If I were a smart ass, I’d say, sure. Where else can you kill another person without penalty, outside of war (where there is the disadvantage of other people shooting back at you)?
But in reality, no. I would never consider killing a person who was a not a direct and immediate threat, and since I’m not in the habit of carrying lethal weapons around, probably not even then.
With that said, less than three weeks ago, I was the guy who took a friend’s terminally-ill dog to the vet to be euthanized. I still feel like Hitler over that one.
The “will of God” has been used for æons to make people feel better about their barbaric ways; it is no different in this man’s case. As for me, I’m left wondering, as I always am, why an omnipotent being has any need of human help to carry out its will.
This, and Oakminster’s answer, are probably the closest to how I feel about it. Do it dispassionately and efficiently, with as much dignity and solemnity as possible, and try not to be too disturbed when he flops around and screams for a few seconds afterward. Destroying his chest cavity, even with five rifle bullets, isn’t going to kill him instantly. I doubt he’ll go anywhere near as painlessly as my dog did at the vet. But the voters of Utah have thought about that, and I guess it doesn’t bother them that much. I think that it would bother me, or at least, it should. I don’t know; I’ve never killed anything larger or more sentient than deer. Being bothered by it though, isn’t by itself a good enough reason for not doing it.
Fascinating article; thank you for linking. Similar to what I remember reading about Pierrepoint, except I don’t know what Mr. al-Beshi thinks about whether his work deters anyone else from committing capital crimes. Incidentally he’s really, really good at what he does, if he’s the same guy I’ve seen performing Saudi executions. Of course, in their country, he gets a lot of practice. Five a day?(!)
Nope. Everything in life should be done as handsomely and affably as one feels capable of at the time. And without feeling sympathy — if they have done certain things — showing rancour would just be petty and mean.
To quote lovable old Nietzsche once more:
“Beware of Those In Whom The Urge To Punish Is Strong”
And also, from the fine old song, “What do you care what time it is, you ain’t goin’ any place.”
I am against the death penalty but if for some reason I found myself part of a firing squad I think I could do it.
A. If someone is tied to a post and facing a firing squad they are almost certainly going to die, whether I participate or not.
B. I’m a good shot and I would feel an obligation to make the execution as painless and humane as possible. Regardless of the crime they were accused of.
C. If it was up to me I would give the accused life in prison instead. They can be let out of prison if new evidence exonerates them.
As I understand it, the first drug used is sodium thiopental, which does not have very much usage nowadays in medical procedures. As a result, only a few companies still make it (supply and demand), and they’re mainly in Europe. Therefore the EU can put a chokehold on that one drug.
There probably isn’t enough money in the execution business for a drug company in the US to start up making it, with all the FDA requirements that they would have to comply with. Plus, any company that does start making it would have to deal with the resulting bad publicity.
So, short answer, my guess is that the market rules.
Now, I suppose the US government could commission a lab to start making it, but that would be socialised medicine, and we know how far that’s likely to go.
:dubious: It’s hard to miss a 6" target at 25 feet with a decent hand gun and I suck. A leveled rifle with a scope is probably a guaranteed hit +/- of an inch at that distance.
The question I have is what is the target area? The heart seems unnecessarily painful. 22 longs into the head, only need one and it will rattle around the skull quickly and efficiently.
I find that Claverhouse’s oulook on life can best be understood by viewing him as a modern-day re-incarnation of Richard Lovelace (the chap who wrote the bit about “I could not love thee, dear, so much, / Loved I not honour more,” when he wasn’t fighting on behalf of King Charles I against the vile parliamentarians).
Or, of course, Bonnie Dundee himsel’, but somehow I think of Lovelace more, even though he was English. What’s the wee matter of a boundary between supporters of the Stuarts?
