I’m having a hard time parsing Slug’s illustration. Is this a (condemned) prisoner in the lower-left half of the picture (wearing stripes)? How exactly is he oriented? Working from right to left, I presume the four strands are his hair, the long celery-like stick his nose, and the squares next to that are…? His teeth? A mustache? Further left is beyond me altogether. The funnel I get, but what’s it attached to? Is the cloud thing his lips? A wad of cotton? Is the slash his mouth? A dribble of rat poison? How is this even a lethal injection? The guy on the right is pouring rat poison into a funnel. For that matter, is he even a legit executioner? He looks kind of shifty.
What would be wrong, morally and ethically, with giving prisoners the option of suicide/euthanasia, by their own hand or a means of their own choosing?
Judgement passed, the prisoner is given the option of life behind bars, or they may immediately go off and use a bolt gun on their head or enter a chamber full of nitrogen gas or the like.
Savings are huge and there is less of an issue with later findings of innocence if the prisoner decides themselves to end their life.
Um…“cite”? Or can I just outright say that last bit rather sounds like “weasel words” to me?
For that matter, what type of hanging is being talked about, here? Getting hoisted from the ground by the neck? Having too long a drop from a gallows, so the condemned is decapitated? A properly placed noose with a rope length measured according to the official table of drops, so that the neck is broken so quickly and with enough force to rupture the medulla oblongata?
Or the “Firing Squad”…literally, as in a squad of gunmen taking aim? Or rifles sighted in and bolted down to a bench? Or a coup de grace to the condemned’s head from a pistol, or a rifle?
Even decapitation, that gruesome anecdote included, might vary in immediate effect, depending on how it was carried out—based on some of the numbers I’m seeing online, an 88lb guillotine blade traveling at 6 meters per second would deliver 781 joules of kinetic energy. That actually compares favorably to the energy I’m seeing cited delivered by a captive bolt pistol used for stunning cattle, although that’s delivered to (and through) the cranium and brain.
And I think it’s “fair to say” that, as inexact as the blanket terms “hanging” and “firing squad” are, they could indeed be considered “humane alternatives” to burning at the stake, crucifixion, dismemberment, etc. (Although, off the top of my head, I can only recall strangulation specifically offered as a “humane” alternative execution method, for burning at the stake, if the condemned confessed or converted before their execution.)
I hate to give anyone ideas, but this article makes me wonder; Why not just implement sudden death at some random time while the subject is asleep in his cell? It could be on an open-ended date. “They never know what hit them.” I suppose there’s an argument that it would be cruel and unusual punishment - going to sleep every night, not knowing if “Tonight’s the night.” Spreading it out over, say, a couple month’s window might reduce that effect.
I have no idea how the actual execution would take place, but I’m sure we have people out there who would come up with something.
The death penalty is morally wrong, always and everywhere, and the guy in Slug’s picture is Hitler (below his nose is a greying mustache). The apparent cotton wad at the base of the funnel is foaming at the mouth, ccaused by rat poison.
I wonder if rupturing the medulla oblongata would actually result in instant death - sure, it will stop breathing and by that means cause unconsciousness within a few minutes. I doubt that destroying it would stop the heart - in cases of heart block the heart contracts by itself, just a little slower. Conscious thought does not rely on the medulla oblongata.
I think your rifles idea makes more sense - you can target them on multiple sites. I imagine specially made captive bolt systems would also work (not the ones designed for cattle - they work by bouncing the brain off the inside of the skull and if the skull is too thin they just punch a hole in it which causes a much more localized trauma.
There is however the issue of public squeamishness, which is I think one reason why the lethal injection has caught on - crushing the head between a couple of really big, really fast moving bits of metal would be painless, as the brain would be crushed faster than it could process the information, but it wouldn’t make pretty viewing - and one needs to remember that the victim’s loved ones will often be present.
Is there a dose for heroin that is always lethal (even to someone who uses the drug all the time and, presumably would have some sort of tolerance) and wouldn’t be painful? If so, I wouldn’t have an issue with using it, though I think we should just get rid of the death penalty all together.
Heroin is so popular with all the cool kids now, what with users driving shit-faced into buildings and head on into cars on the highway, not to mention overdosing and keeling over on a daily basis. The prisons couldn’t keep a supply locked up for killing prisoners, it would be constantly ‘disappearing’, a big scandal. It’s just that good.
So, Cecil points out good reasons not to use heroin.
I wonder if we will see US states switch to inert gas asphyxiation (e.g. Inert gas asphyxiation - Wikipedia). This seems like a good alternative for a number of reasons.
Painless. My understanding is that the subject, deprived of oxygen, slowly slips into narcolepsy, sleep, and then death.
Cheap and available. You can use nitrogen, which is abundant in the atmosphere.
No dosing issues. There is no need for sticking a vein, figuring out a subject’s tolerance to different chemicals, etc. You just need to have the right percentage of nitrogen (pure N2 would work fine and be easy).
Morality of the death penalty aside it seems like nitrogen asphyxiation would by far be the best route.
I’m from Michigan, the first state to abolish capital punishment–we’ve never had it–and I’m quite happy to keep it that way.
But now consider this. It’s generally the folks on the right who favor capital punishment, and those on the left who oppose it. But the folks on the left are the ones most likely to favor assisted suicide, which they see as a humane, dignified way to let someone go quietly and peacefully. If I were in favor of capital punishment, I’d just specify that the means of execution should be the same means used for assisted suicide. That would pretty well pull the rug out on any argument that the means (as opposed to the punishment itself) is cruel.
I’ve never understood why they’ve never tried to go that route.
One wonders why we are so solicitous of the comfort of someone who burned a family alive, but whatever…
Frankly, old age is not for sissies. If you think throwing up because of heroin OD is unendurable, try being old. Throwing up is the least of it as your body slowly ceases to function, everything begins to hurt, and your mind starts doing funny things. Indeed, old age is a far crueler punishment than any method of execution in use today.
The fact is, if lethal injection is found to be inhumane, many states are saying that they will return to hanging and firing squads. The methods may be gruesome, but it is arguable that they are still the least painful methods of execution.
Does it strike anyone that having a humane execution is an oxymoronic quest?
My main concern is that once you execute someone, you not only make it impossible to commute the sentence if the suspect is later found to be innocent, but also end all query whether justice was actually served in the first place. Too many people are convicted of capital crimes based on the flimsiest of evidence.
One attorney once told me that over 60% of the Texas capital cases are based solely on the testimony of people who were involved in the crime, and were given leniency if they help convict the person charged. That is, two people go out and rob a liquor store. The cashier is killed. One of the perpetrators works out a deal with the prosecution to turn states evidence. The other is charged with capital murder, convicted on the evidence of his former partner in crime, and sentenced to death.
The problem with the death penalty isn’t the method of execution. Changing the method of execution isn’t going to solve any problems.
The Left are a death cult that wants to kill the innocent while saving murderers. They have an inverted value system that justifies organized robbery while punishing people who actually work. There is really something wrong with these people – and something even more wrong that the rest of us tolerate it.
A lot of people on this board know I’m against the death penalty (because I’m convinced the justice system convicts factually innocent people too often), but I just want to throw this out there - Cecil said “Heroin overdose can cause difficulty in breathing, one of your less pleasant experiences.”
If it’s enough heroin (or morphine, same diff), the stoned/condemned will not miss the breathing and not experience discomfort. Morphine is sometimes giving to people who are in their last minutes on this earth, precisely because when breathing becomes too difficult, the brain will not recognize that horrible, torturous reflexive ‘need to breathe,’ nor oxygen starvation.