeah, if you actually read the bible, there are tons of prohibited activities that get you the death penalty (death by stoning). Some of these:
...so if you want to trot out the bible to defend your position, you better get ready for lots of capital punishment!
If a married person has sex with someone else's husband or wife...
If a married couple has intercourse during the woman's period...
Being a fortune teller...
Working on Saturday...
I find it deeply disturbing that the implied statement is, execution somehow does not deny him the mercy of god, yet by murdering his victims he somehow denied those victims the same kind of mercy. Does it mean, god sends souls of murdered people to hell, for being permanendly marred by the murderer's sin?
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
The death penalty is a 100% deterrent to prevent Ronnie Lee Gardner from ever killing again. The same applies to Garry Gilmore, John Wayne Gacy, Ted Bundy and the small number of others. Realize that even though someone may be in legal custody that they often continue to commit crime. That's what happenend when Gardner committed his second murder - he was in custody. Ted Bundy escaped from jail and committed more murders. Crime in prison is significant. Even when someone is rotting in a maximum security prison there is still risk to medical personel and those that still have to work directly with the criminals.
Yes, execution is a deterrent that prevents all future crimes.
Maybe if they interacted with their constituents more than a few hours each year there wouldn't be so much pent up anger. Besides, the videos that you saw weren't representative of all the town halls or even a majority of them. The media isn't going to air a video of a respectful conversation when they can air fireworks instead.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
The problem isn't with their constituents in general, it's with a very vocal minority that has decided that shouting down their representatives is more effective than dialog.
I agree that politicians need to find more creative ways to interact with their constituents (i.e. not form letters, spam emails, and town halls), but there's no easy solution when you can't get a word in edgewise at any reasonably sized public event. Then again, no one promised that being a politician would be easy.