Long term prisoners should have the right to die by euthanasia - Dr Nitschke..

Vic41 · Guru

Long term prisoners should have the right to die by euthanasia - Dr Nitschke..

johnq · Guru

NO, they should rot in gaol.

My wish is that the rubbish media would stop giving them the publicity they crave for their disgusting crimes.

ken thomas · Guru

Let them die and will free up a lot of space for homeless nomads
$80000 a year to let them rot no thanks
Ken

Cloak · Guru

That Nitchki how ever it's spelt.... Sure makes me think about this issue...

I think he's loosing his marbles..

billeeeeeee · Guru

I am a member of Exit, every body should have the right to die , when, and where ever they choose , and be given the right tools to do it , it is our right, ,,,,but its just another civil right the Government has taken away from us..... a very excited Billeeeeeee

tonyd · Guru

Indeed. Nitschke is a giant among the pygmies. His recent persecution by the medical bigwigs is very sad.

Despite overwhelming support for voluntary euthanasia, we are very unlikely to get a referendum on the subject because our Prime Minister spent three years training to be a Jesuit priest and a significant number of the inner Cabinet share his religious beliefs.

I am not for a moment criticising them for their belief in an imaginary friend in the sky. It's a free country and they can believe anything they like, but they have NO right to inflict those medieval beliefs on the rest of us.

I, too, belong to Exit. I have been reading for years about the delights and advantages of palliative care for the terminally ill. But I have NEVER read a supportive comment from someone who was actually under palliative care. Says it all, really.

Good Onya Phillip Nitschke!

Tony

PJK · Senior Member

I have no problems with genuine voluntary euthanasia, but I do have some concerns about how to control it.
In the wrong hands it could hide a murder.

But back to the topic originally raised -
I my mind murderers, rapists, terrorists etc, that are looking at long jail time, have given up their right to choose anything.
In my twisted mind, I would let them choose life time in jail, or death.
Then reverse their choice and that is what they serve.
Or, let the victims family choose - even better.

Peter
PJK

SnowT · Guru

I seriously think I'm going Of track here..

But I do agree in the Death Penalty..

and there are a few names that come to mind....

The shootings resulted in the deaths of seven people, and serious injury to 19 others.[2] After a police chase lasting more than 30 minutes, 19-year-old former Australian Army officer cadet Julian Knight was caught in nearby Fitzroy North and arrested for the shootings. Knight was later sentenced to seven consecutive terms of life imprisonment with a non-parole period of 27 years for one of the bloodiest massacres in Australian history.[3] As Knight was between 18 and 21, he was classed as a young adult offender under Victorian law and also, because at the time Victoria did not have life without parole, he was given the 27-year minimum.[4]
From wikki..

Life should be for LIFE.. With a No Parole Full Stop..

He is costing us $125K per year.. Plus he got a Uni degree in Law For NOTHING...

Juergen..

Sorry if I went of track But I am Passionate for the Death Penalty in the right situation..

Vic41 · Guru

Here's a couple from WA that should not have been given a choice, one committed suicide (I don't think anyone cried) and the other is still serving time.

He was working for a relative of mine at the time he was arrested and it was there he met his first victim. He actually borrowed a shovel from his work to do "gardening" which was used to bury the bodies.

Surprisingly both staff and customers at his work thought he was a very caring and helpful person, how wrong they were. See;

http://evilladies.com/serial-killers/catherine-and-david-birnie-evil-serial-killers/

-- Edited by Vic41 on Tuesday 30th of September 2014 12:45:27 AM

Jonathan · Senior Member

.. and a bit more info about the "man" ..

http://www.skynews.com.au/news/top-stories/2014/07/24/nitschke-s-mother--wants-access-to-drug-.html?cid=BP_RSS_SN-TOPSTORIES_5_Nitschkesmotherwantsaccesstodrug_240714

dorian · Guru

An 84-year-old friend who was confined to a nursing home after he contracted Alzheimer's eventually lost his swallow reflex. His doctor then made the decision to allow him to die. To this end he was put in bed, doped with sedatives (he was allergic to morphine, so I don't know how he coped with that), and his lips were wetted periodically. It took several days but eventually he suffered organ failure and starved to death. His dog got a better end than that.

To all you do-gooders, may you suffer a similar fate, and, if you believe in a god, then may you burn in hell.

peterblack · Senior Member

I agree with Guru
my father died dementia
we all need to have the right to euthanasia or not

To all you do-gooders, may you suffer a similar fate, and, if you believe in a god, then may you burn in hell.

GaryKelly · Guru

I'm an atheist so I don't believe in the death penalty for criminals because I believe it's the easy way out. Hitler shot himself and avoided punishment for his monstrous deeds. Death is the end, not a punishment. On the other hand, life in jail is a punishment. To euthanize a lifer is to rob society of its right to justice.

Vic41 · Guru

Some interesting facts on life imprisonment Gary in different States;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_imprisonment_in_Australia

Perhaps some long term lifers could spend a long term of their sentence first as punishment and then be given the choice of being knocked off to save taxpayers some money, not as an escape to further imprisonment to them.

I have met Phillip Nitschke and am also an Exit member, I attended one of his talks. I am also an atheist.

johnq · Guru

It would NOT be voluntary euthanasia at all, but assisted suicide, and State assisted at that.

Sure they should have copped a .308 centre mass originally (instant death and another waiting already up the spout), but that solution is problematical, unacceptable to the electorate, and the very same problems plus will be re-visited.

It will not assist the case for voluntary euthanasia, quite the opposite. Instead it will drop everything into that fetid swamp infested by salties, the human rights lawyers, who will immediately latch onto every way imaginable to suck the bucket of taxpayers' money dry

and,

give disgusting criminals access to the media with their 'Will I or won't I' and 'You the public are making me do this too', 'It was society's fault', etc.

-- Edited by johnq on Tuesday 30th of September 2014 02:19:42 PM

Big Gorilla · Guru

dorian wrote:
An 84-year-old friend who was confined to a nursing home after he contracted Alzheimer's eventually lost his swallow reflex. His doctor then made the decision to allow him to die. To this end he was put in bed, doped with sedatives (he was allergic to morphine, so I don't know how he coped with that), and his lips were wetted periodically. It took several days but eventually he suffered organ failure and starved to death. His dog got a better end than that.

To all you do-gooders, may you suffer a similar fate, and, if you believe in a god, then may you burn in hell.

I think a lot of Doctors today are sympathetic to the elderley, and younger people of course who are terminally ill with no chance of recovery. They overdose with morphine and/or withhold life supporting services. In a way you could term the practice euthanasia, and I admire the Doctors who take that course of action. My dear Mother was in a care facility with Dementia, at 92, had a cerebral hemorrhage. The Doctor said we can operate but she probably wont survive. Just let her be, we can't do anything for her, she is in no pain, the nurses will take good care of her. They did just that and 2 days later she passed.

Knowledge speaks, but wisdom listens.