Ohio's current death row population is 53% Black. From [HERE] The US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit on Friday ruled [opinion, PDF] that manufacturers of drugs used for lethal injections may remain anonymous in Ohio. The lawsuit, Fears v. Kasich, was brought by death row inmates who claimed that barring discovery that would lead to the identity of such manufacturers unlawfully prevented prosecution against those who administer lethal injections in the state, including Ohio Governor John Kasich . The inmates claimed that a protective order barring such discovery allowed for "unknown laboratories using unknown testing protocols to evaluate drugs manufactured or compounded by an anonymous source," thereby preventing a demonstration of potential harm caused by the use of such drugs. In a 2-1 decision, the justices disagreed and affirmed the lower court's ruling that the state's interest in protecting the drug manufacturers from anti-death penalty-related violence outweighed the inmates' concerns. In a dissenting opinion, Justice Jane Stranch noted that the evidence that such a threat existed was limited to a single email sent to a pharmacy from an anti-death penalty advocate in Oklahoma. [MORE].
OSHO says, "These nuts think they are democratic."
This is how man goes on saying one thing and goes on doing just its opposite. He talks about being civilized, cultured – he is not civilized, not cultured. The death penalty is a proof enough.
This is the rule of a barbarous society: An eye for an eye, and a head for a head. If somebody cuts off one of your hands, then in a barbarous society, this is a simple law: one of his hands should be cut off.
The same has been carried down the ages. The death penalty is exactly the same law: An eye for an eye. If a man is thought to have murdered somebody, then he should be murdered. But it is strange: if killing somebody is a crime, then how can you remove crime from society by committing the same crime again? There was one man murdered; now there are two men murdered. And it is not certain that this man murdered that man, because to prove a murder is not an easy thing.
If murder is wrong, then whether it is committed by the man or by the society and its court, makes no difference.
Killing certainly is a crime.
The death penalty is a crime committed by the society against a single individual, who is helpless. I cannot call it a penalty, it is a crime.
And you can understand why it is committed: it is a revenge. Society is taking revenge because the man did not follow the rules of the society; the society is ready to kill him. But nobody bothers that when somebody murders, it shows that man is psychologically sick. Rather than sending him to imprisonment or to be executed, he should be sent into a nursing home where he can be taken care of – physically, psychologically, spiritually. He is sick. He needs all the compassion of the society; there is no question of penalty, punishment.
Yes, it is true, one man is murdered; but we cannot do anything about it. By murdering this man do you think the other will come back to life? If that were possible, I would be all in support of this man being removed – he is not worth being part of the society – and the other should be revived.
But that does not happen. The other is gone forever; there is no way to revive him. Yes, you can do one thing, you can kill this man too. You are trying to wash blood with blood, mud with mud. You are not aware of what has happened in history in many cases. [MORE]