Then the only legal sentence is life, and the prior death sentence doesn't matter any more than a unanimous public opinion poll saying that we should still hang pickpockets.

Yes, but we were talking snarkily about health care and whether it's in the state's best interest to keep one alive to punish them for as long as possible.

I suppose the cheapest would be to abolish the death penalty and not provide LWOP prisoners any medical care. Of course, you'd have to have a medical system set up for the non-LWOP patients, so you wouldn't save much on medical expenses by withholding care, just perhaps on long-term living expenses.

I'm no expert on constitutional law, but I imagine that withholding medical care would be considered cruel and unusual punishment.

Well, sure, but we're talking the best of all possible worlds here.

Sometimes medical intervention is required. For example, I believe the law is that the state may not execute someone who is insane at the time. Therefore, the state may may forcibly medicate the person to restore their temporary competence so that they can understand why they're being tortured during a botched lethal injection procedure.

Yes, but apparently only if you're guilty of a crime. Perfectly acceptable if you're the customer of a health insurance company.

DING DING DING!!!

Oooo - I'm gonna have to use that one.

William Safire is now bitching about word usage on another plane.

He's probably arguing with Ron Ziegler about "inoperative" in the Watergate circle of Hell between lava showers.

--t