Tuesday, November 13, 2007

Several parts of this story concern me

I understand the "cruel and unusual punishment" aspect of administering the death penalty. The 8th Amendment to the Constitution guarantees that "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." However, the taking of life is neither cruel nor unusual. The argument of whether lethal injection is cruel is fallacious. If we can put thousands of cats and dogs to death in the same manner, we can execute a few murderers in the same way. The end result is death no matter the method. We do not torture to death, draw and quarter, burn at the stake, stone people, cut off heads with a Ginsu, etc. A simple needle in the arm with an overdose of barbiturates is hardly cruel. None the less, spineless liberals will find any way they can to protect murderers while at the same time slaughter innocent, unborn life. The issue of whether or not lethal injection is cruel and unusual punishment is going to be decided by a court of nine justices rather than by the supreme judge. Go figure.

What really bothers me is the idea that the 10th Amendment is once again becoming null and void. "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." The rights of the states to try, convict, and execute properly tried criminals is a violation of their rights as states. No execution will go forth unless the 5th Amendment was followed, anyway. "...nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;" Here is the story upon which I comment.

No comments: