Bringing the discussion back to the original topic-- the lawsuit filed in Oklaoma by the family of Clayton Lockett.
I was an officer in the military for many years, both active duty and reserves (17-ish years). Members of the military are precluded from suing the government for a variety of issues related to their service. IMO, if that's "just enough" for members of the military who serve and fight to defend every citizen's rights and freedoms, then it's "just enough" to extend that to the families of criminals who are executed, as a result of breaking laws and brutally murdering other citizens.
What I'd like to see introduced in the Oklahoma legislature, as a direct result of the lawsuit of the family of Clayton Lockett, is legislation that would preclude families of the condemned from civilly suing State government officials and Correctional departments for actions arising from carrying out the sentence of death.
I do not believe the families of the condemned should have any legal standing to bring any lawsuits related to the incarceration and imposition of sentence of the convicted criminal inmate. Should the families of the murdered be able to sue the Governor and State officials for failing to prevent the murder of their loved ones?
These families of the exeuted have not been burdened with anything that requires "financial compensation" from a civil judgment, IMO-- and it's beyond offensive, really, that a lawsuit such as this one should be given the dignity of moving it thru the system to try to get them some kind of windfall of cash for the family of a brutal murderer.
If that were to be introduced in the OK legislature, I think it would have a much better chance of passage in one or two sessions of debate than a whole new method of execution. In fact, I think the general public would be so outraged that it might just fly thru the legislature, and there would be no further lawsuits from the families of executed criminals.
