“for the consequence of choices they do not make.”

I’m not here to be contrarian, I’m here because I sincerely belive it does more harm than good to withhold these drugs. People hae already suffered and that will continue both because of the state and bcauis of the drug companies. Both have the power to make a difference here.

“No, the whole reason for Arkansas’s actions in trying to rush through executions is because of the difficulty they will face getting the drugs if this batch expires.”

That’s an example of how things get worse when you try and keep them from getting the drugs, not better.

States are responsible. So are the drug…

“Google it.”

Not only did I do that, I read the links you posted. Only ONE of the three said what you seem to think it says. AND THEY ARE ALL STILL ON DEATH ROW.

“That is the whole reason for Arkansas’s actions”

Nope.
“Before Baker’s injunction, Pulaski County Judge Wendell Griffen had issued a temporary restraining…

“First of all, not going forward with executions as a result of drug shortages HAS happened,”

Yes, not doing any executions is an option. It’s also not going to happen as evidenced by the stories of people killed with all manner of drugs, and the subsequent issues. I’ll say it over and over as many times as I need to: “Shared responsibility doesn’t mean the drug companies have none.” Your dislike of the…

Again, you’ve failed to explain by what mechanism drug companies are forcing states to do anything.

“Wait, how does refusing to sell drugs “force” states to do anything?”

YOU SEEM TO HAVE MISSED SOMETHING

Since I was quoting my previous post, I was talking about the drug companies. The responsibility is shared, that doesn’t make it go away. 

“I’ve provided links,”

And I read them and explained that only one of them even qualifies.  

“I’m not googling any more for a troll.”

IN your first link, withholding drug was not the reason executions were put on hold, it as because they didn’t use the right ones. They were not folloing proper proceedure. And those inmates are still on death row.

“Not providing drugs has led to states halting executions.”

Name one. And let me ask you, are these people still on death row?

“There is nothing pragmatic about thinking that an uninterrupted supply of drugs will some how lead to the end of the death penalty.”

That’s also not what I said. I said it does nothing to stop…

Drug companies not selling those drug is not getting executions commuted.

“If drug companies do not supply drugs, people might not die.”

Disagree.  

“What kind of sense does that make?”

The pragmatic kind that understands that limiting access to the drugs only leads to more suffering when executions take place anyways.  

I’m not ok with the death penalty. I said as much.

“The best thing would be no death penalty. Second best thing would be death penalty with something like a morphine overdose, or whatever they give to people in the few states with physician assisted suicide. But insisting on nothing but the first option is only…

No, not a troll. And yes, their decision does lead to an increase of suffering. That’s just a fact. When they refuse to sell the drugs people die by less humane means. That is a fact. The responsibility is shared, that doesn’t make it go away.

You are ok with increased suffering to prove your point. Just own it.

Their decision results in increased suffering. That’s a fact and I don’t think it’s worth it to make a point. Work to end the death penalty without exploiting other people’s suffering.

BTW I could not find any examples of executions being halted specifically due to drugs. For example, the one posted on Jez today…

They are directly respoible for the increase in suffering, especially because they KNOW that’s what the outsome of their choice will be.

They are directly respoible for the increase in suffering, especially because they KNOW that’s what the outsome of their choice will be.

I don’t care what they are meant for, the reality is the consequences of their decision directly leads to increased suffering. They have a responsibility for that.

And BTW, Drs DO prescribe drugs that kill people, and or are not meant to be used in the way people are using them.

Off label use is a real thing, as is Dr…

They make the drugs, what they are doing is actively preventing prisons from OBTAINING the drugs so they can use them for executions.

And yes, they have some responsibility for the consequences of that decision.
Not for the people being killed, but for those people’s increased level of suffering.