Well, no one was 
Anyway, South Carolina is apparently going to offer their condemned the choice of firing squad or electric chair, because unobtainable death chemicals. What I’m wondering about is, in the history of capital punishment, has the method of execution ever been to merely tap an artery and bleed out the prisoner? Seems like it would be pretty effective and drama-resistant.
Would the blood then be thrown away?
I would imagine. Killing a guy is okay, harvesting his organs is not.
But what if they checked the organ donor box on the back of their license? I don’t have an issue if a condemned person wanted a death that made their organs viable for use afterwards. Think about, they have been in a controlled environment for a number of years before their execution and could be in fairly decent health. If they wanted to be beheaded I’m fine with it.
I’m not exactly pro-death penalty but sometimes its pretty clear that someone did a heinous crime and is OK with being put to death.
The problem with this execution method is that it’s important for PR purposes for the death to look sterile. Nicking an artery and having blood come out doesn’t LOOK humane.
Ditto for crushing someone with a massively heavy boulder or blowing them up with high explosive (which are methods I’ve seen suggested here in the Dope) - they achieve painless death for sure, if done right, but they’d never pass the PR test.
I’m sure they would use an intravenous line into a receptacle.
I get opposing the death penalty in all cases. I get supporting the death penalty if done painlessly and with strong protections to make sure the innocent aren’t executed. I don’t get this type of thinking. I know that many people think like this, I just don’t understand it. As long as the condemned is going peacefully, why does it matter what it looks like to those witnessing the execution? If someone thinks that they would be traumatized by witnessing say, a beheading or the firing squad as opposed to lethal injection, they have the option of not watching.
I never said cut the artery and have a little geyser. I’m sure the method would be to tap the vessel, and the executioner would turn the valve.
Exsanguination is just one method of depriving the brain of oxygen. A more direct method, painless and efficient and which has accidentally caused the deaths of hundreds of industrial workers in the US is nitrogen hypoxia.
Or you could strap the condemned’s feet to the hub of a playground merry-go-round at sufficient speed until the centrifugal force prevents fresh oxygenated blood from circulating in the brain. Also painless.
Of course, the most cruel form of lethal injection is their own toxic brain chemistry. Let them stew in their own juices for as long as they live.
Seems to me, there are plenty of abundant, cheap and reliable anaesthic drugs that have been used on me and billions of other patient with no physical or emotional discomfort. Once the subject is comatose, you go on to the next step (death) without a concern for prettiness.
This whole argument is sustained by the vindictive, who insist that the executee suffers consciously of the whole process.
And as has been explained many times in these threads, using those drugs on humans requires FDA approval for the use, which is not forthcoming for executions.
And, as soon as the US starts using those drugs for executions, drug manufacturers in the EU and countries like India will stop selling them to the US, triggering considerable drug shortages for ordinary medical usage.
It’s hard to be sure just how painless any such gruesome demise is, but we can be at least fairly sure of how fast it is. And there might be an attitude that if it’s really really fast then it’s okay to be gruesome.
Consider execution by feeding the condemned into a wood-chipper, preferably head-first. I don’t think it gets much more gruesome than that, but it’s fast.
I’ve seen some statistics about how long it takes a nerve impulse to travel from one synapse to the next. It’s actually rather slow. It should be possible to destroy a human body (or at least the head and brain of one) faster than that, which would imply that the victim feels nothing at all. I suspect that getting killed in a sufficiently horrific plane crash works this way too. (ETA: Another similarly horrific example is the case of someone getting sucked into a jet engine, to be spit out the back end as a goulash of blood, protoplasm, and bone meal. Yes, this has actually happened, and there are even some videos of it on YouTube. Searching for them is left an an exercise for the reader.)
TBH, I rather hope I die like that, one way or another. (Not necessarily any time soon, though.)
All the above said, I am still fairly strongly against (but not totally absolutely against) the death penalty.
The things we choose to care about in a notionally civilized society.
I’m with you, its crueler to keep them locked up forever while they think about why they are there.
But, if we have to kill people I think we should do it painlessly-which is why I don’t like the idea of a firing squad made up of real people who might have problems actually shooting another human being. If they miss, the subject will be in pain. It can’t be that good for the humans on the squad either.
That would be great if it worked, but I know of no evidence that it does. Do people serving life in prison have high suicide rates? I think humans are really adaptable and prison seems to be a “home” to many of them. I know the popular thing for people to say is that they would rather die than go to prison but I think real life proves that wrong. People generally grasp at any small chance for life when they have to choose between life and death.
I’m unable to provide a direct link, but if you’ll search for Richard Speck’s prison video, you’ll have your evidence.
I’m not sure strident proponents of the death penalty want it to be quick or painless.
I can of course only speak for myself, but as it happens I’m fine with it being quick and painless.
In this situation, I can understand the apparent contradiction, because of the fear, correctly or not, that the opportunity for organ harvest would encourage the DP.