May 13, 2013
David G. Savage:
Church-state, literally? Supreme Court weighing public school graduation in a church
May 10, 2013
Rabbi Berel Wein: Be all that you should be
May 8, 2013
Peter Ford: Why China is welcoming both Israel's Netanyahu and Palestinians' Abbas
Obama administration quietly backs out of appeal over new contraceptive mandate
At Kerry-Putin meeting, US-Russia relations thaw --- a tad
The Kosher Gourmet by Leela Cyd Ross :
Almost too pretty to eat, this colorful salad with Sicilian inspiration will tickle the taste buds and delight your visual sensibility
May 6, 2013
May 3, 2013
Kids, kittens the Same?
With employee perks at struggling Internet pioneer Yahoo! it's hard to tell
Artificial kidney offers hope to patients tethered to a dialysis machine
April 29, 2013
Poland's new Jewish museum celebrates life, doesn't revisit Holocaust
Terrorism in America: Is US missing a chance to learn from failed plots?
Boston Bomber's 'Svengali' Revealed
Tiny satellites + cellphones = cheaper 'eyes in the sky' for NASA
April 26, 2013
Clifford D. May:
Defense in the Age of Jihadist Terrorism
Sharon Palmer, R.D.:
How to feel your best -- with plenty of energy, a healthy weight and optimal mental and physical function -- without driving yourself batty
April 24, 2013
Jewish World Review
January 9, 2008
/ 2 Shevat 5768
Dishonest on the death penalty
Debra J. Saunders
As the U.S. Supreme Court considers arguments from attorneys for two convicted murderers from Kentucky who claim that the three-drug lethal injection protocol used in most death-penalty states can cause excruciating pain, do not be fooled. The same thug-hugging lawyers who complain that a convicted killer Goddess forbid might conceivably feel pain during execution (if the drugs are not administered properly) often are the first to keep doctors out of the execution chamber, because they want the alleged possibility of pain as a legal argument.
That's how much they care about their clients. Or it shows how bogus they know their excruciating-pain argument to be.
Start with the bogus medical argument that the three-drug protocol may cause "excruciating pain" and hence violates the Eighth Amendment protection against "cruel and unusual punishment." In that the Kentucky protocol starts with the administration of 10 times the amount of sodium pentothal needed to start invasive surgery, there is no chance that the other two drugs will cause pain for a convicted killer during execution. And no one has proven that an executed inmate has felt any pain from the three-drug cocktail.
Yes, some politicized medical journals have been willing to publish alleged research that supports the bogus pain argument, but they do so to their own discredit. In 2005, the British medical journal, The Lancet, ran a piece that reported that blood samples taken from executed prisons showed concentrations of the sodium pentothal that "were lower than that required for surgery in 43 of 49 executed inmates." It turns out the samples were taken as long as two days after death, which allowed the drug to dissipate.
Justices David Souter and Stephen Breyer flirted with the notion of having lower courts consider what Donald Verilli Jr., who represented two convicted Kentucky killers, called "the practical alternative" one dose of sodium pentothal, which should be lethal, if slow.
Sure, that's "practical" - for defense lawyers, not the courts. If the justices were to mandate one-drug lethal injection, the big bench could create fodder for more appeals because the only known problematic executions involved poorly inserted needles not the drugs. And there is no guarantee that injections of one drug will be completely problem free.
Justice Antonin Scalia seemed to get it when he commented, "This is an execution, not surgery." As the Washington Post reported, Scalia also asked where the Constitution says that "in the execution of a person, who has been convicted of killing people, we must choose the least painful method possible?"
Ralph Baze, whom Verilli represents, killed two cops serving warrants against him in 1992. He recently told the Louisville Courier-Journal that he won't apologize for the murders he shot the officers in the back in self-defense.
Now, I don't want Baze to suffer when he is executed should that day ever come but there is no reason to expect he would suffer, other than suffering loss of his life.
Which is the whole point.
And until the courts get wise to the anti-death penalty lobby's bait-and-switch, citizens can expect to watch countless dollars fund these dishonest appeals. Sleep safe, America, secure in the knowledge that the safest man in America is a death-row inmate with a pending appeal.
Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in the media and Washington consider "must-reading". Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.
Comment JWR contributor Debra J. Saunders's column by clicking here.
Debra J. Saunders Archives
© 2007, Creators Syndicate
Richard Z. Chesnoff
Frank J. Gaffney
Victor Davis Hanson
A. Barton Hinkle
Judge A. Napolitano
Cokie & Steve Roberts
Debra J. Saunders
J. D. Crowe
Ask Doctor K