Be on a firing squad for $100K? Hell, the NRA has thousands of people who would pay that much to be on one!
Having attended an NRA convention, I can vouch for this. Many people, myself included, support the use of firearms to defend ones’ self and property, but I saw people there who’ll feel cheated on their deathbeds if they’ve never had they chance to actually do so.
My point being this: yes I know that man is strapped to the chair because 20 years ago he forced a woman to felate him while he held her baby with a knife to it’s throat, and after ejaculating went ahead and killed them both. As an anti-death penalty advocate, it’s not this monster I care about. It’s me the shooter. Can I be sure that I’m not frustrated in my career, family relationships, masculinity (since we all seem to be men applying here), etc., that the desire to shoot this scumbag isn’t some form of compensation? Am I killing him for his one big sin a way to expiate all my little ones?
Is there any act so evil that it can purify my desire to kill, and make my motivation to be the person who gets to pull the trigger an insignificant issue? My answer is no.
Yeah. if Utah was paying that kinda of scratch I bet their would be a line up and around the block!!
I could def do it. I think theirs a certain switch you can flick that enables you to deal with normally terrible events… to keep your mind in gear. I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t be waking up in a cold sweat or anything down the line.
Im female =)
Hmm…
Having such a high bar allows very interesting forces come into play that might not be there for what a firing squad member might receive for their … services.
In general, I oppose the death penalty.
So by taking the job, I freely admit violating my core principles. With such an exorbitant amount of money in play, however I have very little question that I’d do it for a period of time, rationalizing thus:
This is a doomed person in any case, and my refusal only means that someone else pulls the trigger. It is the state, after all, who has sentenced this person to die. And if in review of the facts at hand it seems to me that he or she is unquestionably guilty–DNA evidence, credible witnesses, no legal mumbo-jumbo barring exculpatory evidence from being considered by the jury–then, I’m afraid that if truly presented this choice… 
Now, had the money been more realistic, it’s an easy decision. Hey, state, find yourself another assassin. And that’s why I think the conditions of this ethical puzzle are valid. It’s a way for people to find out if they have a price.
Agreed that the money being offered here is definitely skewing things a bit. Hell, I regard the death penalty as flat-out murder, but the amount being offered is even making me think “well, somebody is going to kill this guy, so…”.
But no, shooting a defenseless person is murder as defined by my moral compass – no two ways around it. I don’t think I could look myself in the mirror if I took this job.
proved by your having read for detail 
The only reason I oppose the death penalty is there’s too much of a chance that someone innocent could be executed. I live in Illinois and I know. Do Rolando Cruz and Riley Fox’s dad come to mind?
John Gacy, on the other hand, hell yeah I’d take a shot at him! And since I can’t aim for crap, I’d probably need to shoot several times. And I’d take my time reloading in between.
Okay, I don’t really mean that. If the death penalty is applied, lethal injection should be used. And it should be absolutely certain that the offender is guilty. But since applying that standard is impractical, I’m against the death penalty.
But still, I wouldn’t have any problems pulling the switch or trigger myself.
I’ll do it. Might as well be me rather than someone who knows they’d curl up in a ball on the floor crying if they had to do it, or who’d deliberately miss to keep their own hands clean. And I sure as hell might as well get paid for it.
I support the death penalty, as long as it’s not being handed out by a bunch of fuckwits with low standards. So it depends on whose idea of “slim chance they’re innocent” it is: mine or Texas’s.
I could do it, and would do it merely for the base salary given in the OP, without the bonus for “shooting days.” I think modern investigative techniques and the science of evidence today gives us a fairly strong probability of guilt in a conviction. It also gives us a capability to review old cases and exonerate those who deserve it. And with the exception of Texas (a state which, if it paid the $100,000 bonus, would quickly find itself bankrupt), the number of actual executions performed in the United States is pretty low compared to the number of appeals and other legal actions (and chicanery) to prevent executions. Convicts sentenced to death spend much of their time in prison awaiting appeals and re-trials and reviews of their sentences.
I’m not only for the death penalty, I’m for the application of the death penalty. It would be better for the state as a whole (I’m talking about the government and the people it serves) to execute convicted criminals on death row. Review any cases that warrant further review, and then get rid of these wastes of resources.
If in the course of the trial and sentencing phase the accused is convicted and ordered to be executed, and an appeal finds the same result, off he goes. There’s no need for the state to spend $50,000 per year to feed, house, and clothe this creature that our social contract has deemed unworthy of continued existence. Throw in the additional costs involved in the medical care, education, and continued legal processes generated on its behalf, and you’re talking about money that would be better spent employing teachers, police officers, firefighters, or funding community improvement projects, or any number of other things.
I recommend that you and anyone else who feels this way watch the HBO documentary titled “The Execution of Wanda Jean”. She’s a rare death penalty case because she’s a woman, but beyond that, being poor, black, mentally challenged, and having poor legal representation, she’s all too typical.
And we all know that Texas’ “justice” system is fucked up beyond all imagination…but this case wasn’t even in Texas.
Even if someone would be in favor of the death penalty if it was applied fairly and consistently, I have no idea how anyone who knows the first thing about it could not see that that is nowhere near the case. Who could be in favor of something that is taking people’s lives in such an obviously discriminatory manner?
Slithy Tove, I think you make an important point in post #42. If there were any nefarious reasons why I would feel gratified by slaughtering another human being I see little reason why society wouldn’t be better off with me on the other end of the rifle.
I am female as well and I voted yes, I believe I could do it, if I were sure that my reason was solely to protect community safety and well-being.
If I were getting paid for it or were using a social measure for personal purposes I’m afraid it could get to be a desired habit and probably pretty nasty for my mental and emotional status.
No. I do not believe in the death penalty, for two reasons. First, the system isn’t perfect: innocent people have been and continue to be executed. Second, my religious beliefs would prevent it: I believe “Thou Shalt Not Kill” applies to the state as well as the convict. Life in prison is hell enough.
While Texans and Oklahomans may draw distinctions between themselves, as a Californian, I certainly can’t. As far as I’m concerned, Oklahoma might as well be “North Texas” - and with a big case of sibling rivalry toward “South” Texas.
I think the system gets it right more often than they get it wrong; there may be socioeconomic issues which tilt the balance of the prison population toward minorities and the poor, but those do not excuse the commission of crimes. I can turn that right back into my argument: money saved not caring for condemned inmates could be put to use improving the community and rectifying some of the causes of crime in the first place.
I’m also in favor of a lot of liberal prison reform ideas such as parole and treatment for non-violent drug offenders and expanded rehabilitation programs for inmates who would benefit from them. But I could still serve as the headsman without any qualms.
The money offered in the OP was a deciding factor for me. Executioner is not a gig I’d do for minimum wage. It’s a dirty job with significant emotional cost. For “Kiss My Ass Money”, yeah, I’m willing to deal with it long enough to save my nest egg…then I really will tell the world to kiss my ass, and live out the rest of my days as I choose…likely not hitting a lick at a snake most days.
I don’t know much about the great state of Oklahoma, but I know that they don’t execute about as many people as the entire rest of the country put together, in recent years, like Texas does.
But executing prisoners does NOT save money versus keeping them in prison for life, and in fact costs a lot more money. I know some people say we should change this by eliminating the appeals that are costing all this money, but removing even the substandard safeguards that we do have in place is a pretty scary thought.
I do think that the vast majority of people in prison have done, if not exactly what they were convicted of, at least something similar. But that standard isn’t good enough when we’re talking about state-sanctioned killing. And even if a person committed the act, that doesn’t necessarily make them culpable. Our prisons are full of people with mental retardation, severe mental illness, etc. Sometimes, like in the case of Wanda Jean, we should be holding the people who let them fall through the cracks in the first place at least as responsible.
For anybody who is being executed, no matter the circumstances?
The judicial system is flawed in favor of money. Many people on death row have been exonerated. The premise that you know for certain he is guilty does not fly.
Many soldiers suffer from what they have done. That after being trained to kill and to believe they are defending the country. It is not as easy as people think. You find out after it is too late.
Well - I’m opposed to the death penalty and wouldn’t take the job because of that. Further - I’m opposed to the idea that people could profit from the taking of human life. I’d be pretty angry if I lived in a State where public funds paid that kind of money to individuals so they could profit from the killing of other human beings.
How many of those appeals aren’t actually concerning the condemned’s innocence or the fairness of their trial, but on the legality of the death penalty itself? I seem to recall that the latter actually made up a surprising number of them, but I very admittedly don’t have any figures on hand to back that up.