ABA will revoke your certification if you execute someone

[Gern Blansten]

---

Members don't see this ad.

The point is not whether or not we condone the death penalty. By the time the execution is scheduled, that decision has been made, and not by any of us. The issue at hand is whether or not physicians should participate. I think the analogy of palliative medicine is a valid one. The person will die whether we agree with it or not. Should the execution be handled in a competent fashion or leave it to chance that it may be a fiasco?

In addition, you never answered the question I asked. Are you stating that someone should be banished from society for having beliefs that disagree with yours? I think you said there was no place in society or medicine for that person. Taking that stance is a slippery slope.

I would not ever wish to participate in this type of care, but I would not support taking ABA certification away from someone who wished to assist making someone's final moments of life less painful.

 

[Gern Blansten]

Because that was the part I objected to. Why would I argue statements I agree with?

His point is, the rest of his post, had you bothered to include it, precluded the need for your response.

 

[pgg]

Because that was the part I objected to. Why would I argue statements I agree with?

So -

• first, you read the entirety of my post in which I noted that the death penalty risks executing innocent people
• next, you edited those statements out of your reply to me
• then, you asked if I agree that the death penalty risks executing innocent people

You're either

• not reading the posts you're replying to
• ******ed
• a troll

Which is it?

 

[Gern Blansten]

You're either

• not reading the posts you're replying to
• ******ed
• a troll

Which is it?

I think I know the answer, but I will wait to see if I am right.

 

[gaspasser2004]

I've always found it interesting that in general (doesn't apply to all) that conservatives are pro-life and pro-death penalty while liberals are pro-choice and anti-death penalty. I am mostly pro-choice and I oppose the death penalty because of its expense, rare inaccuracy and because I think life in prison is a worse punishment.

I agree with the ABA's position on the death penalty and board certification. When helping out with an execution, the "patient" is the prisoner set to die. "Do no harm" to me means that we can't use our specialized skills to facilitate "harm". When giving anesthesia for abortion, the "patient" is the mother, not the fetus. Interestingly enough, the Hippocratic Oath once prohibited giving anesthesia for abortions, but was modified as abortion became more politically palatable. I don't give anesthesia for abortions in my current practice, but would stop doing them if the ABA came out against it.

Right or wrong, ABA certification has become a prerequisite for a good job with a fair market wage. We have long passed the point where certification was just "icing on the cake". Now it is akin to having a high school diploma as far as anesthesiologists are concerned.

 

[Eta Carinae]

I've always found it interesting that in general (doesn't apply to all) that conservatives are pro-life and pro-death penalty while liberals are pro-choice and anti-death penalty. I am mostly pro-choice and I oppose the death penalty because of its expense, rare inaccuracy and because I think life in prison is a worse punishment.

Perhaps you are right. Either way, your opinion is your right.

I do have to clarify the statement about conservatives, though.

So mostly, conservatives are against the the taking of *innocent* life. And also against the exploitation, especially to the extreme of murder, of the weak and defenseless- this includes unborn children, babies/children, the mentally handicapped, the physically handicapped and the elderly.

While it seems convenient to apply the blanket statement that there is some sort of irony or disingeniousness, we do believe that to protect that weak, defenseless members of society, it is necessary to restrain the exploitative and murderous elements from participation in and/or existence within society.

 

[Eta Carinae]

Originally Posted by psychforme
1 People's Republic of China Officially not released. At least 1700[44] - 5000[45]
2 Iran At least 388
3 Iraq At least 120
4 Saudi Arabia At least 69
5 United States 52
6 Yemen At least 30

These posts remind me of a patient who has been non-compliant with his/her antipsychotic meds.

• This entire discussion was never even about the morality of capital punishment to begin with and so your attempt to move posts to that argument- well that's just in keeping with the "flight of ideas" symptom isn't it? 😉
• There are people in society who will NEVER agree with your foolish, naïve and errant position. I know you lefties uniformly get up in arms whenever you fail to achieve consensus. You will NOT achieve it here. I will support the death penalty as long as I'm here. When I have children, I will teach them the same as voting adults. No amount of indoctrination, coercion or intimidation will alter that. You either live with the fact that a dissenting voice will continue to exist or if that fact becomes unbearable to you, you are free to relocate to a country that better aligns with your misguided views.
• Even if I were to meet you at your false statistics, between 1976 and 2008, 4362 criminals have been determined to have committed offenses worthy of death. Since 1976, the requirement for guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt, beyond reasonable suspicion, and habeas corpus have eliminated, at the very least mitigated, the incidence of wrongful executions when judiciously applied. And in fact, 39, not 52 were actually innocent in the entire history of capital punishment in this country since the 18th century. This would be <0.1% of all executed criminals.

Why don't we turn the tables and view some of the henious crimes committed by some of these monsters:

In TX, the rape to death by an adult male of a 3 month old infant

On April 30, 1997, Woods entered the home of his ex-girlfriend through an open window. Woods sexually assaulted the 11 year old white female, then abducted her and her 9-year-old male brother. Woods severely beat the 9-year-old boy about the head, resulting in serious injury, and cutting the throat of the 11-year-old victim, resulting in her death.

On March 10, 2000, during the night time hours, Berkley attacked and kidnapped an 18 year old Hispanic female in El Paso, Texas. Berkley took her to a deserted area where he sexually assaulted, robbed and shot her five times in the head with a 25 caliber pistol

On January 2, 1998, Alix murdered another male at an apartment complex in ---. Alix had kidnapped and raped the victim's sister and then forced her to return to her apartment and load up his car with two televisions, one VCR and stereo equipment. When the victim returned home, Alix chased him down and shot him one time in the back, resulting in his death.

I have to stop there because some of these are so graphic, so evil, I need an anti-emetic.

"The death penalty murders innocent people"? OK, I'm done conversing with a psych patient.

Narc was right.

 

[Eta Carinae]

Originally Posted by psychforme "Certain beliefs." He is pushing an agenda that has murdered hundreds of innocent people. A crime much more hideous than any schizophrenic going on a killing spree due to psychopathology. The difference is the death penalty proponents carefully in a thoughtful manner murder innocent people while most technical killers murder because of psychopathology.

You know that Psychoanalysis practice that you and your buddies endorse, YOU REALLY, REALLY would benefit from it.

• Naci Mocan, an economist at LouisianaStateUniversity, authored a study that looked at all 3,054 U.S. counties over two decades, and concluded that each execution saved five lives. Mocan stated, "I personally am opposed to the death penalty... But my research shows that there is a deterrent effect."

• Joanna M. Shepherd, a law professor at Emory with a doctorate in economics who was involved in several studies on the death penalty, stated, "I am definitely against the death penalty on lots of different grounds... But I do believe that people respond to incentives." Shepherd found that the death penalty had a deterrent effect only in those states that executed at least nine people between 1977 and 1996. In the Michigan Law Review in 2005, Shepherd wrote, "Deterrence cannot be achieved with a half-hearted execution program."

"The death penalty murders innocent people"? OK, I'm done conversing with a psych patient. Narc was right.

 

[psycho-matic]

. And in fact, 39, not 52 were actually innocent in the entire history of capital punishment in this country since the 18th century. This would be <0.1% of all executed criminals.

I have been watching this thread in silence, however I feel compelled to address the above statements. Let me preface my response by saying I am opposed to both the death penalty (but am not opposed to a physician participating in one - nor do I believe any agency should have the right to impose their political views on a physician's practice as long as it is in the confines of the law) and abortion, except in the case of a medical situation that poses a risk to the mother.

You acknowledge that capital punishment has killed innocent people, albeit a small "statistically insignificant" minority. And your total of 39 is only the known cases - how many will forever remain unknown? At what price do we justify the existence of the death penalty? 39 lives? five? I submit that the loss of even one innocent person necessitates the abolition of death penalty in all cases where absolute certainty of guilt cannot be established; since we cannot have a double standard, the implications are that such an imperfect system should not be allowed to exist.

If you, your spouse, or a child were in this predicament - innocent yet facing the death penalty - your views would likely be very different.

 

[pgg]

Since 1976, the requirement for guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt, beyond reasonable suspicion, and habeas corpus have eliminated the incidence of wrongful executions.

That's a bold statement.

And in fact, 39, not 52 were actually innocent in the entire history of capital punishment in this country since the 18th century. This would be <0.1% of all executed criminals.

And it's a statement that's contradicted by the link you posted in the very next sentence. Go back and read the entry on that page for Wayne Felker and Cameron Willingham, two guys executed since 1976 after being convicted using evidence that now appears flawed.

They may have been guilty by the standard of the day (maybe), but they certainly aren't "beyond a shadow of a doubt, beyond reasonable suspicion" guilty by today's standards. But they are still dead by today's standards.

 

[Eta Carinae]

I have been watching this thread in silence, however I feel compelled to address the above statements. Let me preface my response by saying I am opposed to both the death penalty (but am not opposed to a physician participating in one - nor do I believe any agency should have the right to impose their political views on a physician's practice as long as it is in the confines of the law) and abortion, except in the case of a medical situation that poses a risk to the mother.

You acknowledge that capital punishment has killed innocent people, albeit a small "statistically insignificant" minority. And your total of 39 is only the known cases - how many will forever remain unknown? At what price do we justify the existence of the death penalty? 39 lives? five? I submit that the loss of even one innocent person necessitates the abolition of death penalty in all cases where absolute certainty of guilt cannot be established; since we cannot have a double standard, the implications are that such an imperfect system should not be allowed to exist.

If you read my post carefully again, you'll find that I wrote:

Since 1976, the requirement for guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt, beyond reasonable suspicion, and habeas corpus have mitigated the incidence of wrongful executions.

I would be remiss to state that the possibility of a wrongful execution was not a source of hesitation for me in this matter. However, my statement was in counter to her inflated (and unreferenced) statistic and I remain resolute in my firm support of the institution of capital punishment, even in the face of its less than perfect history, if 99.9% of the most malevolent, execrable and depraved criminals are meted the punishment that is equivalent to the gruesomeness of their crimes.

If you, your spouse, or a child were in this predicament - innocent yet facing the death penalty - your views would likely be very different.

Sr, I can categorically assure you, with all certainty and asseveration, that not even my most distant relatives, not even any of my forefathers, would have had the utter displeasure of ever even shaking hands with or coming in contact with any such aberrant societal elements. Not to mention stand accused of crimes of the nature of which capital punishment would be considered.

 

[Eta Carinae]

That's a bold statement.

And I stand by it.

 

[Eta Carinae]

If you, your spouse, or a child were in this predicament - innocent yet facing the death penalty - your views would likely be very different.

Really?
Do we kill children?

 

[Eta Carinae]

Originally Posted by Eta Carinae
Since 1976, the requirement for guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt, beyond reasonable suspicion, and habeas corpus have eliminated the incidence of wrongful executions.

That's a bold statement.

Of course, it might require a review of the legal briefs to determine if all 3 requirements were enforced by the court of trial before the finding of guilt and the subsequent execution and if any of the appeals made use of these provisions.

 

[psycho-matic]

Really?
Do we kill children?

You know well what I meant. When my son becomes an adult he will still be my "child" - my offpsring.

 

[psycho-matic]

And I stand by it.

There is a case linked in another thread on SDN, about a case under investigation in Texas where the evidence does appear to exonerate the man who was executed for the crime.

In my own state, there is mounting DNA evidence that points toward a man on death row not being the one who committed the crime - even the victim's family is rallying in support of him. The courts, however, are denying appeal after appeal on the grounds that the trial was fair, he received a fair representation in trial, and that due process of the law was followed. No system involving human beings is perfect. Capital punishment, even today, is fallible.

 

[Eta Carinae]

You know well what I meant. When my son becomes an adult he will still be my "child" - my offpsring.

I really thought you meant capital punishment for a child.

I understand.

thanks for the clarification.🙂

 

[Eta Carinae]

There is a case linked in another thread on SDN, about a case under investigation in Texas where the evidence does appear to exonerate the man who was executed for the crime.

In my own state, there is mounting DNA evidence that points toward a man on death row not being the one who committed the crime - even the victim's family is rallying in support of him. The courts, however, are denying appeal after appeal on the grounds that the trial was fair, he received a fair representation in trial, and that due process of the law was followed. No system involving human beings is perfect. Capital punishment, even today, is fallible.

You are right in your statement that capital punishment can be with errors.

so can flying airplanes,
so are some of our practices in medicine in our attempts to heal

some of the drugs we use can potentially irreversibly harm patients or kill them.



In the face of reasonable doubt or evidence of innocence, particularly physical evidence, then the failure is with the court in its ability to abide by the provisions I've mentioned in previous posts (beyond reasonable suspicion, beyond a shadow of a doubt, habeas corpus). That court's execution of *justice* is flawed and the criminal should appeal to the highest court of the land in that case.

 

[psycho-matic]

You are right in your statement that capital punishment can be with errors.

so can flying airplanes,
so are some of our practices in medicine in our attempts to heal

some of the drugs we use can potentially irreversibly harm patients or kill them.



In the face of reasonable doubt or evidence of innocence, particularly physical evidence, then the failure is with the court in its ability to abide by the provisions I've mentioned in previous posts (beyond reasonable suspicion, beyond a shadow of a doubt, habeas corpus). That court's execution of *justice* is flawed and the criminal should appeal to the highest court of the land in that case.

Said highest court in the land refused to hear the Texas case.

 

[maceo]

you guys are going off topic...

does the aba have a right to dictate to you what to do? and

what other reasons can they use to revoke your certification..

 

[Eta Carinae]

Said highest court in the land refused to hear the Texas case.

HA! Good ol' John G.
That boy is the epitome of a bad boy.

I can just hear the conversation now:

Justice Alito: Hey Johnny, I think this guy's innocent
Justice (John G.) Roberts: How many times do i have to remind you pansies, I got more important things to do than hear about those writs


Alito: what's with the yelling. I think this petition presents compelling evidence for reasonable doubt

Roberts:

 

[Bertelman]

I agree with the ABA's position on the death penalty and board certification. When helping out with an execution, the "patient" is the prisoner set to die. "Do no harm" to me means that we can't use our specialized skills to facilitate "harm". When giving anesthesia for abortion, the "patient" is the mother, not the fetus. Interestingly enough, the Hippocratic Oath once prohibited giving anesthesia for abortions, but was modified as abortion became more politically palatable. I don't give anesthesia for abortions in my current practice, but would stop doing them if the ABA came out against it.

You've justified the ABA's position based on semantics. How is an abortion different from a live delivery? When you place a lumbar epidural for SVD, how many patients are you treating? Of course you are only "treating" one, but don't think you can ignore the needs of the fetus about to be born. Somehow you find it convenient to "ignore" the live fetus during an abortion. I also don't understand why you would stop doing a procedure you don't even participate in just because some certifying board tells you so.

As for "Do no harm", I frankly don't understand how that phrase is linked to ABA cert. I'm not there yet, but I don't imagine we have to sign any documentation during or after our ABA boards stating we will "Do no harm". That's just some feel-good cliche for thousands of medical students to recite, as though every other profession out there is just recklessly causing harm in their wake while surging to rule the world. Well, maybe lawyers 😉

This argument isn't about whether you believe in the death penalty or a physician's right to participate. It's about whether you believe an organization created to maintain the educational standard of our profession has the power to deny it's members the right to fair employment based on a completely legal pursuit.

This hasn't gotten much press mostly because their aren't too many physicians that participate in executions, and none of them wish to come forward. I'd like to see them try to end our participation in abortions.

 

[phospho]

I've been in several (county jails and state pens). There's nothing fancy or cush about it.

Sorry this isn't really related to the thread, but I had a quick question:

How can a medical student get involved in something like this? Are we allowed to take electives at prisons/jails as M3's or M4's?

I go to Ohio State (i.e. a huge school) and I can't find a single thing about this. I guess my real question is: how were you able to get that kind of experience? I would love to be able to do an elective or some volunteer work at a jail or pen. clinic.

Obviously, I'm assuming you weren't saying that you actually did time at a county jail or state pen

 

[Apollyon]

Sorry this isn't really related to the thread, but I had a quick question:

How can a medical student get involved in something like this? Are we allowed to take electives at prisons/jails as M3's or M4's?

I go to Ohio State (i.e. a huge school) and I can't find a single thing about this. I guess my real question is: how were you able to get that kind of experience? I would love to be able to do an elective or some volunteer work at a jail or pen. clinic.

Obviously, I'm assuming you weren't saying that you actually did time at a county jail or state pen

You asked this last year, but didn't get a lot of info.

As a student, I don't think you'll get much exposure, for legal reasons (and when I was a student, while rotating through EDs, I didn't have to see the drunks or detainees (convicts and other)).

UTMB has a concentration in corrections medicine in their Preventive Medicine residency.

 

[Narcotized]

.

 

[Narcotized]

.

 

[reedman]

problem solved.

 

[phospho]

You asked this last year, but didn't get a lot of info.

As a student, I don't think you'll get much exposure, for legal reasons (and when I was a student, while rotating through EDs, I didn't have to see the drunks or detainees (convicts and other)).

UTMB has a concentration in corrections medicine in their Preventive Medicine residency.

you remember... yeah, there weren't many responses.

I remember back when I asked this question, someone mentioned that physicians rarely work in these settings, as the prisons seem to rely more on nurses, PA's, etc...

I didn't even know there was a preventive medicine residency though. Will definitely look into that if I'm still interested someday.

Random Q: Is there a way for me to see my (really) old posts? It just lets me go back to 300.

thanks for your help!🙂

 

[Eta Carinae]

problem solved.

😕
What's that?

 

[Apollyon]

😕
What's that?

It's a captive bolt pistol.

 

[reedman]

its a pneumatic gun that fires a bolt into a cows skull. this crap is way to complicated, we could just pay the guys down at the slaughterhouse overtime to apply their skills at the prison.

no doctors involved, no problem.

 

[pgg]

does the aba have a right to dictate to you what to do?

One of the things that is unique about certain professions (especially ours) is that we are supposed to police ourselves. There is a place for state licensing boards and our professional societies to regulate our conduct, to take steps to both

• reduce the chance that a "licensed" or "certified" physician will violate the public's trust
• address ethical issues and provide guidelines for controversial issues

License suspension and de-certification are the only sticks they have. If we do a poor job of policing ourselves (or worse, make no attempt at all) the inevitable result will be even more heavyhanded government regulation by non-physicians.

I'm not sure I really agree with the ABA's position here, but I do acknowledge that the organization does have a role in addressing and enforcing ethical conduct, and I'd rather that a body of anesthesiologists who are accountable to the rest of us be the ones to do it. The ABA and ASA aren't secret cabals ruled by hooded guys who live in shadow; those who feel strongly that the leadership of our specialty is poor should get more involved.

 

[usnavdoc]

It's a captive bolt pistol.

Like in no country for old men? lol

 

[Apollyon]

Like in no country for old men? lol

Bravo zulu! Hot **** on target there!

 

[Gern Blansten]

Like in no country for old men? lol

I love that movie. The bad guy in that movie was a great actor. He was cold hearted.

 

[tucker27705]

First off, great post/topic. Very interesting subject and very interesting reading everyone's thoughts.

My thoughts, in no particular order:

Legal, ethical and moral questions are posed by this topic. Legally, I believe we can partake in executions if asked and we desire to do so.
Morally, that can only be answered by the individual.
Ethically? That is to be determined by our board. The real question to me is, should the board make that decision? They didn't have to. They chose to. I wonder why? I'm fairly certain they felt what they were doing was right. But I'm not convinced. I think we can have differing opinions on this issue which are well reasoned, ie, reasonable. In this instance, I don't believe they should have issued such an edict that forces others in the profession to abide by the decision makers' personal biases and morals, when there are others that are equally defensible.
Let's recognize that we live in a country where the death penalty has been adopted by a large majority of the states. Whether you or I or the board disagree with it is moot. It is the law of our land, for now.
All this talk about "do no harm" is a specious argument. We do harm all the time. We poke people, we stick things in their throats etc. But we look at the big picture.
If we look at the big picture here, the prisoner is going to die. The question is, how? Paralyzed and awake (as some claim have happened), or well anesthetized and unaware? I know how I'd want to go, and it aint by a bolt in the brain, unless the only other alternative is a dolt at my iv.

Anyway, a couple of other points:

Yes, we do kill/execute children. The supreme court has specifically ruled that this is not unconstitutional. Same with mentally ******ed and pregnant prisoners. Thus, we could theoretically execute a ******ed, pregnant, minor. All these issues have been brought to the Court and allowed.

One more point. If you are going to make multiple points, you really don't need multiple posts. I, personally, am tired of a series of one sentence posts from the same person. Its not illegal, unethical or immoral. But its irritating.

Tuck

 

[Eta Carinae]

Anyway, a couple of other points:

Yes, we do kill/execute children. The supreme court has specifically ruled that this is not unconstitutional. Same with mentally ******ed and pregnant prisoners. Thus, we could theoretically execute a ******ed, pregnant, minor. All these issues have been brought to the Court and allowed.



Tuck

"As an attorney, I was stunned when Caplan stated that the United States permits "the execution of children." This is factually incorrect because the US Supreme Court explicitly prohibited that practice in the widely publicized case of Roper v. Simmons decided in 2005. This inaccuracy in Caplan's editorial highlights the dubious "factual" information from clearly partisan sources, such as the cited Human Rights Watch. "

Steven K. Erickson, JD, LLM, PhD

 

[tucker27705]

Sorry, when I was in law school (early 90's), we studied a decision from the 80's that ruled such capital punishment was ok. I am no constitutional scholar, nor am I a criminal lawyer. In fact, I haven't practiced law since the mid 90's. Thank you for bringing my attention to this more recent decision.

Addendum:
Ok, now I am really feeling dumb. Looked up the case Eta cited, and low an behold, it was prompted by a 2002 ruling from the court (Atkins v Virginia) overturning their earlier decision regarding the execution of mentally ******ed convicts. Next thing you know, we won't be able to execute pregnant convicts either. What's this country coming to?

 

[Eta Carinae]

Sorry, when I was in law school (early 90's), we studied a decision from the 80's that ruled such capital punishment was ok. I am no constitutional scholar, nor am I a criminal lawyer. In fact, I haven't practiced law since the mid 90's. Thank you for bringing my attention to this more recent decision.

WOW! MD/JD?


Really impressive.

 

[countingdays]

Sorry, when I was in law school (early 90's), we studied a decision from the 80's that ruled such capital punishment was ok. I am no constitutional scholar, nor am I a criminal lawyer. In fact, I haven't practiced law since the mid 90's. Thank you for bringing my attention to this more recent decision.

Addendum:
Ok, now I am really feeling dumb. Looked up the case Eta cited, and low an behold, it was prompted by a 2002 ruling from the court (Atkins v Virginia) overturning their earlier decision regarding the execution of mentally ******ed convicts. Next thing you know, we won't be able to execute pregnant convicts either. What's this country coming to?

Many or possibly the majority of people in prison are technically mentally ******ed. Should being stupid = 007?

 

[Mman]

I disagree with the death penalty, however my reasons are different than most death penalty opponents (I suspect).

1) It's far more expensive than life in prison and with our budget I can think of far better ways to spend that money.

2) I don't believe any good study has shown it deters crime in any real way.

3) Innocent people have been executed and that's not a good thing.



With all that said, if we are going to have a death penalty I'm not entirely opposed to an anesthesiologist being a part of the problem. Would it be bad publicity for the specialty? Easy to spin it that way and would probably happen. Would I want to be a part of it? No way. However, when you look at things like D & Es, the line gets awful blurry in terms of what is a medical procedure and what is an execution and I'm not sure I want the ABA revoking certification over something like that. A lot of it is a personal moral judgment and not a professional decision.

 

[psychforme]

I'm not sure I want the ABA revoking certification over something like that.

ABA certifies the anesthesiologist meet their standards. They can't certify that your not a psychopathic killer when you are - that would be lying. If the tea party crowd are fine with their anesthesiologists being killers the tea party crowd can let themselves be put to sleep by non-board certified anesthesiologists. Patients who don't want such a health care provider deserve better.

 

[psychforme]

So -

• first, you read the entirety of my post in which I noted that the death penalty risks executing innocent people
• next, you edited those statements out of your reply to me
• then, you asked if I agree that the death penalty risks executing innocent people

You're either

• not reading the posts you're replying to
• ******ed
• a troll

Which is it?

No, I asked you if you denied that it HAD happened since you refererred to the occurence as bizzaro world.

 

[psychforme]

Why do the saved innocent lives of a real dealth penalty mean nothing to you, you heartless bastard unfit for society. I want an answer. We are talking a real dealth penalty where overwhelming undeniable video evidence would result in capital punishment in less than a month, maybe 2.

Someone named psychoform clearly understands punishment works. From the time Psycho stuck his hand in the cookie jar and mom whacked it with a hard wooden spoon, Psycho immediately learned to not get caught stealing cookies. Punishment works, fellas. Even hard core criminals don't typically murder in front of a crowd of police. They don't want to be caught and punished. Got it?

The fact is a swift reliable dealth penalty would cause serious deterance. Human beings typically understand punishment, even the worst offenders, (not our current system of endless legal shanaigans which scares nobody). So why is the great caring Psycholiberal not giving a damn about saving potential innocent murder victims, but his heart bleeds if we gas a killer??? I find that very unfit for my society.

I'm not really waiting on your answer. It will again be dishonest 3rd grade logic just trying to push your agenda.

The death penalty doesn't save innocent lives. The scientific consensus backed with strong data is that the death penalty does not deter murder. Please don't reply with the death penalty version of intelligent design You fundie repubs are so predictable. Despise science so much - yet have to make up your own "scientific" theories about everything under the sun.

How many murders have overwhelming undeniable video evidence?

 

[psychforme]

These posts remind me of a patient who has been non-compliant with his/her antipsychotic meds.

[*]There are people in society who will NEVER agree with your foolish, naïve and errant position. I know you lefties uniformly get up in arms whenever you fail to achieve consensus. You will NOT achieve it here. I will support the death penalty as long as I’m here. When I have children, I will teach them the same as voting adults. No amount of indoctrination, coercion or intimidation will alter that. You either live with the fact that a dissenting voice will continue to exist or if that fact becomes unbearable to you, you are free to relocate to a country that better aligns with your misguided views.

I will resort to engage in the politics of this country. My goal will be to increase abortion in the republican demographics and increase anti-death penalty education for school children in areas where these cults flourish. You will still be free to relocate if it becomes unbearable to you that facts will win.

Why don’t we turn the tables and view some of the henious crimes committed by some of these monsters:
.

How about making policies through rational decision-making?

 

[Eta Carinae]

Many or possibly the majority of people in prison are technically mentally ******ed. Should being stupid = 007?

Perhaps that question should be posed to them?

 

[Eta Carinae]

I will resort to engage in the politics of this country. My goal will be to increase abortion in the republican demographics and increase anti-death penalty education for school children in areas where these cults flourish. You will still be free to relocate if it becomes unbearable to you that facts will win.

We'll see how that goes over.
Hey, Freud, so in Europe, weed's like legal, so you can get your reefer burger with KoolAid all day long. I would give it a shot.

How about making policies through rational decision-making?

Have you and your ******ed buddies ever considered that?

 

[deleted50478]

The death penalty doesn't save innocent lives. The scientific consensus backed with strong data is that the death penalty does not deter murder. Please don't reply with the death penalty version of intelligent design You fundie repubs are so predictable. Despise science so much - yet have to make up your own "scientific" theories about everything under the sun.

How many murders have overwhelming undeniable video evidence?

citation needed

If anti-death penalty activists set out to create evidence against its deterrent-effect, how convincing is the 'evidence' likely to be?

On an unrelated note. I am NOT a 'healthcare provider.' I am a doctor. Don't let the pretenders change the terminology to suit their fantasy that we are all just healthcare providers.

 

[Narcotized]

.

 

[Bertelman]

ABA certifies the anesthesiologist meet their standards. They can't certify that your not a psychopathic killer when you are - that would be lying. If the tea party crowd are fine with their anesthesiologists being killers the tea party crowd can let themselves be put to sleep by non-board certified anesthesiologists. Patients who don't want such a health care provider deserve better.

You are f'ing insane.