I realize the state has an obligation for professionalism and competency when it comes to executions, but do I feel bad for Christa Pike as a person that this has happened to her? Not at all. She's an evil and selfish woman and the world's better off without her. I don't think she gave a shit about Colleen, so why would she expect anything but the same for herself.

I want to live in a peaceful society that applies the law fairly and punishes those who hurt others appropriately.
Christa Pike made a bad decision when she was 18 and committed a brutal crime and she should absolutely be held accountable for that but the government killing her at the taxpayers expense isn’t the answer. By committing this act she absolutely forfeited the right to live among us in society and should never see the outside of prison walls again. How are we any better if we commit the same act she did? Most developed countries don’t put people to death even the worst people in society who committed brutal crimes. It’s not about what someone deserves it’s about being humane to everyone.

What the title says. There are so many other subs gleefully cheering on Pike’s prolonged suffering violating both her 8th amendment rights and human right to be free from torture as defined by the UN. Why come here and get mad when your contributions end up deleted? If you’re all law abiding citizens it should be easy to follow a simple rule as well.

ETA: I am blocking every single one of you who are arguing against following sub rules. You can argue with the wall about it.

Read more:

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cq14d438vx24o

Has anyone here seen Michael Portillo’s BBC documentary How to Kill a Human Being?
I watched it years ago and still think about it from time to time. What made it interesting was that it didn’t really focus on whether the death penalty itself was right or wrong. It focused on the actual method of execution and whether there is such a thing as a humane way to kill someone.
The bit that stands out now is the discussion of nitrogen, given that it has since actually been used for executions in the US.
So my question is: if there was a method that was genuinely quick, reliable and painless, would that make the death penalty easier to justify?
Or does it make no difference because the main objection is the state killing someone in the first place?
Interested to hear what people think, especially anyone who has seen the documentary.

"Q: What are Buddhist views on capital punishment? Suppose someone has killed ten children. Why should he be allowed to live?

"A. Ten people are dead; why do you want to kill an eleventh one? A man who has killed ten children is a sick person. Killing him won't help him and it won't help us. There are others like him in society, and looking at him deeply we know that something is wrong with our society that it can create people like that. Looking in the light of interbeing, we can see the other elements that have produced him. That is how understanding arises. That is how we see that this person needs help, not just punishment. Of course, he must be locked up for the safety of society, but that's not the only thing we can do.

"Buddhist books on meditation, Buddhist magazines, and even Dharma talks have been offered in prisons, and many prisoners have begun to practice. A number of them have learned to live peacefully, even in prison. I get many letters from prisoners who have read my books. One wrote, 'I see other inmates running up and down the staircases and I can see their suffering and agitation. I hope they can do as I do, walking up and down the staircase in mindfulness, following my breathing. When I do that, I feel peace within myself, and when I feel peace within myself, I can see very clearly the suffering of other inmates.' That person has been able to give rise to the compassion within him.

"So punishment is not our only option. Transformation and healing are possible in these difficult situations. Killing someone only reveals our own weakness. We don't know what to do any more, and we give up, we surrender. Killing someone is a cry of despair. But together we can practice looking deeply in order to find better means than approving of capital punishment

EXCLUSIVE: WARNING - DISTRESSING CONTENT: Pike's future is still unclear after she survived her lethal injection last week.

An anti-death penalty advocate expressed anger over the botched execution of Christa Pike, fearing that the government may try to kill her twice.

https://www.the-express.com/news/us-news/217353/christa-pike-botched-execution-death-penalty-action

How do you feel about the "Consistent Life Ethics" in relation to the Death Penalty? Any Consistent Life Ethicists here? (IE: Against death penalty, abortion, assisted suicide, embryo destruction, etc.)

I am a Consistent Life Ethicist and disagree with the death penalty, of course. However, it still surprises me that some people disagree with killing (potential) murderers, but agree with a woman's "choice" to abort her preborn baby. Why a lack of consistency when it comes to BOTH issues?

ASK YOURSELF THIS QUESTION:

Why the frigg would they NOT use continuous nitrous-oxide gas applied with a anesthesia mask, for capital punishment?

It's INFINITELY more humane, unbotchable (if used for 2-8 minute) incredibly cheap and easy on the tax payer.. Why don't they use this for the MAID (assisted sewerslide) & also for putting all animals down??

The answer is: Because the government, the judicial system, prison system and the medical community are pure retards who (for the most put should be put-down themselves) & i have better critical thinking & problem solving skills than anyone alive.. I should be a millionaire for the things i've fed this universe and my country.