• Utah lawmaker proposes firing squad executions for death row inmates
    129 replies, posted
[QUOTE=sgman91;44853446]Most pro-capital punishment people I know feel that human life is so valuable that death is the only truly just consequence for taking it away from someone.[/QUOTE] I like how they take an idea and then conclude the exact opposite to what naturally follows from it.
I can't imagine what it would be like to be the person who pulls the trigger, the person who directly kills. At least with the drug injection it's more indirect.
A firing squad is just as bad as lethal injection, except its messier. If you don't destroy specific parts of the brain you'll still either be somewhat conscious, feel immense pain from the skull wound or just still be alive until you bleed out. If you're going to "humanely" kill someone, force them to breathe nitrogen, it's painless, clean and cheap. Of course, not executing in the first place would be better.
Why worry about treating someone humanely when they've proven to be inhumane? An eye for an eye doesn't make a blind world, it makes a world led by one person, ergo a world under control. The way the justice system is designed, you can do the most awful, horror movie recreation, torture shit you want to someone and you will be A-Okay. Nothing bad will happen to you under the watch of the justice system because they don't care about what bad things you do to other people. They just care about seeing you get back to your normal life as an operational part of society while the ruins of the people you left behind continue to smolder and choke the people around them.. Yeah, real fair.
sure, why sugar coat murder anyways
I've always wondered why they don't just give them an extremely high does of heroine or morphine. I'm sure that wouldn't be the worst way to go.
ODing is never pleasant, on an upper you get to be awake while your whole body shuts down (and the agony sobers you) and on a downer you'll suffer a seizure before you pass out
[QUOTE=outlawpickle;44850411]I was just about to reference this! Not only did he survive the firing squad, but he survived the coup de grace afterward where someone put a gun right to his head to make sure he would die.[/QUOTE] Christ that sounds truly horrific. What happens in this situation anyway, has the person been executed? After the botched one recently there were some articles speculating that had the person survived they would have been executed and couldn't be executed again. [editline]22nd May 2014[/editline] Also, I was reading the other day about how they do it in Taiwan (I think?) and they pump the prisoner full of morphine beforehand so they are pretty out of it then shoot them. [editline]22nd May 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=kaskade700;44851443]Why did these go out of style anyways ? [t]http://www.allthingscrimeblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/guy2.jpg[/t][/QUOTE] I'm sure I read somewhere that the idea of a guillotine being a clean and quick method of execution was a myth and that it regularly went wrong.
i wonder if you couldn't use a device similar to a captive bolt pistol it just straight-up destroys parts of the cerebrum to induce unconsciousness, and if modified to fire a larger bolt, or a wide disc-like shape, could easily kill the victim not to mention these are the devices used to slaughter livestock, with larger heads and tougher skulls than a human. the biggest advantage is that it achieves immediate unconsciousness, which i guess is the primary goal of everyone who feels that traditional methods aren't 'humane' [sp]lol[/sp] enonugh
If there were a way I would be executed, it would be by a firing squad in formal dress. I'd rather not feel my insides burning without end because lack of sedative through injection. He'll, maybe you'd get some last words out of it too. There is no humane way of killing a person in the end... nor is there one without it's flaws.
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;44849806]When it comes down to it, the fastest methods to work with are lead or rope. Still do not support the death penalty though.[/QUOTE] why? when you have someone that gets released and commits the same criminal acts and murders people they should get their lives revoked. Sure you can try to find a way to debate with me but the fact of it is if they can't learn to change their ways then no point in letting them live.
[QUOTE=Matthew0505;44874947]The most humane method would probably be some kind of hypoxia like nitrogen asphixiation, since the brain is the most sensitive organ to oxygen loss. But it'd still be better to not do it in the first place.[/QUOTE] I was going to post "Why not knock them out on sleeping pills and codeine then suffocate them with an inert gas or removing all air from the room" But you pretty much beat me to it.
Why don't they just use something like a benchgun with .30-06 hollowpoint, they x-ray you or whatever, then aim directly through your spinal cord
I really really don't think the death penalty is a good idea. I don't hold the [i]"all life is scared, no human deserves death, think of that poor serial rapist's feelings!!!!"[/i] viewpoint, But you simply can't trust who lives and dies to the justice system because [i] it gets shit wrong [/i]. Imo any practice that has even the most remote chance of resulting in the death of an innocent person should not be allowed to continue.
Why not inert gas asphyxiation? It is painless, and quick.
[QUOTE=Kanshi;44875888]Why don't they just use something like a benchgun with .30-06 hollowpoint, they x-ray you or whatever, then aim directly through your spinal cord[/QUOTE] Because incompetence. If it requires proper setup like xraying and aiming, it will go wrong.
If we are talking about execution mmethods, why don't we just put murderers into big gray buildings with a ton of metal bars, and prevent them from harming anyone else by having a great security system and by never letting them leave until they die of natural causes?
I still find it strange the obsession this country has with trying to pussyfoot around the fact that they're killing a person. I remember it was proposed a while back that it be done a single bullet to the base of the skull, if I remember correctly it was a lot more cost efficient and quicker than testing chemicals. [QUOTE=milkandcooki;44880385]If we are talking about execution mmethods, why don't we just put murderers into big gray buildings with a ton of metal bars, and prevent them from harming anyone else by having a great security system and by never letting them leave until they die of natural causes?[/QUOTE] we get it, just get it out of your system
[QUOTE=Mr.95;44880431]I still find it strange the obsession this country has with trying to pussyfoot around the fact that they're killing a person. I remember it was proposed a while back that it be done a single bullet to the base of the skull, if I remember correctly it was a lot more cost efficient and quicker than testing chemicals. we get it, just get it out of your system[/QUOTE] Imagine bringing up something like the cost of the tools used for the execution of a human being. Are you some kind of crazy amoral robot or something? You guys realize that by suggesting all of these "humane" ways of [I]killing somebody[/I] you're proving that the death penalty is a fucking joke, right? Seriously, if you grabbed some of these posts and mixed them in with things actual politicians have said, most people probably won't be able to tell the difference, especially with shit like "bullets are cheap! use those!" "Humane" execution is the most hilarious oxymoron to ever exist, and it's even more hilarious that it's still legal in a lot of states. [editline]22nd May 2014[/editline] "but they're murderers" Yeah, they'll still be murderers when they're dead, too. They'll never be able to get out and murder you, so there's no point in going through the trouble of killing them. Worried about them escaping and killing you or your loved ones? Then you'd probably get your priorities straight, because there's an infinitely higher chance of you getting hit by a car or getting killed by a vending machine.
[QUOTE=Lonestriper;44873909]I like how they take an idea and then conclude the exact opposite to what naturally follows from it.[/QUOTE] A just consequence always requires something valuable in return for something valuable. The very fact that your life is supremely valuable is what makes it the only comparably valuable thing to the life that you took. [editline]22nd May 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;44862855]Almost every argument I've heard about pro death penalty makes it sound like retributive justice, some sort of moral duty to rid the world of evil doers and general cost efficiency arguments.[/QUOTE] What am I going to say? Pretty much everyone I know would hold the view that I presented, whether or not they can articulate it is another story.
[QUOTE=sgman91;44881296]What am I going to say? Pretty much everyone I know would hold the view that I presented, whether or not they can articulate it is another story.[/QUOTE] If you can't honestly and completely articulate your opinion on this issue, maybe you should rethink it. Supporting the death penalty isn't like having a favorite color or liking a certain videogame, it's a serious, controversial issue where literal lives are on the line. Is the margin of error worth it, if so, where do we draw the line? Is it justifiable to take somebody's life, regardless of [I]financial expenses?[/I] Will them being dead erase their crimes? Is it a good idea to raise new generations in a society where killing somebody for killing somebody else is an acceptable thing to do?
[QUOTE=milkandcooki;44881329]If you can't honestly and completely articulate your opinion on this issue, maybe you should rethink it.[/QUOTE] Did you even read the comment I was responding to? It had nothing to do with the actual argument. [editline]22nd May 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=milkandcooki;44881329]Supporting the death penalty isn't like having a favorite color or liking a certain videogame, it's a serious, controversial issue where literal lives are on the line.[/QUOTE] I really appreciate the condescension. It helps to remind me that I'm on Facepunch. [QUOTE]Is the margin of error worth it, if so, where do we draw the line?[/QUOTE] The argument that the justice system isn't accurate enough to give out the death penalty is a completely different line of reasoning then the death penalty, on it's face, being inhumane or wrong. I'm directly responding to the latter, not the former. [QUOTE]Is it justifiable to take somebody's life, regardless of [I]financial expenses?[/I][/QUOTE] The cost involved is inconsequential to the overall budget. [QUOTE]Will them being dead erase their crimes?[/QUOTE] Strawman, nobody has made that claim. [QUOTE]Is it a good idea to raise new generations in a society where killing somebody for killing somebody else is an acceptable thing to do?[/QUOTE] Well, that the entire question isn't it? I believe that having the death penalty actually gives more value to human life. It shows that taking a life is worse than any other crime that one can commit. Without the death penalty you literally can't teach this in any meaningful way. Our society decides how bad actions are by the consequence that we give them.
[QUOTE=sgman91;44881462]Well, that the entire question isn't it? I believe that having the death penalty actually gives more value to human life. It shows that taking a life is worse than any other crime that one can commit. Without the death penalty you literally can't teach this in any meaningful way. Our society decides how bad actions are by the consequence that we give them.[/QUOTE] I dunno dude, being locked up for the rest of your entire life with no chance of getting out is just as bad as being dead. Neither a dead person nor a in-for-life convict can go out to the store and buy eggs, get married and have a family, start a business, watch TV in their own house... So why kill them? And I dunno how executing people gives human life more value, seeing as we're just throwing MORE lives away. If we, as a society, truly valued human life we'd never kill anyone unless it was some kinda heat of the moment gunfight standoff with the cops. Like, nobody's ever been able to give me a straight-ass answer: Why kill convicts? If you could sum it up on one sentence I'd love to hear it. [editline]22nd May 2014[/editline] [quote]Is it justifiable to take somebody's life, regardless of financial expenses?[/quote] also you didn't really answer this question, you just looked at the "financial" part (which had regardless in front of it for a reason) and ignored the rest.
[QUOTE=milkandcooki;44881242]Imagine bringing up something like the cost of the tools used for the execution of a human being. Are you some kind of crazy amoral robot or something? [/QUOTE] You do realize I already addressed that in the first part of my post right? Repeating it with a different wrapping doesn't do much. Also cost and tools actually is a factor when a single bullet costs usually $1 to $5 and chemicals used for executions often cost way more if I remember correctly. Also are you addressing me in the humane bit of your post or just the topic in general? Also calling me an amoral robot doesn't really do much for your point.
Is consolation for the victim supposed to be part of the reasoning behind the death penalty? If so, I want to be able to choose what happens to the person if I'm a relative of the victim. Hell, you should let me carry out the sentence in any way I see fit. Chain him down and pass me a pair of pliers. It's about consolation for the victim's family and friends, right? This will console me.
[QUOTE=Explosions;44883069]Is consolation for the victim supposed to be part of the reasoning behind the death penalty? If so, I want to be able to choose what happens to the person if I'm a relative of the victim. Hell, you should let me carry out the sentence in any way I see fit. Chain him down and pass me a pair of pliers. It's about consolation for the victim's family and friends, right? This will console me.[/QUOTE] In my opinion, the desires of relatives are irrelevant.
The death penalty. Meh, in any case, it's easier to off the guys instead of supporting them through a lifelong, no-parole sentence. Most humane way would be opium and asphyxiation. Or carbon dioxide asphyxiation. Or helium asphyxiation. Lethal injections aren't too bad however, and I doubt the firing squad will be implemented.
[QUOTE=Lackadaisical;44883299]The death penalty. Meh, in any case, it's easier to off the guys instead of supporting them through a lifelong, no-parole sentence. Most humane way would be opium and asphyxiation. Or carbon dioxide asphyxiation. Or helium asphyxiation. Lethal injections aren't too bad however, and I doubt the firing squad will be implemented.[/QUOTE] I know I'm a bit fucked in the head, but I think helium asphyxiation would be a HILARIOUS way to kill people on death row. I feel bad about it, but I can't deny it......
[QUOTE=sgman91;44881296]A just consequence always requires something valuable in return for something valuable. The very fact that your life is supremely valuable is what makes it the only comparably valuable thing to the life that you took.[/QUOTE] You'd have a very hard time finding circumstances where the punishment for a crime could be considered a just consequence then. We just don't calculate punishment on the premise that its value would need to be equal to the crime. Taking the idea that life is invaluable then flipping it as a justification of execution is an parochial view of the the role of the law and begs the question of assigning a great value to life in the first place.
[QUOTE=milkandcooki;44882575]I dunno dude, being locked up for the rest of your entire life with no chance of getting out is just as bad as being dead.[/QUOTE] Then why pick one over the other? If you think it's just as bad then you have no bias towards one or the other, since according to you they're equal. [QUOTE=milkandcooki;44882575]Neither a dead person nor a in-for-life convict can go out to the store and buy eggs, get married and have a family, start a business, watch TV in their own house... So why kill them?[/QUOTE] Why do you want to keep them alive? [QUOTE=milkandcooki;44882575]If we, as a society, truly valued human life we'd never kill anyone[/QUOTE] But obviously we don't value human life as a society seeing that murderers still kill people. [QUOTE=milkandcooki;44882575]unless it was some kinda heat of the moment gunfight standoff with the cops. [/QUOTE] If we as a society valued human life this wouldn't happen, I don't see why you included it in your post.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.