I know I’m going to get in trouble for this monologue, but remember it’s all opinion, not necessarily fact. My starting position is the consideration of the death penalty, not whether it is justified, but how it can be done humanely. Let me first explain my overall feelings.
I’m not against the death penalty, but I do feel that it should never, ever be applied unless there is no possibility of innocence. Also, I don’t feel it is appropriate in many cases in which it is applied. A single fatal crime of passion, to me, would only require isolation of the killer to protect others. Serial killings, killing in commission of a planned crime, and unusual deliberate brutality (even non-fatal) are quite another thing. I don’t think we should be called upon to house and support such creatures for the rest of their lives.
There are many States that have a death penalty in their codes and prisoners awaiting execution. As I said above, if there is any possibility of innocence, there should be no possibility of execution. That would include any case where guilt was in doubt when the trial went to the jury.
I’m definitely against hanging, electric chairs, firing squads, etc. There is no reason we have to be brutal in eliminating those who are not humane enough for us to permit them to live. But lately, States that use lethal injections for executions have had a problem obtaining the required drugs. This has surprised me because I have had to have a few pets euthanized. In each case they were old and suffering. I knelt next to them while the procedure was being done and talked to them so they would know they were loved up until their ends. I know they didn’t suffer. I don’t understand why the same drugs and techniques cannot be applied for human executions. It seems particularly crazy to me that some States have pursued elaborate, and often flawed, procurement methods to obtain drugs, some of which turned out to be faulty and cruel. I don’t understand this.