Op-Ed for Bearing Drift "McAuliffe's Secrecy Gambit on the Death Penalty Strikes Against Transparency", 2016 April 13

Online content

Fullscreen
4/13/2016

http://oearingdrift.com/2016/04/ bit-on-the-death-penalty-strik St

BEARINGDRIFT Hore
VIRGINIA'S CONSERVATIVE VOICE
vy ££ Qa
ZL SHAUN KENNEY @ =O. COMMENTS [tad

So Governor Terry McAuliffe has set
up a rather false choice for members
of the Virginia General Assembly:
mandate secrecy as to who provides
the cocktail of drugs issued during an
execution, or get rid of the death
penalty in Virginia. From the
Washington Post:

McAuliffe, a Catholic who is personally
opposed to capital punishment, said he
was trying to find a way to avoid the use
of the electric chair, which he called a

“reprehensible” method of execution

Ve take human beings, we strap them into a chair, and then we flood their bodies
with 1,800 volts of cit, 5 pain until they die,
McAuliffe told reporters. “Virginia citizens do not want their commonwealth to
revert back to a past when excessively inhumane punishments were committed in
their name.”

ig them to

“All I'm doing today is providing a humane way to carry out capital punishment
here in Virginia so we have options,” he said. “If they do not take it up, I want to be
clear; they will be ending capital punishment here in Virginia.”

Would McAuliffe care to describe the humane method of killing another
human being? Perhaps by injecting someone’s body with barbiturates, then
injecting them with another cocktail of drugs to paralyze the body, then another
and final drug that imposes cardiac arrest?

.. but I digress.

The prospect of “secrecy” in this instance isn’t the simple donning of a mask
over the head of the executioner. To the contrary, it’s the concealment of blame
—a state protection when botched executions occur (and sadly, they do indeed
occur).

The problem here is that it’s not a question as to whether or not pharmaceutical
firms want to deliver lethal injections — Florida, Georgia, and Texas all do so,

with California and four other states offering medically assisted suicide. The

y-9 pe gainst-transparency/

About Us

McAuliffe's Secrecy Gambit On The Death Penalty Strikes Against Transparency | Bearing Drift

The Score

ADVERTISE WITH US

REACH 100K+
READERS MONTHLY
2016 MEDIA KIT

J.R's already scouring the news,
so let him do the work for you!
Subscribe to his free newsletter -
full of useful news and tidbits!
You'll be smarter. More informed.
Better looking

Email Address*

First Name*

Last Name

* = required field

I'm interested in the following
issues:
Agriculture
Budget/Taxes
Business/Jobs
Education
Energy
Faith/Family/Pro-life
Health Care
Immigration
National Security/Veterans
Transportation

Subscribe

powered by MailChimp!

13,

4/13/2016

question here is whether or not McAuliffe’s amendment creates more problems
than it solves.

This is where the principle of transparency is so absolutely critical, and more so
where the life of a human being is being held in the balance.

More to the point, it’s not as if the Virginia Department of Corrections has had
difficulty obtaining the drugs required for lethal injections. The reason why
there’s a concern (at least on the surface) is that pharmaceutical firms are
concerned that the process for obtaining the drugs for lethal injection not only
run counter to the FDA-approved uses for the products themselves, they might
very well be violating the Controlled Substances Act in doing so.

As a Catholic, I have an inimical opposition to the death penalty in the modern
era. It is not necessary in an era of modern incarcerations, our certainty in all
cases is far from absolute in order to impose the maximum penalty of law, and
in all but the most extreme instances the maximum penalty of death

simply does not live up to the standard of justice most Americans have come to
expect from our jurisprudence system.

One’s personal opinions and faith aside, McAuliffe’s concerns at this point
aren’t with the manufacture of lethal drugs, but rather with the manufacturing
of controversy where none need be.

Moreover, the strike against transparency is what ought to concern every
Virginian of goodwill, regardless as to where you stand on the death penalty,
and especially when it concerns the maximum penalty of the law.

McAuliffe ought to know better.

Share this: Facebook 4 Linkedin. Google +1. Twitter. = Email_~—Print

Sponsored
MEDICARESUPPLEMENT.COM
Don't Pay For Medigap Plan F Until You Read This

Plan F is the most popular Medigap plan, but there's another plan
option you should consider.

OComments Bearing Drift

®@ Login

Sort by Best

@ Recommend [% Share

Be the first to comment.

Sponsored

Virginia: Drivers Are Stunned By This New Rule
Provide Savings Insurance Quotes

http: Ibearingdrift.com/2016/04/ ji y-gambit-on-the-death- penalty-strikes-against-tranep

McAuliffe's Secrecy Gambit On The Death Penalty Strikes Against Transparency | Bearing Drift

IT'S TIME Ti

ETO
GROW VIRGINIA
AGAIN!

Recent Comments

Dj. Spiker on SORRY, RNC DELEGATES, YOU
DON'T NEED A GOFUNDME PAGE
[UPDATED]

John Harvie on TAYLOR GETS SHERIFF
‘STOLLE’S ENDORSEMENT

MD Russ on WHAT DOES A CONVENTION
FIGHT MEAN FOR VP?

Zach Werrell on SORRY, RNC DELEGATES,
YOU DONT NEED A GOFUNDME PAGE.
[UPDATED]

Bob White on LIVE-BLOGGING POWHATAN
COUNTY GOP MASS MEETING: JEAN
GANNON DEFEATS PAT MCSWEENEY FOR
CHAIR

Like Us on Facebook

Follow Us on Twitter

Tweets by @bearingaritt

AA Rearine Meift

23

Metadata

Resource Type:
Document
Rights:
Date Uploaded:
December 29, 2025

Using these materials

Access:
The archives are open to the public and anyone is welcome to visit and view the collections.
Collection restrictions:
Access to this collection is unrestricted with the exception of select items noted in Series 5.
Collection terms of access:
This page may contain links to digital objects. Access to these images and the technical capacity to download them does not imply permission for re-use. Digital objects may be used freely for personal reference use, referred to, or linked to from other web sites. Researchers do not have permission to publish or disseminate material from these collections without permission from an archivist and/or the copyright holder. The researcher assumes full responsibility for conforming to the laws of copyright. Some materials in these collections may be protected by the U.S. Copyright Law (Title 17, U.S.C.) and/or by the copyright or neighboring-rights laws of other nations. More information about U.S. Copyright is provided by the Copyright Office. Additionally, re-use may be restricted by terms of University Libraries gift or purchase agreements, donor restrictions, privacy and publicity rights, licensing and trademarks. The Department of Special Collections and Archives is eager to hear from any copyright owners who are not properly identified so that appropriate information may be provided in the future.

Access options

Ask an Archivist

Ask a question or schedule an individualized meeting to discuss archival materials and potential research needs.

Schedule a Visit

Archival materials can be viewed in-person in our reading room. We recommend making an appointment to ensure materials are available when you arrive.