A state execution in the U.S. was postponed when concerns were raised about the use of an untested drug they had intended to use as a method of execution. Many say the point of the punishment is to ensure death, an untested drug could allow the accused to be revived and have to go through the procedure again. Also the aim is to minimise the degree of suffering experienced in their final moments as this is a legal requirement.
On the other hand others might argue the individual has been sentenced to death so should they be entitled to something pain free? Should the experience be as pleasant as possible under the circumstance? Or do they have no right to any of these options? They have committed an unforgiveable crime which warrants death so should they suffer during the process?
Personally I don't believe untested drugs should be used, yes the individual has committed a crime which may be unforgiveable but they are paying for that with their lives which surely is enough? To avoid all these issues it is best if the drugs should be tested prior to its use to ensure the process is as quick and clean as possible, at the end of the day the individual still loses their life and that's the point is it not?
On the other hand others might argue the individual has been sentenced to death so should they be entitled to something pain free? Should the experience be as pleasant as possible under the circumstance? Or do they have no right to any of these options? They have committed an unforgiveable crime which warrants death so should they suffer during the process?
Personally I don't believe untested drugs should be used, yes the individual has committed a crime which may be unforgiveable but they are paying for that with their lives which surely is enough? To avoid all these issues it is best if the drugs should be tested prior to its use to ensure the process is as quick and clean as possible, at the end of the day the individual still loses their life and that's the point is it not?
Comments
Post a Comment