Utah lawmaker proposes firing squad executions for death row inmates
129 replies, posted
[QUOTE=snookypookums;44850368]This mangled lucky-ass motherfucker managed to survive a firing squad
[IMG]http://cdn.list25.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Slide43.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
Who is this guy? I want to look him up, did they let him live or something? Just curious since there's a photo of him alive afterwards all healed up.
[QUOTE=Lonestriper;44883578]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.[/QUOTE]
It's vary hard to talk about equal when differing actions are taking place. So for example, how much prison time is equal to forceful rape? I have no idea.
I would use the word 'comparable' as opposed to 'equal.' The phrase "punishment that fits the crime" is based on this entire idea. If consequences are not the way that society shows what it thinks of different "bad" things, then what alternative do you propose?
[QUOTE]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]
Firstly, I never said life was invaluable. I said that it has a lot of value. Secondly, I've already stated that the very fact that life has a lot of value is what makes the death penalty meaningful, on both ends of the act. The act of taking an innocent life must be punished severely because of the great value that has been destroyed and the only thing of comparable value is the life of the perpetrator. No other consequence can compare in value.
It is a strange case when someone argues that the value of life requires the extraction of life for an equitable result in the case of murder. It certainly makes the inalienability of life seem less inalienable when punishment can go so far as to include execution. Value is a completely arbitrary goal in the case of a comparable basis for punishment. It's society that decides what is comparable, I would prefer that society decide that the finality of capital punishment be a step to far. Especially so in the case of the fallibility of the legal system. If we cannot be sure we are absolutely correct, how can we resort to absolute punishments?
[QUOTE=sgman91;44884180]It's vary hard to talk about equal when differing actions are taking place. So for example, how much prison time is equal to forceful rape? I have no idea.
I would use the word 'comparable' as opposed to 'equal.' The phrase "punishment that fits the crime" is based on this entire idea. If consequences are not the way that society shows what it thinks of different "bad" things, then what alternative do you propose?
Firstly, I never said life was invaluable. I said that it has a lot of value. Secondly, I've already stated that the very fact that life has a lot of value is what makes the death penalty meaningful, on both ends of the act. The act of taking an innocent life must be punished severely because of the great value that has been destroyed and the only thing of comparable value is the life of the perpetrator. No other consequence can compare in value.[/QUOTE]
What I don't understand is that you acknowledged that the possibility of killing innocent people is a problem. If so, even if there was a need for some sort of fitting punishment in the manner you described, the death punishment should be regarded as inadequate, since it has that fundamental problem the life sentence doesn't. Why consider it if it doesn't meet one of the basic requirements?
[QUOTE=Rika-chan;44849845]One shot in the back of the head and done[/QUOTE]
I don't know why so many people seem to have the impression that execution by firing squad is done with a shot to the head.
Execution by firing squad involves shooting the heart simultaneously with multiple rounds to ensure complete destruction of the organ. The subject may or may not pass out from the shock of such an event, but certainly will pass out from the resulting blood loss. For those few seconds, however, I can guarantee you that they will be having a very bad time.
By construction, there is no humane way to execute someone. You can invent a method of execution that will preclude the possibility of the subject feeling any physical pain during the execution itself, but any execution involves scheduling a time and date, and that in itself is a form of profound mental torture. To tell someone that they are going to be killed on this date, at this time, at a particular location, and to constantly remind them of that fact is dehumanizing and degrading. Even farm animals are not treated this way.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.