Captive bolt gun, like they use for slaughtering cattle?
To understand why the execution mechanics of capital punishment are in the crude state that currently exists, you should all watch the Errol Morris documentary, Mr. Death: The Rise and Fall of Fred A. Leuchter, Jr.. Leuchter is a self-taught “execution engineer” who made it his life’s work for a while to make execution machinery more efficient. (It’s particularly creepy to hear him talking about how underpowered electrocution systems “cook the meat too much.”) Leuchter designed the lethal injection system used in New Jersey that many modern lethal injection systems are based on, and opposes gas chamber systems on the basis of hazard to operators. Of course, Leuchter is also not a doctor and apparently not in possession of even rudimentary knowledge of biochemistry despite posing as an expert consultant in a number of cases, and ended up as a lecturer on the Holocaust denial circuit after his forensic “examinations” at Auschwitz and Birkenau, which were seriously flawed. This is one of your leading experts in the field of execution. (For obvious ethical reasons physicians aren’t involved in the process.)
As msmith537 notes, there are plenty of ways to quickly and essentially painlessly execute someone, but they all pretty much leave some kind of mess, and no method is utterly foolproof. Regarding the search for compassionate/painless methods of execution, it is a reflection upon the culture rather than for the benefit of the prisoner. What this is supposed to accomplish, other than eliminating the perpetrator as a threat to society, is in question; there is no evidence that the death penalty is a deterrent to crime, and the cost necessary to assure that the accused has had every reasonable opportunity to exonerate himself (and still the system fails) is extraordinary.
Of course, we can’t seem to figure out what we’re doing with incarceration, either; mandatory sentencing makes for a nice campaign slogan, but it results in a large prison population that is no more rehabilitated or able to cope in polite society, whether they’re released in five years or in twenty, and prison overcrowding often results in early release of dangerous and violent felons despite sentencing laws. There are certainly a large majority of prisoners who cannot be rehabilitated over any length of time using any extant method. There are definitely people I think should never be released back into society, but the legal system has enough flaws that the death penalty is a questionable policy at best.
Given that you’re going to execute people, though, the method suggested by the o.p. is certainly no worse than any other method in use, and better than most.
Stranger
I expect that killing a stranger is considered worse than killing an acquaintance or relative (which is what characterizes most murders in the US). So the factor is not exactly unrelated to your crime.
I would argue in favor of executing all murderers, not all killers - there’s a difference. But the idea of judging intent and circumstance does not change significantly from what it is now.
That’s an interesting point, but there are two flaws that I can see - [ul][li]Making an execution messy would have relatively little impact on anyone who did not witness it. Maybe a gunshot wound to the head would be a quick, painless, but messy form of execution. But having the brain splatter would not be very hard on me - I am OK with the messy aspects of, for instance, lethal injection - people crapping their pants on death or whatever. So I would not be “deterred” (so to speak) from widely applying the DP just because cleaning up the execution chamber would be unpleasant for the guards.[*]I don’t think we need any deterrent to executing truly guilty people. There is not (in my opinion) such a thing as executing “too many” factually guilty murderers. Everyone who is factually guilty (to the extent that this can be determined) should be executed. And therefore it would be my moral duty to overcome whatever repugnance I might feel for decapitation or shooting or whatever messy execution method is chosen. IYSWIM.[/ul][/li]Regards,
Shodan
What about the neck strain prior to detonation? Cruel and unusual, especially considering how excessive 25 pounds of C4 would be. A detcord halo would be sufficient. You’re also missing the trend for execution methods to have less spectacle and mess.
How many murders are committed by people that have been executed?
The primary function of imprisonment is to separate criminals from the rest of society for the protection of society. Rehabilitation, punishment, deterrence, et al. is secondary. Execution is a particularly permanent form of “separation from society”. If we have no intention of restoring someone’s freedom, how is it humane to keep them in a cage for the rest of their life?
Personally, I’d be inclined to give prisoners the option of suicide by some fairly harmless means (In keeping with the thread… breathing mask with pure nitrogen, perhaps?).
The biggest problem is that accurately and consistently putting someone into unconsciousness, and confirming it, requires a medical professional. AFAIK, every licensing board or authority for medical professionals expressly forbids involvement in an execution.
Maybe a better question to ask would be “How many murders have been committed by people who would have been imprisoned, but instead were acquitted because the jury wouldn’t convict someone and send him to his death?”
There is evidence that acquittal rates are higher in death penalty cases than in life imprisonment cases. Jurors seem to require a higher standard of proof in cases where the defendent’s life is on the line. As a result, the death penalty may actually result in more murderers being on the streets.
The death penalty can be shown to be more expensive to society (appeals are expensive, and people stay on death row for years or decades anyway), there’s no evidence that it deters murder, and it may result in more murderers going free.
That’s why I’m against it.
Would it be cruel and unusual to simply make the condemned watch every episode of Survivor? Surely that would kill them…though I’m unsure how painless it would be.
I suppose if we HAVE to kill people nitrogen asphyxiation is a pretty good way to do it. Its painless, it seems fool proof, and its not as gruesome as some of the other methods proposed (I for one don’t want to see some guy’s head imploded using the explosive helmet method).
Personally I think the death penalty is ineffective, overly costly and should be abolished. With all of the recent evidence of miscarrages of justice (some in capital cases), and in light of how much it costs to actually get someone TO the place of execution (appeals, court costs, etc), I just don’t see the worth.
-XT
I would bet that, if we adopted nitrogen as a method of execution, there would be lawsuits alleging that it is not painless or foolproof.
Similar, in fact, to the lawsuits now alleging that lethal injection is “cruel or unusual”. It’s good enough for major surgery, but not good enough to kill someone. :rolleyes:
Regards,
Shodan
The jury could always choose a life sentence, if they’re too timid to sentence someone to death. If they’re not given that choice, that means our legal system is broken.
Has any study established the painlessness of nitrogen asphyxiation? Because, unlike other “messy” methods, this is something we CAN test empirically – just get volunteers to breath pure nitrogen, and revive them after they pass out. Nitrogen itself is not dangerous, it’s the lack of oxygen that kills you.
Well, except for the whole “brain damage” thing. But heck, most people aren’t really using those brain cells anyway.
Stranger
Or they just don’t care, the way you don’t care about killing innocents. Or they are falsely convicted.
No, it doesn’t. It costs more to execute people, as said. And what makes you think that criminals believe that they will be caught, or that the punishment has anything to do with the crime ? America’s death penalty is notoriously determined by race, wealth and gender, not by the crime you commit.
So you think people should be executed for stealing pizzas or credit card fraud ?
How many murders have been committed by people who killed the witnesses to avoid execution ? How many cops have been killed by people who expected death, so fought to the last rather than surrender ?
Actually, IIRC many places, such as California, has written it into the Penal Code that the purpose is punishment. Certainly that seems to be true culturally; not many people seem to care if sticking more and more people in prison reduces crime, either by deterrence or rehabilitation or anything else.
This is an interesting argument, which I don’t recall coming across before. I don’t want to launch a “cite” attack (I’m against the death penalty in all cases), but I’d like to read more about this. Can you point me to a reference? Thanks.
Of course not. And I don’t think non-violent crimes should apply to the “Three Strike Law” in the first place.
But America’s prisons are already in crisis due to overcrowding. Nobody wants to release prisoners early, and nobody has the balls to raise taxes to pay for more prisons. It’s a tough problem, but at least the death penalty allows us to “thin the herd” a little bit. (Imagine how bad overcrowding would be if the death penalty didn’t exist!!)
OK, how about 5 1lb shaped charges?
Same effect, less cost/lighter.
It doesn’t though. How many prisioners do you imagine are executed in the US per year? I’m not sure of 2002-2007, but a quick google search turned up this cite stating that in the period from 1976-2002 only 820 prisoners were executed in the US (29 per year average). I’m guessing that more prisoners died from other prisoners in that time (or hell, maybe from natural causes) than were executed.
If the intent is to ‘thin the herd’ it ain’t workin. And of course you have the huge expense to GET someone not only sentenced to death but through all the hoops and appeals process (it costs a LOT more to execute someone than to simply let them rot in prison). Finally…miscarrages of justice DO happen. In light of that I’m not seeing the point of capital punishment.
-XT
Because major surgery is done by a surgeon, and execution is done by a technician. There’s a significant disparity in skill here, which allows for a lot more errors in execution on the part of the lethal injector(pun not intended).
Perhaps allow them to stab themselves with a nerf dagger?
I’m pretty sure there is already enough evidence from cases of accidental asphyxiation by nitrogen, or oxygen deprivation by other fairly inert gases (with subsequent resuscitation) that it is a completely painless loss of consciousness.
As pointed out, it doesn’t. If you actually want to “thin the herd”, just stop sticking in people for non-violent offenses. And legalize the less dangerous drugs. And outlaw prison labor, so there isn’t a profit motive to put people in prison. As long as we try to solve all our problems by tossing people in prison, they’ll be overcrowded. Other countries manage to survive, and in fact have less crime and violence, with fewer people in prison.
I’d wager that has more to do with the standard of evidence required for a “death penalty case” v. a “life imprisonment case” than any particular squeamishness on the part of a jury… which is basically as it should be.