Wednesday, April 12, 2006

Judges Set Hurdles for Lethal Injection

NYT reported Judges in several states have started to put up potentially insurmountable roadblocks to the use of lethal injections to execute condemned inmates. Their decisions are based on new evidence suggesting that prisoners have endured agonizing executions.

Maybe we should consider beheadings. But should we use an Axe, like Britain used, or a Guillotine, like the French.
In response, judges are insisting that doctors take an active role in supervising executions, even though the American Medical Association's code of ethics prohibits that.

3 comments:

Russ S. said...

So, let me get this straight.... It is considered unethical for A doctor to supervise the execution of a convicted murderer who has been convicted by a jury of his/her peers, and been given numerous appeals, but it is perfectly ethical to murder an unborn child that has committed no crime other than to be concieved by an obviously irresponsible mother and possibly father? Whats wrong with this picture? Lets start "aborting" liberals.

Don Singleton said...

Rather than partial birth abortion you propose post birth abortions -- long post abortions.

Seems about as logical as what is happening.

Russ S. said...

Believe it or not, that was my point.