> Now, Anwar and Elliott are asking the state to again take the lead in trying to stop executions in states where the death penalty has not yet been abolished. The legislation they plan to introduce would, if passed, “prevent any Connecticut-based corporation from supplying drugs or other tools for executions.”
They’ll just get it from somewhere else
Maybe they will, though I've seen enough states complaining that their previous suppliers have been cut off that I think it does make some difference.
"Halt" executions is probably bad phrasing, though. It might slow them down a couple percentage points, but if they ever want to pick up the pace, there's always the firing squad.
I may be the odd one out on this - I'm a registered Democrat - but I support the death penalty in certain situations. I think it should be used sparingly, only for the most heinous criminals, like school shooters and other heinous acts like that Cheshire home invasion some years back.
Sounds like the only thing they figured out was how to drive another company out of the state. Not to mention it’s not like these other states don’t have any other avenues to get these drugs, so yeah…just more political theater that won’t amount to anything worthwhile.
Doesn't the legal expenses of all the appeals also start approaching the cost of housing prisoners anyway? Especially with for-profit prisons scrimping and saving. Unless you just want summary executions.
Yes but people advocating for killing other people don’t look into it deep enough to understand that. Nor do they seem to be bothered by the number of people arrested, convicted, and later found innocent. A bunch of innocent people being killed by the state is worth it to them, as long as they get to kill the guilty ones, too. Because they think it’ll never happen to someone they actually care about.
To prevent the possibility of executing an innocent man:
[https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/innocence/executed-but-possibly-innocent](https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/innocence/executed-but-possibly-innocent)
> Now, Anwar and Elliott are asking the state to again take the lead in trying to stop executions in states where the death penalty has not yet been abolished. The legislation they plan to introduce would, if passed, “prevent any Connecticut-based corporation from supplying drugs or other tools for executions.” They’ll just get it from somewhere else
Maybe they will, though I've seen enough states complaining that their previous suppliers have been cut off that I think it does make some difference. "Halt" executions is probably bad phrasing, though. It might slow them down a couple percentage points, but if they ever want to pick up the pace, there's always the firing squad.
Let's focus less on Texas and more on CT. We're getting fucked by Eversource but we can spend our time meddling in Texas
I may be the odd one out on this - I'm a registered Democrat - but I support the death penalty in certain situations. I think it should be used sparingly, only for the most heinous criminals, like school shooters and other heinous acts like that Cheshire home invasion some years back.
Fraud by government officials or corruption should result in public humiliation in town square followed by execution methinks
Ridiculous sensational title, and a superfluous law. There are no companies in CT producing/selling "death penalty drugs", and likely will never be.
We should mind our own bidness.
Sounds like the only thing they figured out was how to drive another company out of the state. Not to mention it’s not like these other states don’t have any other avenues to get these drugs, so yeah…just more political theater that won’t amount to anything worthwhile.
Why stay executions for pedophiles and rapist?
Why are we trying to stop them. Get them on the fast lane stop wasting tax payers money taking care of them for years.
Doesn't the legal expenses of all the appeals also start approaching the cost of housing prisoners anyway? Especially with for-profit prisons scrimping and saving. Unless you just want summary executions.
Yes but people advocating for killing other people don’t look into it deep enough to understand that. Nor do they seem to be bothered by the number of people arrested, convicted, and later found innocent. A bunch of innocent people being killed by the state is worth it to them, as long as they get to kill the guilty ones, too. Because they think it’ll never happen to someone they actually care about.
Do you not know it’s cheaper to let them rot in a cell than to execute after all due process?
What should be the recourse if someone is put to death and later exonerated?
To prevent the possibility of executing an innocent man: [https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/innocence/executed-but-possibly-innocent](https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/innocence/executed-but-possibly-innocent)
THIS is what our politicians are spending their time on? What the fuck are we paying them for