The chief judge of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has a suggestion to prevent legal challenges to lethal injection as a method of execution:
Bring back firing squads.
I am not making this up.
Chief Judge Alex Kozinski was upset with his court's decision this week to stay the execution of Arizona killer Joseph Rudolph Wood, who murdered his estranged girlfriend and her father in 1989.
A federal appeals court ruled Monday that Arizona cannot yet execute Wood, who argued that he had a First Amendment right to know detailed information about the drugs that would be used to kill him.
Late Tuesday the Supreme Court reversed the lower court ruling, lifting the stay.
Kozinski's dissent in the 9th Court ruling outlines why firing squads would prevent such legal wrangling.
He wrote in part:
"Whatever the hopes and reasons for the switch to drugs (for executions), they proved to be misguided. Subverting medicines meant to heal the human body to the opposite purpose was an enterprise doomed to failure. Today's case is only the latest in an unending effort to undermine and discredit this method of carrying out lawful executions…
"Whatever happens to Wood, the attacks will not stop and for a simple reason: The enterprise is flawed. Using drugs meant for individuals with medical needs to carry out executions is a misguided effort to mask the brutality of executions by making them look serene and peaceful—like something any one of us might experience in our final moments…
"But executions are, in fact, nothing like that. They are brutal, savage events, and nothing the state tries to do can mask that reality. Nor should it. If we as a society want to carry out executions, we should be willing to face the fact that the state is committing a horrendous brutality on our behalf…
"If some states and the federal government wish to continue carrying out the death penalty, they must turn away from this misguided path and return to more primitive—and foolproof—methods of execution. The guillotine is probably best but seems inconsistent with our national ethos. And the electric chair, hanging and the gas chamber are each subject to occasional mishaps.
"The firing squad strikes me as the most promising. Eight or ten large-caliber rifle bullets fired at close range can inflict massive damage, causing instant death every time. There are plenty of people employed by the state who can pull the trigger and have the training to aim true.
"The weapons and ammunition are bought by the state in massive quantities for law enforcement purposes, so it would be impossible to interdict the supply. And nobody can argue that the weapons are put to a purpose for which they were not intended: firearms have no purpose other than destroying their targets. Sure, firing squads can be messy, but if we are willing to carry out executions, we should not shield ourselves from the reality that we are shedding human blood. If we, as a society, cannot stomach the splatter from an execution carried out by firing squad, then we shouldn't be carrying out executions at all."
I love this guy.
And he's right.
Either we "stomach the spatter" or we abolish the brutally barbaric practice.
No comments:
Post a Comment