Cruel? Inhuman? Just make it quick

Re “Unfit to execute,” Opinion, Nov. 26

Eric Berger has it all wrong. Who cares how condemned convicts die, as long as they do so quickly? Being humane about executing a living being is reserved for animals, who do not know what is morally wrong or right. Humans are another story -- they knew when they performed their violent crimes that they were in the wrong, and they know it when their execution dates arrive. Whether it causes pain is immaterial to the task at hand, which is to terminate their lives as fast as possible.

Do-gooders like Berger are ruining the punishment effect of executions by paying attention to the convicts’ feelings of any pain. Whatever considerations they are pushing are more for soothing themselves than anything else. To the dead criminal, it doesn’t matter a bit.

Joe Doremire

Fountain Hills, Ariz.

Berger details the apparent dilemma concerning the uncertainty of a painless execution for murderers on death row. Why is the solution so complicated? A bullet to the back of the head would obviously be quick and painless. This could also be preceded by an emotional palliative consisting of a couple of marijuana cigarettes or some hard liquor. This solution would definitely be neither cruel nor unusual, which is more than can be said for being caged for life, sometimes in solitary confinement for those violent enough to threaten the lives of other inmates.

Robert Crawford

Venice

Berger’s attack on lethal injection is a thinly veiled attempt to nullify the death penalty. Unless a convicted felon was flat-lined and brought back to life, it would be impossible to corroborate Berger’s assertion that lethal injection is inordinately painful and thus “cruel and inhuman punishment.” The majority of Americans support capital punishment.

Mark Holland

Newbury Park