Dawn of the Dawg
YOU TRY ‘EM, WE FRY ‘EM:
Thursday, January 5, 2012
YOU TRY ’EM, WE FRY ’EM: I never saw much point of having my cake if I couldn’t eat it, too. But then, I never particularly liked cake. Even worse, I could never figure out what that expression meant. But if I could, I strongly suspect it would apply to the new debate swirling over the death penalty in California, in legal limbo since a federal judge found evidence six years ago that the three-chemical killer cocktail administered at San Quentin might constitute cruel and unusual punishment. Among California voters, the death penalty has been more or less a theological matter for the past 50 years. As with God, you either believe or you don’t. Mostly, Californians believed. Now, concern about the bottom line is shaking that faith. For the first time in eons, California’s death penalty is at risk. A new statewide coalition — SAFE California — is currently collecting signatures to qualify an initiative to abolish the death penalty for this November’s ballot. This group isn’t wasting any breath arguing the right-and-wrong of capital punishment; instead, it’s focused exclusively on the dollars and cents. A recent study undertaken by Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Arthur Alarcon — a death penalty supporter throughout his career — revealed that we’ve spent $4 billion since 1978 to execute 13 prisoners. That’s $308 million per execution. Alarcon’s study also found that running Death Row costs the taxpayers $185 million a year they could otherwise be spending on other things, like more cops, drug-rehab counselors, or teachers. Finally, it concluded the state could save up to $1 billion every five or six years by abolishing the death penalty outright and sentencing people convicted of capital offenses to Life Without Possibility of Parole instead. Many of the usual anti–death-penalty suspects — like the ACLU — are very much involved, but so too is Jeanne Woodford, the former warden of San Quentin who personally presided over four executions. And so, too, is Don Heller, the former prosecutor who wrote the 1978 ballot language reinstating the death penalty in California.
Angry Poodle
Many are quick to blame the dedicated cadre of bleeding-heart–obstructionist attorneys who file appeal after appeal to ensure the state doesn’t accidentally kill off any innocent scumbags. Given the 17-year gap between average conviction and average execution, clearly, they’ve been effective. And increased delays equal increased costs. But equally responsible has been the Department of Corrections itself. Not only has the state’s actual execution of the death penalty been startlingly half-assed, but its rigid insistence on using the killer-cocktail protocol — when more effective and more expedient alternatives clearly exist — makes me wonder if the Department of Corrections isn’t secretly in league with the ACLU to end capital punishment. The killer cocktail consists of three chemicals: The first, sodium thiopental, is a barbiturate that knocks you out; the second, pancuronium bromide, is a paralytic agent that stops the muscles used to breathe; the third, potassium chloride, chemically short-circuits your heart. Unfortunately, sodium thiopental is extremely short-acting. A federal judge found that in six of California’s 11 lethal injections, there was reason to wonder if the drug knocked the prisoners out for the duration of their execution. If not, that means the condemned were chemically suffocated to death while still conscious. As excruciating as that sounds, it’s nothing compared to the liquid flamethrower effect induced by an injection of potassium chloride. The good news, at least for those witnessing, is that there’s no writhing, twitching, or contorting on the part of the executed. After all, they’ve been paralyzed. This, in the words of Chief Justice John Roberts in a 2008 ruling upholding the constitutionality of the procedure, ensures that “the dignity of the procedure” is maintained.
It’s worth noting that the Humane Society and every organization of veterinarians in the country have strongly condemned the use of paralytic agents — like pancuronium bromide — when euthanizing animals. In fact, in the states where 97 percent of all lethal injections have occurred, the state legislatures have passed laws prohibiting the use of such paralytics when killing critters. (The killer cocktail was originally concocted in Oklahoma in 1977; by 1981, that state’s legislature outlawed as inhumane the use of paralytics to kill animals.) Typically, dogs, cats, cows, and horses are put down with a massive overdose of a single barbiturate. In recent years, states like Ohio and Washington have decided if it’s humane enough for animals, it’ll have to do for humans. California has thus far refused to even consider that option. It has also proved equally stubborn in not explaining why. Ohio was prompted in large measure by the decision of Hospira, the manufacturer of sodium thiopental, to shut down its U.S. factory and to stop selling the drug to death rows in the U.S. This shortage induced a panic among American executioners last year, and numerous executions were postponed. Arizona responded by buying in bulk from Dream Pharma, a very shady British company located behind a driving school in West London that specializes, according to its Web site, in finding hard-to-get drugs that have been discontinued or unlicensed “in other parts of the world.” In turn, California’s executioners bought a few vials from Arizona just in case. This in turn sparked one of the weirder lawsuits ever, with attorneys for the condemned arguing the imported sodium thiopental could not be used in American executions because the Food and Drug Administration had not first certified it could be used to kill safely. Among the many deficiencies listed, it turns out the imported vials of the drug did not contain warning labels that the product contained was habit-forming. California could easily finesse the cruel-and-unusual concerns by abandoning the killer cocktail and switching to sodium pentobarbitol, as the state of Ohio — and thousands of veterinarians — have done. Until the state at least studies the matter, the death penalty is effectively dead here. And that’s just as well.
Like I said, I’ve never been a big fan of cake. But then again, $4 billion will buy an awful lot of it. And enough milk and icing to help get it down.
Related Links
Comments
In the past, I have been for the death penalty for only the most violent crimes. However, it now costs more to execute a prisoner than to keep the criminal in jail for 40 years. Unless we can bring down the cost, we should just let the criminal rot in jail until he's carted out in a box.
Exception: If the criminal ever becomes a total invalid, we should remove them from the prison system, much to the chagrin of the prison guard's union.
Botany (anonymous profile)
January 5, 2012 at 3:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Botany,
Your post is good. I was writing a lot about the marijuana and a large portion of bloggers wanted to look at ancient methods of medicinal use. I wonder if they would “feel” as strongly about the quickness at which the death penalty was executed in ancient Greece or Rome or Persia. The Chinese death of a thousand cuts was a gruesome way to go. I am pro death penalty and as you stated correctly the slothfulness of the system is very expensive. If you read the 12 Tables you will see that parents that had an unruly juvenile could bring that juvenile before counsel and if reform was not possible the penalty for the juvenile was death. That took care of gang and other social problems. I am not suggesting we travel back in time to those laws. However, an offender that is put to death will not offend again and if the system was timely then the death penalty would be a deterrent much further than it is now. The death penalty should be expanded to rapists and pedophiles too. That is a very strong statement I know. Rape is a crime of violence and a step away from murder in violating your most sacred constitutional freedoms of liberty. Pedophiles are rapists. Children should know that they are protected and that they will not be raped or become reprogrammed to consent to the rape.
People can't wrap their minds around the following: In the criminal world murder is the way criminals keep order: period. They don’t hold court. Even in the most organized criminal organizations murder is the norm for keeping order. They are very good at keeping theft down as well as maintaining a high degree of order using murder.Civilized people do not understand the subculture of the criminal code of conduct. You kill someone in your organization or another organization that did you wrong or you get a promotion by doing that killing. Look at the violence in Mexico between the cartels. They are not in negotiations purchasing parcels in the illegal trade of drugs and weapons. They are killing each other and the authorities that stand up to them. People are intimidated and scared on the boarder.
What do we say about the death penalty as citizens? So many people are against it. The bad guys know it works. They would rather go to prison; it’s safer.
jw (anonymous profile)
January 5, 2012 at 7:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
So JW is suggesting that our judicial system embrace attitudes held by criminals? You seem to think nothing of killing an unruly teen..?
And what about people like Barbara Graham, who are executed and later found innocent? The fact that the wrong people do get convicted occasionally is reason enough to kill the death penalty.
Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
January 5, 2012 at 7:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)
KV,
You read into things way too much. Read the words. "I am not suggesting we travel back in time to those laws." "Civilized people do not understand the subculture of the criminal code of conduct." "People are intimidated and scared on the boarder."
Have you ever read anything substantial? You simply just don't understand. You go for the tongue twister. Some people just don't care at all until they are a victim. You're agenda oriented and that's a fact. Not fact oriented. I do not believe that you have seen violent crime or lost a family member to it. Have you served your country? The freedom you enjoy was delivered to you courtesy of people like me that have fertilized the ground with our skin, blood and bones so you can spew and spit on them because you don’t like the cut of their jib.
Get you facts straight, when history is explained it does not mean that it is endorsed.
jw (anonymous profile)
January 5, 2012 at 8:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"You're agenda oriented and that's a fact."
-- jw
Says the pot to the kettle.
SezMe (anonymous profile)
January 6, 2012 at 1:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"If the criminal ever becomes a total invalid, we should remove them from the prison system ..."
-- Botany
Great idea. Some old geezer is now a total invalid so we wheel him/her out of the prison gate and he/she sits there rotting in the noonday sun. Death ensues. After a while, the stench from the rotting corpse becomes really bad. But all is saved when feral cats, dogs and wild coyotes nibble away at the putrid flesh. After a while, only a bedraggled skeleton is left. Universal Waste Management is called in by the state to haul it away and they take away the fetid wheelchair at no charge.
My kind of society, for sure.
SezMe (anonymous profile)
January 6, 2012 at 1:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
SezMe,
Dear Pot, My history is not wrong nor is my criminal analysis of crime trends in America. That is not agenda driven; the rest was a factual presentation of how was and it is. However, poking at cannabis people is called editorializing and ancient customs as a generalization. I am still with you. However the: roll them out for the rats to be eaten alive would be considered barbaric and cruel and unusual punishment. I don’t think that will fly. The flies would though.
My next read, American Sniper by Chris Kyle; 5 bronze stars and 2 silver stars, the most lethal sniper in American history. He saved the lives of a lot of troops and civilians.
I just finished destroying, by a counter thesis, a book called Justice Blind by Mathew Robertson. He thinks the death penalty is wrong and that we should house more prisoners; and we should hire more guards.
Kettle 1 over and out
jw (anonymous profile)
January 6, 2012 at 1:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I favor the death penalty in principle, but oppose it in practice. As Ken points out, innocent people get killed.
If there were some way of ensuring the guilt of *everyone* on death row, I could support it, but as far as I'm concerned, one innocent person getting executed is one too many.
billclausen (anonymous profile)
January 7, 2012 at 1:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I oppose war as most warriors do, but we are always ready when you need us.
jw (anonymous profile)
January 7, 2012 at 3:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Well, I oppose executions as most executioners do, but we are always ready when you need us!
rambler (anonymous profile)
January 7, 2012 at 10:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I oppose opposition as most opposers do, but we are always ready when you need us.
Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
January 9, 2012 at 8:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Become a volunteer; go to Afghanistan with the one of the civilian organizations that helps our soldiers get ready to come home from their tour of duty. Join the USO and stay here and help.
jw (anonymous profile)
January 10, 2012 at 10:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)