It is obvious that the main issue is whether to heal a prisoner simply for the purpose of execution or otherwise. The basic undertone to this argument could be whether the government authority has the power to force prisoners or citizens to take drugs without their consent regardless of their status. Another point of argument could be making a prisoner sane before execution is rational or a good reasoning before killing. In this scenario, Charles Laverne Singleton is a prisoner on death row, and he is awaiting execution for the crime of felony capital murder. Singleton became insane while in prison, it can be inferred that his insanity is related to the approaching date of execution. The eighth circuit court of appeal has ruled that the State
…show more content…
The ruling has stirred up opposition and controversy against it.
In agreement with David Kaczynski (Kaczynski). Of a truth, I understand that medications are meant to restore people’s health, and that is exactly what the anti-psychotic medications are doing. The anti-psychotic drugs reverses insanity, simply speaking: Singleton has lost his mind and gone insane, and these anti-psychotic medications are meant to heal him of his insanity. My primary concern is the reason or purpose behind the issuing or better still forcing—these drugs. I quite disagree that it is ethical or rational to forcefully administer medications to prisoners for the main purpose of revitalizing their minds for execution. Assuming on a broader terms that these …show more content…
Making Singleton sane to cause him to appreciate his execution is futile at best: even if he does appreciate it, there is no deterring effect that the execution can have on him. His appreciation of his execution is unnecessary for the purpose of deterring others from committing murder, since all they need to see is someone die due to an action of misconduct. In other words: an execution is meant to deter others from violating such a law, not the individual being executed; because the punishment isn’t meant to deter him from further acts of misconduct, his state of mind at the time of death is irrelevant. Therefore, his execution should be carried out regardless of his depraved
The ruling has stirred up opposition and controversy against it.
In agreement with David Kaczynski (Kaczynski). Of a truth, I understand that medications are meant to restore people’s health, and that is exactly what the anti-psychotic medications are doing. The anti-psychotic drugs reverses insanity, simply speaking: Singleton has lost his mind and gone insane, and these anti-psychotic medications are meant to heal him of his insanity. My primary concern is the reason or purpose behind the issuing or better still forcing—these drugs. I quite disagree that it is ethical or rational to forcefully administer medications to prisoners for the main purpose of revitalizing their minds for execution. Assuming on a broader terms that these …show more content…
Making Singleton sane to cause him to appreciate his execution is futile at best: even if he does appreciate it, there is no deterring effect that the execution can have on him. His appreciation of his execution is unnecessary for the purpose of deterring others from committing murder, since all they need to see is someone die due to an action of misconduct. In other words: an execution is meant to deter others from violating such a law, not the individual being executed; because the punishment isn’t meant to deter him from further acts of misconduct, his state of mind at the time of death is irrelevant. Therefore, his execution should be carried out regardless of his depraved