Dumb Decisions: Ohio Killer Can’t Donate Organs Before Execution
Read Time:1 Minute, 40 Second
Did you know it costs more to execute someone than it costs to imprison them for life? Did you know the United States is the only Western nation to still employ the death penalty? Morally, it’s reprehensible, and on a more practical level it’s just not punishment enough.
Life in prison, locked away in an 8×10 cell, with one hour of exercise a week and no other amenities is punishment. So, when one reads about some good that may come from the death penalty, and lives may actually be saved it’s encouraging, until the state steps in and makes yet another dumb decision.
It seems that Ronald Phillips won’t be able to give away his kidneys, and definitely not his heart, before he is put to death tomorrow for the 1993 rape and murder of his girlfriend’s 3-year-old daughter, Ohio prison officials have decided.
According to ABC, the inmate wrote to officials earlier this week saying he wanted to give away his organs and “he would like that one or both of his kidneys, if a match, go to his mother who is suffering from kidney disease and on dialysis, and for his heart to go to his sister, who has a heart condition.”
Prison officials say the last-minute request is unprecedented and they decided they couldn’t grant it, partly because of the security risks that would be involved in transporting Phillips to an off-site hospital.
What happens to his organs after his death is entirely up to his family, but it’s not clear whether they will still be viable by the time his body is turned over to them, the AP notes. Phillips, 40, is scheduled to die tomorrow night from a lethal injection using an untested combination of execution drugs.
What do you think? Should the killer be allowed to save a couple of lives while losing his own anyway?
Happy
0 %
Sad
0 %
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
0 %
Surprise
0 %
0
0
The death penalty isn’t about justice, it’s about revenge.
Yep. But if was my family member who had been murdered I’d want revenge. Just makes me human. That’s why the ‘law’ has stop us killing others as most of us would given sufficient incentive.
Death penalty? I have got reservations but I can’t see how the ‘law’ can support such a thing. If it does then justice is lost to vigilantism.
Someone kills one of mine then it’s MY revenge not the ‘laws’.
As I reside in a country that banned the death penalty many moons ago I’m a bit perplexed.
I worry that being ‘found guilty beyond all reasonable doubt’ is insufficient to justify a death penalty as ‘the unreasonable doubt’ occasionally happened and the wrong person got hanged which can never be justified.
Let’s face it, a ‘posthumous pardon’ means fuck all to the deceased.
On the other hand we have killers like ‘The Yorkshire Ripper’ and Ian Brady of the 1960’s ‘Moors Murders’ infamy who we’ve spent years paying for their continued existence. Kill them. Kill the surviving terrorists from 7/7 as well.
They aren’t ‘Guilty beyond all reasonable doubt’ they’re ‘guilty as sin’.
The death penalty isn’t a bad thing in my immediate view.
The problem is it just has to be perfect and, as we’re human, perfection is a dream – so we daren’t bring it back in Blighty as, eventually, we’ll kill someone who ‘didn’t do it’.
I’ve no issue with killing the guilty who have commited horrific crimes of rape and murder etc but if we get it wrong and kill an innocent…..
Part of me wants a death penalty but a larger part knows we mustn’t. One day we’ll get it wrong.
I am a confused old sod eh?
I am in much the same boat with Marsha. In the first place we should not be executing people, period, end of story, almost anyway. Using the death penalty is not only more expensive, does not deter anyone from anything, does not teach people not to do anything, and it probably contributes to the amount of violence we have in this country. At least I believe that by showing so little concern for human life that the state is willing to commit its own version of ritualized homicide lessens the value of life everywhere in this country.
But, to address this issue, if we are going to kill someone why not harvest their parts for those in need. We are already being monsters with our rituals of killing the person why not go ahead and do the full Monty by just taking away all useful organs; heart,lungs, kidneys, eyes, etc. and giving them to to people who need them to live. Instead of poisoning the person simply put them to sleep and take the organs, the person dies for sure, and that’s it. Job well done. At least that rationale is better than the one we have now. 🙂
The death penalty is barbaric and expensive I agree Mike. How do they know this new cocktail will work to do the job would be another question I had. This keeps us up there with Iran, China and a few other places that still have dp in place. Makes me cringe to think about that. I would imagine it would be too late, if a surgical team was not there, to remove organs right away because of the security and everything surrounding a state sanctioned murder.
They just used the new cocktail last night at 6PM in Starke, Florida. It worked.
woohooo, we’re number 1 we’re number 1 at making new things to kill people. I am so proud we use our talents like this.
Oh, but think, if you are allowed to donate organs, it will be such a good reason for people to commit murder and other capital crimes! I mean, what more encouragement does one need than the ability to donate organs pre-execution they could conceivably save other people’s lives! On the other side, allowing the donation of organs would certainly be an encouragement to continue the capital punishment in the state.
This whole thing is absolutely ludicrous. It’s very difficult for me, as a total non-death penalty advocate, to say “yes, he should be allowed to donate his organs.” I am so against the death penalty that the idea of allowing organ donations for organs whose donation would kill the donator (like the heart or the second kidney) would disallow a last-minute reprieve.
But seriously, the two concepts are mutually exclusive! And I don’t really have an answer to the question. I don’t think that the state should be putting him to death; it’s totally against what I believe our nation theoretically stands for. If he’s going to be put to death, well, he SHOULDN’T be put to death. But if there is no way around it, gosh, I just find the whole situation so repulsive! Yes, he should be allowed to donate his organs.
This is just plain stupid. Ohio can’t figure out how to get this done? Idiots. This bastard took a life and if he’s willing to give back why not let him? You are right Mike-a dumb decision.