The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the 3 cocktail method of lethal injection.

Supreme Court justice Roberts stated that challenges must show that the state's method of lethal injection "creates a demonstrated risk of severe pain" and that there were "feasible" and readily implementable" alternatives that would significantly reduce the risk of severe pain.

The Court also stated that a slightly or marginally safer alternative is not good enough.

Lets see if the states perform mass executions to make up for lost time!

I am going to have to disagree with Jackie. Crime is lower in states such as Texas, but I don't believe it is because citizens are toting guns around with them every where they go. Crime in New York is most likely high because of opportunity. There is more money and more mindless people wandering the streets of New York. You must also take into consideration the fact that in Texas most people drive where they go, where as in New York or Chicago, most people take the subway and walk. I have not done the research yet, but I bet you that if you look at the ratio of persons to the percentage of crime for New York and then Houston, it will be similar. There are 8.5 million people who live within the 5 boroughs of the City of New York. What is the population of Houston? That 8.5 million does not include all the people who come from Long Island, Jersey, and many other places around the world to visit.

All that being said; I firmly believe that if an individual desires to own a weapon to protect their family and themselves then they should be afforded the right. Gun laws exist for a reason and give those who are eligible the right to possess arms. Not all persons are mentally capable of being responsible enough to possess a weapon, and I don't think crime would increase or even necessarily decrease if all persons were afforded the right to bear arms with no restrictions. It would make for an interesting case study though.