Alarm as Alabama man to be executed via gas method rejected by veterinarians

Tommy Tainant

Diamond Member
Jan 20, 2016
46,612
20,091
2,300
Y Cae Ras

Dear me. They are killing this man with a drug that vets refuse to use.
That does not appear to be the act of an advanced society.

Should the US not have an agreed more humane method of killing prople >
 

Dear me. They are killing this man with a drug that vets refuse to use.
That does not appear to be the act of an advanced society.

Should the US not have an agreed more humane method of killing prople >
killing prisoners costs about 4 mil in appeals and all that over a decade......life costs way less


not economical to kill....now if we could sell all their usable organs, skin, eyes etc, then it would be worth it
 
Alabama is overthinking the whole situation here. Capital punishment has existed since antiquity, its really not that difficult. The ancients were able to do it without this kind of big to-do.

Just give this Smith creep the option of either having his head chopped off or being burned at the stake. Let it be his decision, a hot steak or a cold chop.
 

Dear me. They are killing this man with a drug that vets refuse to use.
That does not appear to be the act of an advanced society.

Should the US not have an agreed more humane method of killing prople >


Sort of amusing to hear about "humane" from a British subject. Where was Tommy when the English executed Mel Gibson?
 

Dear me. They are killing this man with a drug that vets refuse to use.
That does not appear to be the act of an advanced society.

Should the US not have an agreed more humane method of killing prople >
Yeah, take them outback, put a bullet in the brain, and let the vultures have at him...Not only humane, but very environmentally sound.

 
They need to just use a guillotine. Make it out of stainless steel in a stainless room. All you have to do is hose it and the room off after use, sharpen it, and oil it. Easy and cheap to maintain and a guaranteed quick death every time.
 
As I said, not the act of an advanced society.
However I must admit that this level of savagery has put an end to murder.
 

Dear me. They are killing this man with a drug that vets refuse to use.
That does not appear to be the act of an advanced society.

Should the US not have an agreed more humane method of killing prople >
What a load of shit. First, the articles states that this scumbag is set to be “judicially killed”. What the fuck is THAT? He was sentenced to die. Second, the author then jumps into the UN’s condemnation of nitrogen for execution. Why should we care what the UN has to say about this? They place human rights violators on their commissions for human rights advocacy.🤡. The UN is decidedly anti-west, and particularly anti-American. In the past those clowns have insinuated that they should monitor US elections. Imagine that: an organization with membership comprised of, inter alia, murderous dictators monitoring our elections, and now opining on our choice of execution.

I had to euthanize a longtime pet this past Monday. I was in the room with him while it was done at the vet. First, they sedate. Then they administer the lethality drug. It was peaceful. We want to know that our loved ones, even pets, are treated as lovingly as possible. But a convicted killer?!? I don’t love that fucker, and probably nobody does. He forfeited his right, IMO, to humane treatment when he acted inhumanely in taking the life of another person. Frankly, I don’t see what difference it makes how we treat a condemned man. Yes, the 8th Amendment protects against cruel and unusual treatment. But that is subjective and variable. The law changes from time to time on this particular matter.

Finally, why should we care what some leftist, limey rag has to say about what we are doing here in America? The UK is a fucked up mess. It is an example of what happens when a state loses its national identity due to massive migration.

Vets don’t use it because people don’t want to see their pets suffer when they are being euthanized. It can be a delicate time. And that is assuming the animal does, in fact suffer. They, like the scumbag murderers, are given a strong sedative before they are given the lethality dose.
But euthanizing a beloved pet that had been in your family for years is a context far different than executing a murderer.

Tommy, you are a dumb fuck dildo,
 

Dear me. They are killing this man with a drug that vets refuse to use.
That does not appear to be the act of an advanced society.

Should the US not have an agreed more humane method of killing prople >

For some reason, the article you posted didn't mention that he was given a choice, and he chose this method.
 

Dear me. They are killing this man with a drug that vets refuse to use.
That does not appear to be the act of an advanced society.

Should the US not have an agreed more humane method of killing prople >
We did. But we can't get the drugs, because foreign countries won't sell them to us. Including England.
 
What a load of shit. First, the articles states that this scumbag is set to be “judicially killed”. What the fuck is THAT? He was sentenced to die. Second, the author then jumps into the UN’s condemnation of nitrogen for execution. Why should we care what the UN has to say about this? They place human rights violators on their commissions for human rights advocacy.🤡. The UN is decidedly anti-west, and particularly anti-American. In the past those clowns have insinuated that they should monitor US elections. Imagine that: an organization with membership comprised of, inter alia, murderous dictators monitoring our elections, and now opining on our choice of execution.

I had to euthanize a longtime pet this past Monday. I was in the room with him while it was done at the vet. First, they sedate. Then they administer the lethality drug. It was peaceful. We want to know that our loved ones, even pets, are treated as lovingly as possible. But a convicted killer?!? I don’t love that fucker, and probably nobody does. He forfeited his right, IMO, to humane treatment when he acted inhumanely in taking the life of another person. Frankly, I don’t see what difference it makes how we treat a condemned man. Yes, the 8th Amendment protects against cruel and unusual treatment. But that is subjective and variable. The law changes from time to time on this particular matter.

Finally, why should we care what some leftist, limey rag has to say about what we are doing here in America? The UK is a fucked up mess. It is an example of what happens when a state loses its national identity due to massive migration.

Vets don’t use it because people don’t want to see their pets suffer when they are being euthanized. It can be a delicate time. And that is assuming the animal does, in fact suffer. They, like the scumbag murderers, are given a strong sedative before they are given the lethality dose.
But euthanizing a beloved pet that had been in your family for years is a context far different than executing a murderer.

Tommy, you are a dumb fuck dildo,
As stated you are not part of an advanced society.
 

Dear me. They are killing this man with a drug that vets refuse to use.
That does not appear to be the act of an advanced society.

Should the US not have an agreed more humane method of killing prople >
1705591978125.png
 
As stated you are not part of an advanced society.

So you don't see India , Ethiopia, Japan and Indonesia as "advanced societies"?

Awfully racist of you, Tommy.

Although expected from a British subject who went around the globe telling others "we are the British Empire and you are shit"
 

Dear me. They are killing this man with a drug that vets refuse to use.
That does not appear to be the act of an advanced society.

Should the US not have an agreed more humane method of killing prople >
An advanced society would not have murderers. He should have been commuted to a life sentence after the last attempt.
 

Forum List

Back
Top