• Arkansas Faces Lawsuits Over Plan To Kill 8 Men In 10 Days
    76 replies, posted
Cost is fairly irrelevant to the topic. Firstly, the small number of people executed makes the total, although large on a per person basis, not large relative to entire state's budgets. Secondly, the topic is so much bigger than simple cost, as to make the cost shrink in relevance. [editline]29th March 2017[/editline] Anyone convinced to not have the death penalty because it's cheaper to have life imprisonment probably shouldn't have been for the death penalty in the first place.
[QUOTE=Fourm Shark;52028413]I would say helium asphyxiation would be the mist painless[/QUOTE] Most traumatic and inhumane however, your body starts to think you're drowning with Helium asphyxiation. Nitrogen is better gas option for oxygen deprivation as it doesn't trigger any body response. Its why Nitrogen is used a lot with euthanasia, its the most humane and cleanest way to kill someone as it puts them to sleep before it hits with the removal of oxygen in the body. Also Helium is a limited and expensive gas when compared to Nitrogen, Helium is extracted while Nitrogen can actually be produced for example. Anyway I'm not really for or against capital punishment as its a very touchy subject.
[QUOTE=sgman91;52030798]Cost is fairly irrelevant to the topic. Firstly, the small number of people executed makes the total, although large on a per person basis, not large relative to entire state's budgets. Secondly, the topic is so much bigger than simple cost, as to make the cost shrink in relevance. [editline]29th March 2017[/editline] Anyone convinced to not have the death penalty because it's cheaper to have life imprisonment probably shouldn't have been for the death penalty in the first place.[/QUOTE] I think it's entirely irrelevant to the topic, not just fairly. The way I view it is this: The death penalty costs someone their very lives as the penalty for their crime. This is one of the single most irreversible actions you can take. Thus you have absolutely no margin of error. Executing even one innocent person makes the entire idea a moot point.
The most humane execution method is to force people to die in their sleep at the age of 80, surrounded by those that they love and cherish.
[QUOTE=Lambeth;52030949]The most humane execution method is to [b]force people to die[/b] in their sleep at the age of 80, [b]surrounded by those that they love and cherish.[/b][/QUOTE] Why would you do this to them!?
Always thought, what kind of lethal injections are used by the lethal injections? If they are so expensive, why not use cyanide salts? People use them to suicide because you don't feel a thing, if i'm not wrong?
[QUOTE=Reagy;52030844]Most traumatic and inhumane however, your body starts to think you're drowning with Helium asphyxiation. Nitrogen is better gas option for oxygen deprivation as it doesn't trigger any body response. Its why Nitrogen is used a lot with euthanasia, its the most humane and cleanest way to kill someone as it puts them to sleep before it hits with the removal of oxygen in the body. Also Helium is a limited and expensive gas when compared to Nitrogen, Helium is extracted while Nitrogen can actually be produced for example. Anyway I'm not really for or against capital punishment as its a very touchy subject.[/QUOTE] you shouldn't get that feeling of drowning with helium as that sensation is caused by CO2 buildup in the bloodstream
[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;52028335]While I am against the death penalty regardless, what is the most humane form of execution?[/QUOTE] as long as I can see it coming there is no humane method of killing somebody. The anticipation, the dread of it all, is far worse than whatever temporary pain could be. If you want painless though, nitrogen asphyxiation. Zero physical reaction from the body until you're unconscious and dead in the next five minutes.
[QUOTE=ejonkou;52029270]There is no "humane" method of killing another individual. The death penalty is inhumane and it's certainly not just. It's simply petty revenge and murder. No government, under [B]any[/B] circumstance, should have the right to execute it's own population. Nobody should be put in a position where they have the right to dictate who does and doesn't have the right to live. It's one thing to remove a dangerous individual from society in order to rehabilitate them and keep the public safe, but killing them outright like an animal? That's sick, and people who support the death penalty in any form are pretty vile. I've never seen a credible argument as to why the death penalthy should exist. Most countries have had the death penalty abolished for a long time, with the exception of a couple of countries such as the United States, which honestly has a terrible and corrupt legal system. And is probably the last country in the world which should be entrusted with carrying out the death penalty. The US should take all the billions and billions they spend on killing people, and put that money to better use. Put that money in to better mental health facilities with a focus on preemptive care. Try to catch people who are currently considered "beyond rehabilitation" early and treat them before they become violent and dangerous. Put a larger focus on CPS and try to remove children and teens from toxic and dangerous environments. Killing people isn't a solution and it doesn't tackle the root of the problem.[/QUOTE] Yeah we should just throw flowers and be really nice to the person that raped and killed your 10 year old sister before stabbing your grandma to death and burned your mum alive trying to get rid of the evidence setting your house on fire. I'm sure they can be 'rehabilitated' and put back into society. :buckteeth: What a load of shit.
Why does every thread about the death penalty unfailingly revolve around The Coolest Ways To Kill People?
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;52032043]Why does every thread about the death penalty unfailingly revolve around The Coolest Ways To Kill People?[/QUOTE] Because like poisoning pigeons in the park, it's a popular past time! :v:
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;52032043]Why does every thread about the death penalty unfailingly revolve around The Coolest Ways To Kill People?[/QUOTE] Everyone's missing the obvious method anyways: A cartoonishly absurd Rube Goldberg setup to drop an anvil or piano on the one to be executed.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;52032043]Why does every thread about the death penalty unfailingly revolve around The Coolest Ways To Kill People?[/QUOTE] Either there's a number of sick fucks here on Facepunch or Poe's Law. I'm hoping for the latter.
[QUOTE=orcywoo6;52031747]Yeah we should just throw flowers and be really nice to the person that raped and killed your 10 year old sister before stabbing your grandma to death and burned your mum alive trying to get rid of the evidence setting your house on fire. I'm sure they can be 'rehabilitated' and put back into society. :buckteeth: What a load of shit.[/QUOTE] Fortunately, the victim of a crime doesn't get to choose what happens to the criminal.
[QUOTE=Keelwar;52028318]It's also visceral and gory, and when you're talking about killing another human being, the killer wants to be seen as physically non-interactive of the killed's body as possible. It gives proponents a sense of the moral high ground, because anyone can kill anyone with a bullet to the brain.[/QUOTE] Don't really care about the killer, the "humane" killing is for the benefit of the one dying. Personally, I'd rather be dead instantly than watching chemicals enter my veins and slowly kill me. If killing another person makes you feel bad, good, stop fucking doing it.
I still say we should just execute criminals with nuclear weapons, you can't get more humane than vaporization. They're cheap and reliable, too.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.