There is another news story today about how states that use lethal injection as their chosen form of execution are in a mad dash to scour the globe for a new source of the drugs that they need to execute death row prisoners with. (I'm sorry, I know I'm not supposed to end a sentence with with. But I'm a rebel, so I'll do it as much as I'm comfortable with. Take that, Warriner! And do you know what else? I'm going to write an extra-long paragraph for it to go with. So there.) There was a story recently about how the federal government confiscated all of Georgia’s supply of the drug sodium thiopental, stating that there was a concern over how it was obtained (although I happen to know {I have it on good authority from some guy} that they actually confiscated it for a really big government slumber party).
This whole thing reminds me of a number of different recollections I have from over the years with regard to lethal injections. I used to hear that it costs many times more to execute a prisoner than it does to keep them in prison for life. I used to say: “If that’s true, then they are doing it wrong.” But if that’s a fact, it’s probably more likely that it’s because people who get life sentences usually get out of prison after like 15 years, while people on death row have to sit around for years while all their appeals get through the justice system and rack up all those legal fees, and aren’t they usually dead by then anyway? (Again, some guy told me that, so it must be right.) But the most frequent argument I hear against the death penalty these days is that the system that is used for lethal injections is painful, unreliable, and inhumane.
Well, again, I have to say that if that’s the case, they’re doing it wrong. I have a simple solution that will solve both of those problems (the money one, and the reliability/humanity one): use heroin to execute death penalty cases. I know that sounds like a joke, but it’s not. Think of how much they spend on getting the “cocktail” of drugs for the lethal injections, and then think of how often you’ve heard about them having to stop an execution because something went wrong, or because the drugs have expired. Well, when things go wrong with people who use heroin, they die, so isn’t that the desired effect of executions anyway? And now think of how many times you’ve heard of a junkie not using heroin because it has passed its expiration date. That’s right: heroin has no expiration date, so you can always use it to execute prisoners.
And the cost? Well, aren’t our police and DEA agents constantly confiscating heroin from drug smugglers and drug dealers, not to mention just from sketchy guys walking down the street? And then what do they do with it? (Besides sell it illegally and get high, I mean. {<I’m kidding! So please don’t plant heroin on me. But TV shows and movies are constantly showing the police doing that, aren’t they?}) They burn it or likewise dispose of it. Well, what’s to stop them from giving it to prisons to use for lethal injections? And then wouldn’t it be free, since they were just going to dispose of it anyway?
Alright, now for the biggest argument people always make: it’s painful and inhumane. Have you ever seen a picture of a heroin user who died from a heroin overdose? They die instantly, with the needle still in their arm. And for the pain part? Heroin is a pain killing drug, one of the most powerful narcotics in the world. What about dosing? What if they get the dose wrong? Well, if they get the dose wrong and it’s not enough, then the prisoner will just get high for a while. Then they just increase the dose. He won’t feel the second needle, I’d wager, and by then, he probably won’t even mind being executed. And if the dose is too high, well, then nobody will notice anyway. So really, there’s nothing wrong with the plan of using heroin overdoses to execute prisoners: it works, it’s free, it’s painless. The only real argument against it is that it’s impossible to find an argument against it, so nobody would be able to stop executions anymore. And isn’t that what the complaints are all about in the first place, really?
This whole thing reminds me of a number of different recollections I have from over the years with regard to lethal injections. I used to hear that it costs many times more to execute a prisoner than it does to keep them in prison for life. I used to say: “If that’s true, then they are doing it wrong.” But if that’s a fact, it’s probably more likely that it’s because people who get life sentences usually get out of prison after like 15 years, while people on death row have to sit around for years while all their appeals get through the justice system and rack up all those legal fees, and aren’t they usually dead by then anyway? (Again, some guy told me that, so it must be right.) But the most frequent argument I hear against the death penalty these days is that the system that is used for lethal injections is painful, unreliable, and inhumane.
Well, again, I have to say that if that’s the case, they’re doing it wrong. I have a simple solution that will solve both of those problems (the money one, and the reliability/humanity one): use heroin to execute death penalty cases. I know that sounds like a joke, but it’s not. Think of how much they spend on getting the “cocktail” of drugs for the lethal injections, and then think of how often you’ve heard about them having to stop an execution because something went wrong, or because the drugs have expired. Well, when things go wrong with people who use heroin, they die, so isn’t that the desired effect of executions anyway? And now think of how many times you’ve heard of a junkie not using heroin because it has passed its expiration date. That’s right: heroin has no expiration date, so you can always use it to execute prisoners.
And the cost? Well, aren’t our police and DEA agents constantly confiscating heroin from drug smugglers and drug dealers, not to mention just from sketchy guys walking down the street? And then what do they do with it? (Besides sell it illegally and get high, I mean. {<I’m kidding! So please don’t plant heroin on me. But TV shows and movies are constantly showing the police doing that, aren’t they?}) They burn it or likewise dispose of it. Well, what’s to stop them from giving it to prisons to use for lethal injections? And then wouldn’t it be free, since they were just going to dispose of it anyway?
Alright, now for the biggest argument people always make: it’s painful and inhumane. Have you ever seen a picture of a heroin user who died from a heroin overdose? They die instantly, with the needle still in their arm. And for the pain part? Heroin is a pain killing drug, one of the most powerful narcotics in the world. What about dosing? What if they get the dose wrong? Well, if they get the dose wrong and it’s not enough, then the prisoner will just get high for a while. Then they just increase the dose. He won’t feel the second needle, I’d wager, and by then, he probably won’t even mind being executed. And if the dose is too high, well, then nobody will notice anyway. So really, there’s nothing wrong with the plan of using heroin overdoses to execute prisoners: it works, it’s free, it’s painless. The only real argument against it is that it’s impossible to find an argument against it, so nobody would be able to stop executions anymore. And isn’t that what the complaints are all about in the first place, really?
I am not addressing the issue of capital punishment here, and I’m not advocating the death penalty. Whether or not we execute certain prisoners is up to the justice system, at least until the machines take over. Then we’re all going to die anyway, so what difference does it really make? I just think that if they’re going to do it, they might as well do it right.
But, hey, at least I’m not like some people! I remember back when I lived in New York City, and some high-powered-looking lawyer or Wall Street hedge fund manager wearing a $5,000.00 suit and alligator shoes had stepped in dog poop and was trying to scrape it off on the curb, and he looked at me and fumed: “I think the penalty for not cleaning up after your dog should be death!!” Well, if we’re going to start doing that, then we really will need a more effective and less expensive method of executing criminals. And doesn’t it just make sense to execute people in prison with something that gets people put in prison too? I’m just saying: two birds with one stone. (If you want to talk about inefficient methods of execution, how about killing two birds with one stone. Who kills birds with stones anymore? It’s hard enough just to hit them with rocket-propelled grenades and surface-to-air missiles!)
But, hey, at least I’m not like some people! I remember back when I lived in New York City, and some high-powered-looking lawyer or Wall Street hedge fund manager wearing a $5,000.00 suit and alligator shoes had stepped in dog poop and was trying to scrape it off on the curb, and he looked at me and fumed: “I think the penalty for not cleaning up after your dog should be death!!” Well, if we’re going to start doing that, then we really will need a more effective and less expensive method of executing criminals. And doesn’t it just make sense to execute people in prison with something that gets people put in prison too? I’m just saying: two birds with one stone. (If you want to talk about inefficient methods of execution, how about killing two birds with one stone. Who kills birds with stones anymore? It’s hard enough just to hit them with rocket-propelled grenades and surface-to-air missiles!)
Want to read the article? It’s at:
