User:NorwegianBlue/BB

Lethal injection

Pancuronium bromide is one of the most horrible and inhumane poisons in existence, so doesn't its use in lethal injection make lethal injection unconstitutional? --70.247.248.43 (talk) 00:30, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

If used on a conscious entity, you'd have a point, but that is not the case in executions. It's the supreme court that decides what's constitutional and what isn't; in the U.S., they have thus far not found the use of that drug in execution unconstitutional. - Nunh-huh 01:14, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

It's not clear that it is "most horrible and inhumane poisons in existence"—it's a paralyzing agent with no hypnotic effects, so if you have that, AND THEN something awful, and you aren't made unconscious first with something else, then you can feel a lot of pain. But it isn't administered by itself—it is part of a "drug cocktail" designed, ideally, to knock you out and kill you without you feeling anything. The Supreme Court has ruled this does not violate the 8th Amendment when done "correctly." In the same ruling, though, they note that if a state continues to use potentially problematic means of killing inmates without sufficient justification in the face of feasible alternatives, that this might be considered an 8th Amendment violation. --Mr.98 (talk) 01:12, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Being injected with pancuronium bromide causes complete paralysis without any anesthetic effect, so the victim suffers a slow and painful death by asphyxiation. --70.247.248.43 (talk) 01:22, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Quite a lot of visceral organ surgeries in the US are performed under a form of paralytic, usually rocuronium. The patients are unconscious by the time it is dripped into the IV line, though. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 01:46, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

That assumes that the anesthetic is properly administered, which is almost certain in the case of surgery but very unlikely in the case of lethal injection due to the AMA's ban on physicians taking part in capital punishment in any way. --70.247.248.43 (talk) 01:56, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Also, how do the executioners obtain the lethal drugs, since they're controlled substances requiring a prescription written by a licensed doctor, and the AMA prohibits doctors from prescribing drugs for lethal injection? From lethal injection:

The AMA Code of ethics specifically prohibits prescription by a doctor of the drugs for lethal injection. Ethical and legal constraints forbid pharmacists dispensing a drug without a valid prescription. A valid prescription can only be written by a doctor with an established relationship to the patient, with the patient's consent, for the benefit of the patient, and in the area of the doctor's expertise, among other requirements.

--70.247.248.43 (talk) 01:27, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Obviously, there are legal exceptions made for executions. And we could always go back to hanging, if necessary. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:23, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

But where in the Constitution is the government given the power to purchase controlled substances without the necessary documents/permits/etc. (a prescription, in this case)? --70.247.248.43 (talk) 03:09, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

The U.S. Constitution does not discuss prescription drugs or controlled substances. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:13, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

So therefore, the government doesn't have any special privilege in obtaining prescription drugs, so they must go through the normal route. --70.247.248.43 (talk) 03:20, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Quite the contrary: The government makes the laws controlling substances, so presumably they make special arrangements for the lethal injection drugs. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:23, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

But do they currently have those laws on the books right now? If so, which law specifically allows them to obtain these drugs in blatant disregard of necessary procedure for the sole purpose of torturing often-innocent victims to death? --70.247.248.43 (talk) 03:34, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

That's a heavily loaded question. 03:39, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

But that's exactly what lethal injection is. Victims have often been exonerated after being sentenced to death, many of them once it's too late. Only incompetent, untrained individuals can administer the drugs, so it's extremely likely that the correct dose of anesthesia would be administered. Therefore, most prisoners will be fully conscious when the pancuronium bromide is administered. Some cases have been especially bad; the man who used to administer lethal injections in Missouri was dyslexic and even admitted to often administering the drugs in the wrong order! Even if these problems were somehow resolved, the phrase "humane execution" is an oxymoron. --70.247.248.43 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:51, 20 December 2009 (UTC).

You're involved in POV-pushing on the lethal injection articles. Tell me this, Mr. Ethics: What is the AMA's position on abortion-on-demand, specifically on their doctors performing it? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:55, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Stop supporting this barbaric practice, which has been eliminated by all other developed Western nations. --70.247.248.43 (talk) 04:08, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

This is the ref desk, not a debating society. If you've got an issue with capital punishment, write to your legislators. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:21, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Each red-colored shape means more research to do.

70, indeed this is not the place for a debate or trying to advocate a position; but since this is the Reference Desk, I'll provide one link regarding your question about this technicality of the law. This story, a transcript of a radio news show, states that in Washington, there doesn't seem to be any mechanism in the law for obtaining the drugs in the first place. But each state (plus the federal government) has its own laws about the death penalty, so to answer your question completely, you'd have to research the law in each of the red-colored states (pictured) to figure out how the executioners are supposed to obtain the drugs. I googled federal law lethal injection drugs prescription and found a bunch of interesting articles. Bugs, if you would provide references in your answers then you might be able to make yourself useful here instead of guessing and supposing in your answers and provoking further debate. Comet Tuttle (talk) 08:13, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

The IP has come here with an agenda, which you'll see if you check his "contributions" to the article on lethal injections. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:27, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm not disputing that, but am asserting that your over-short and unreferenced supposition answers do not help. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:11, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

He wants to debate the morality of the death penalty. Nothing will help that. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:12, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Answering the factual questions, and ignoring the invitations to debate, certainly will help. Stating that "This is the ref desk, not a debating society." is also a positive move. Unsourced statements, the truth of which rely on phrases such as "obviously" and "presumably", are not very helpful. Statements such as "And we could always go back to hanging, if necessary." and "Tell me this, Mr. Ethics: What is the AMA's position on abortion-on-demand, specifically on their doctors performing it?" belong, if anywhere, on a discussion board, which you yourself stated, that the refdesk is not. --NorwegianBlue ^talk 21:19, 20 December 2009 (UTC)