The whole point is not state rights, dispensing death should not be a medical procedure if someone who is ill wants to die they can pick up a .45, get some pills, ect. There is no reason for a "MD" who swore an oath to protect life to kill people (but they seem to do it all the time)
Unless of course bone cancer has rendered your entire bodies frail and made it impossible to leave the bed, not to mention rendered all movement excruciatingly painful. I don't think you can just order a handgun on Amazon.com (with your shattered wrists) and have on delivered to your sickbed.
That is the issue according to this case. The issue of whether or not it's right should be taken up with the state, but it already has, and has been settled.
Your concept is exactly correct. Seems a .45 is less desirable and pretty scary and you have to do it YOURSELF, which would be a real suicide and how could it be prosecuted? The alternative is the DR is the one in control doing the killing. I guess I agree with the poster who said in actuality it really is God who is in control. It would be interesting if the Dr's quit assisting. If death is really what the competent person wants let em do it. Where must I be missing the point?