Arizona's Jeffrey Landrigan executed despite concerns drugs not FDA-approved

[HiWarp]

Am I missing something here? There's concern over the safety of a drug used to execute people? Sure, I understand the whole pain caused if the drug doesn't work properly, but if you are executing a murderer and cause him to suffer some additional pain in the process, how is that a bad thing? Or am I being sadistic?

http://www.nydailynews.com/fdcp?1288181055523

[Rubystars]

The constitution is against cruel and unusual punishment. Executions are not unconstitutional, but those that involve severe pain are, so that's one reason it's important to have approved drugs that cause as little pain during the process of death as possible.

[HiWarp]

The constitution is against cruel and unusual punishment. Executions are not unconstitutional, but those that involve severe pain are, so that's one reason it's important to have approved drugs that cause as little pain during the process of death as possible.

Very true Rubystars, you are correct. I always looked at that clause in the Constitution as preventing the deliberate use of cruel and unusual punishment but mistakenly doing it doesn't exactly adhere to the original intent of the clause.

[Rubystars]

We should all care about this, regardless of what we think of someone currently being executed. God only knows whether or not real right wing conservatives will be subjected to trial as domestic terrorists one day.