>> you're in "the stream." with lethal injection drugs in short fly, firing squads, and capas chambers and electric chairs. >> lisa fletcher is out but we have manuel in command of our cohost chair, and grabbing all of the live feedback from you are the third host of the hoe. we have the topics like abortion, and death penalty. but in all seriousness, this is

the third topic in america, and you can't mention it without a contentious debate. >> and the issue of the death penalty is heating up. of course for those of you at home, we want you to be part of the conversation tonight. and we want you to go to the website. if you go to it, you can download the second app for the show. you can download it on your phone as well. basically, here you can take quizzes, and you can interact

with other users and compete with them for points and get behind the scenes looks at the topics that we're covering. so it's a way to interact with our show. and if you can't download it. go to aljazeera.com/ajam stream. >> should knows condemned to death be forced to face the firing squad? the death penalty is legal in 30 states, with literally 3,000 waiting on death row. since 1996, the u.s. has carried out 4,000 executions. it's humane, the majority of people facing capitol punishment. the manufacturers of the judge say that objections over capital punishment and some are using alternatives. florida used a two-drug

cocktail. reports show that after being injected, he gasped and choked and made choke being sounds. it took 26 minutes, the longest in history. >> i want to stop the death penalty in ohio. i don't think that any family should deal with what we dealt with. >> other states are considering using the electric chairs, and gas chambers and firing squads. critics say that it amounts to cruel and unusual punishment. so is it time to reevaluate how people are punished for crimes in america? helping with this is jerry gibbons, horace cooper, former law professor, now with the national center for public policy research, aaron haynie, an attorney. i want to start with you first, louisiana recently used an

execution, drugs to kill dennis mcfire. and some are calling for executions now. and what is the main concern. >> the main concern, and the person who tweeted in earlier hit on it. is there a moral way in an ethical way for the state to execute member? and by and large, whatever method we have tried, we have found there is not. initially, in california, we had executions by gas chamber, and it was found to be unconstitutional and to constoot cruel and unusual punishment. as a result of that, we have turned to lethal injection. there are protocols, but to use like ohio did. two drugs, a protocol that has not been tested. and what we don't know what's happening when we are executing the person, those go beyond

unethical, and it's experimenting on those condemned to die. >> do you think the ingredients in the lethal injection cocktails and who is making them should at least temporarily halt the executions until we found out more? >> i had nothing to do with the legality of the death penalty. it's a constitutional question. it's not a moral or ethical question. it's a question of whether or not the constitution authorses and allows the capital punishment implementation that occurs in most of the states of america. and in fact, while there are restrictions on the implementations, the court has yet to hold that you can't simply execute a person and then punish them for the crime. i imagine with the present

conservative majority on the court, if we were to revisit the gas chamber and some of the older methods, you might see a different posture from the court, but it would be helpful, i think, to bring it to the court and allow them to ratify that states do have this authority. and it's constitutional. and if that's what the public wants, that's what we should they should get. >> you talk about the moral aspect. and jerry, you were an executioner for 40 years, and you oversaw 32 of them, specifically, 30 by leath an injection, and 25 by execution. and is this indeed a moral question some. >> well, i would say i haven't found a humane way to kill people. i was on the other end. and i participated in this. and i would say death by electrocution is rough.

you got 2500 to 3,000 volts going through a human body. and just a guy weighing 190 pounds at the most, put that much electricity going through a human body, it's going to cook them inside. and whatever electric goes in, it has to come out and when it comes out, 100% of the guys executed had burn marks. >> leath an injection, people sigh that's more humane, and what's your take on it? >> when i witnessed some lethal injections in texas, the guy was singing, and he completed the song before he was pronounced dead. and the chemicals kicked in, and on the other hand, when you push in the syringe, i felt more attached personally. i disagreed with it, and i told them that. >> is that the reason why you

oversaw 62 executions, and now recently, the virginia senate testifying against capital punish: is that your personal statement that you had? is that what made you shift? >> well, when a guy comes on death row, and nine days from being executed, it puts some doubt in the 62 people that i killed. and i always said to myself, i never would want to execute an innocent person, because that makes me on the same level as the condemned person who took abinnocent life. so should they execute me for taking an innocent life if i executed an innocent person? and what's that made me chaste because when that one guy, earl washington, came through the death house, and then he was exonerated, it put some doubt in my mind. >> speaking of doubt, a lot of

our community is expressing doubt and also outrage. >> putting out the question of whether some states are doing away with th death penalty alto. and some are considering bringing back the firing squad. only a matter of time before barbaric things are used: hor as, do you think it matters how we actually put people to death? is that something that actually matters. >> well, i think that the constitution does provide some parameters, but they're pretty broad much if the question is that some individuals responsible are assigned to the task of handling the execution

end up finding that that experience is harmful to them, we could automate the process. there are a significant number of techniques that could be undertaken that would require six weeks out that there be no human interaction in the process. but here's the point. the point is that the nature of the crimes that these individuals have been found guilty of, it is justifiable and constitutional for the society to agree that they should pay the ultimate price and receive the ultimate penalty. >> aaron, you mentioned cruel and unusual in the beginning, and you heard what horace had to say. are we looking at electrocution, the two drug cocktail in ohio? wow say this crosses the line and it becomes cruel and unusual. >> absolutely. having the government experiment on people who some of the time

have done heinous things, so if we're talking about people who aren't innocent. they are guilty, and they are still in fact people. so the idea of what we need to do is simply remove any human interaction gets behind the idea of the death penalty, which is we are dehumanizing human beings in order to do this. do we want to be a society that stoops to the level of criminals, that does to criminals precisely the act in which we found to be so abhorrent? >> before we go to break, omar. >> some more comments on facebook: >> you can hashtag at ajam

stream. he didn't commit the crime, but lost over a decade doing time. this is the first to be exonerated.

>> in phoenix, arizona, convicted on only bite mark evidence, and sent to death row, and in 2002, we had dna evidence that matched another man, and i was subsequently released and he was arrested if the murder. i spent ten years for the murder. >> i'm the only female in the united states that has ever been exonerated from death row. but it destroyed my life because i still live in the town. people say, that's the girl who killed the baby, and i couldn't get a job.

so it's hard for me. >> welcome back. we're discussing the death penalty in the united states. 143 people facing death have walked three, 20 of them cleared because of dna testing. joining us, kurt, the first person exonerated from death row by dna testing. in 1983, urn convicted for the killing of a nine-year-old girl. and you were in prison, and you ended up being the first u.s. prisoner exonerated through dna evidence. you've lived this. how important is it for america to get this process right? >> well, it's very important. we have had 143 individuals who have been convicted of crimes they didn't commit. we sit here and we talk about how we're going to execute a per, but before we think about why we should, and there have

been so many people who have been exonerated. you can't climb over the innocent to get to the guilty. this whole thing was based on an eyewitness testimony of a person, in my case, that was 6-5, curly blond hair, bushy mustache and tan skin and skinny. my hair was red. and we get it wrong, and we can't be executing people when we do. if 143 aircraft fell from united earlies in the last 43 years, we would have none of them planes in the air. >> kirk, talking about this debate of a new lethal injection. it took 26 minutes to kill dennis in ohio. and should a person sitting on death row, should these executions be halted until we have more transparency. >> they should be halted, period. there's no way that an execution

should take place in america with evidence. and this is factual evidence of innocent people convicted and sentenced to death row. we can't do this anymore. itch understand that the public wants retribution. but that's not what this is about. don't climb over me to kill a guilty man. >> well the debate nationwide, peril prosecutors man to seek the death penalty for bombing suspect, joe harnette, a depraved killer, and lacks remorse for the bombing that killed 3 people. one of the mothers who long opposed the death penalty is reconsidering her decision, and omar, i can see this contentious debate boiling up on twitter. >> we have a comment on

facebook: >> so airplane, he want to put this to you, if you have a family, who essentially has lost someone to a vicious crime and torture, or death. and they tell you that they cannot find peace unless the person dies. >> so i think taking into consideration the family of the victim's feelings is important. and we have a process to do that in court, but i think that at the end of the day, we don't have vigilante justice here, and

there are a number of factors that contribute to a killing. societal factors, vulnerability factors, human error, and prejudice, and all kinds of things. and part of the aim of the justice system is to remove some of the emotion, some of the bias, and remove some of that desire to fill that emotional void that's created by losing a loved one, and come in and do what's right, as a government and a society. what should we be doing? >> bob in colorado, fighting to keep the state from executing his son's killer, and some in boston, dzhokhar tsarnaev, the suspect behind the bomb being, should the views of the victim's family members be considered when deciding to seek capital punishment? >> sure, they should be considered but we don't have a vigilante system, and we don't have a system that says whatever

the impact victims decide is going to be the consequence. society has that responsibility. these two brothers brutally plotted and schemed and planned to murder as many people as possible at the boston marathon. we'll have a trial. and he'll be able to make the arguments about why he did what he did, and try to argue that he won't get the maximum punishment, but the truth of the matter is, after all of the evidence goes forward, he likely will be found guilty and likely to be the next federal executed prisoner. that's a process that will immediately lead to a series of appeals, but once that process is completed, i'm certainly going to be satisfied that the penalty that is assessed is one that is just. >> well, kirk, you're in a unique position, how do the

victim's families respond to your position and hearing of the innocence of the crime? >> in the beginning, everybody wanted me to die. the prosecutor said he did it. and the police officers said he did it. the entire state of maryland thought of me as the most heated man in america. but in the end, in the final analysis, they were all dead wrong, and this bombing suspect in boston, you know, we haven't even had a trial yet. and let's see what they have to say. and instead of worrying about so much as how a person should be executed, we should start worrying about people like from witness to innocence who haven't done a thing wrong. we're putting people in prison who are innocent as the day is long.

ray crone and sabrina butler, in that piece you put on, 143 people. we can no longer have the death penalty in this country. >> jerry, before we go to break, how critical is the grieving process to families? >> well, i look at kurt's situation, and then you take my position as executioner. kurt had lost all of his appeals, and i had executed kurt. that's an innocent person, and innocent life. and how do i deal with it myself to take an innocent life? and it shows that innocent people is on death row. things are going to happen in this world. death going to come to all of us. if a hurricane comes through and kills your child, the family can only get mad at god. you can't blame god because things like that happen. death is going to come to all of us.

>> sarah on twitter says: >> moving on, state's rights or who should decide the future in america? if you want more reactions, check this out.

>> welcome back. we're discussing the future of the death penalty in the united states, and we're asking our community, should it be abolished? >> our county is heavily favored in leaving it up to the states. and national politicians would require federal funding and higher taxes:

>> horace, with the few minutes that we have left, the state of maryland spend $200 million on five executions, and some say the economic costs are a reason to push for life in prison. >> first off, the states that have eliminated the death penalty are waiting for a new tax that will come on life sens or extensive sentences, and our system is just as amenable for that, because it's not a perfect system. and we should reinvest in it, and make sure that it's working better, but opponents, generally speaking, opens the concept the but i want to make a quick point. internationally, the mov not as clear as critics of the death penalty. you're seeing it in the uk, france, and poland, a movement.

some members of the mps and the eu are push being against the whole idea that the entire continent ought to be death penalty. >> aaron, we have 2.4 million in prison, and is live in prison the best alternative to the death penalty and if not, what is? >> i think life in prison without the possibility of parole is the best alternative as our system is now. i think that we have tremendous problems in our system, and it is important to litigate those problems, and to draw awareness. we want to have the best system, and a system that has the most chances of rehabilitating people, as well as not convict being innocent people. so to the extent that we can move away from models that focus solely on punishment and get back to models that look at the causes of crime, and how we can

deter crime in the future, it's a good thing and absolutely the right direction to be move in. is it enough? but is it a good start? yes. >> kurt, the final 30 second, how should america move forward? >> we have the death penalty in america, and we have proven it time and time again. the sentence of death has had its day, and it's time to end it. 143 death row survivors in the united states tells me one thing, that the government and the criminal justice system got it dead wrong, and the next time we might execute somebody, it will be somebody like me, an innocent man. >> thank you to all of our guests for this fantastic conversation. thank you for joining us, and thank you as always for our fantastic community and all of your live feedback, until next time, we'll see you online at aljazeera.com/ajam stream.

you. >> hello and welcome to al jazeera america, i'm richelle carey. john siegenthaler has the night off. talking to the many that still want to find work. a cease fire to evacuate an embattled city. it is not nearly enough. opening ceremony, fireworks, home town pride and a few unexpected moments, at the official start of thete