Oklahoma state is considering using vetinary drugs to execute deathrow prisoners.

[MickyMacgraw]

http://www.dailymail....vets-use-animals.html
Im not sure exactly what all the hoo ha is about as pentobarbital which is to replace Sodium thiopental is already used in humans that have seizures and it's used as a sedation drug.

What is your moral stance on this, if a vetinary drug was to be used on a killer that had murdered a friend or a family member would you care?
What if the killer was your friend or family member, what then?

[Sqad]

I am a bit confused here.........if you are going to die by lethal injection, it is the chemical that kills you and the fact that it can also affect other animals seems to be irrelevant.

[ummmm]

A drug is a drug. I wouldn't care what type of drug was used as long as it's the most humane.

[Loosehead]

presumably the drug is good for the job in hand, those "put down" are worst than animals, I connnot see there is much to debate here.

[rojash]

"What is your moral stance on this"
Execution is morally wrong, regardless of how it's performed.

[ummmm]

I agree. It is wrong...but it's happening so they should use the most humane method imo..

[fredpuli47]

So? It appears that the drug is used to anaesthetise before the fatal drugs are administered. It already has some medical use.

The hoo-ha is any excuse to delay execution. That the story is in the Daily Mail may, perhaps, be ignored for once ! It's unlikely that nobody has protested.

I'm against 'judicial execution' but that's another matter.

[Whickerman]

I'm 100% against execution.

Lethal injection is far from Humane btw - the first injection paralyses you so that you can't struggle when the other injections shuts your organs down, but you can feel every part of it.

[Answerprancer]

My moral stance on this is that no-one no matter what has the right to take another person's life, regardless of what they've done.

[Answerprancer]

..."an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind".

[237SJ]

I agree, Answerprancer. The powers that be decree that taking a life is wrong, then they turn around and do just that. I think for situations like mass terrorism though, my first instinct it to do away with the bas***ds

[Haggisdj]

Why do they sterilize the needles??

[modeller]

So answerprancer you wouldn't fire at a bomber who was about to blow up a school or to save the life of your own family.

[Answerprancer]

I probably would modeller, no-one's perfect - I'm sure you'd do something that goes against your principles too if the situation demanded it.

[Answerprancer]

..and before you scream hypocrite, I admit it already.

[Prudentia]

whickerman, so you've been there, eh??? guilty murderers must pay the ultimate price, sooner rather than later, did they pause to consider their victims preferences as how they should meet their wholly and underserved deaths by a perverted and mentally unstable individual. Slot the murderous cretins as soon as the court passes judgement, no compromise. end of story! Defend the indefensible if you can, but I have personal experiencwe here but my money is that you have nothing but a sad bid for a much wished for intelligence.