When is decapitation "bad"?

a reply to: the owlbear

I don't have any particular feeling about this, just that; leave me and mine alone. Pretty much this is how I feel

Execution, by any means, is not humane. Whoever says any different is inhuman. The definition of humane is what? Showing benevolence or compassion. I would love somebody to explain how execution can encapsulate either, never mind both, of these concepts.

a reply to: TechniXcality

I'm a little scared to click on a youtube video of a sillouetted crazy gun I've (luckily) only seen in video games over a Confederate flag. Not my thing, but I will defend your right to show it.

a reply to: the owlbear

You have a point.

I believe, just last year alone, the Kingdom of Saudia Arabia beheaded 59 people for 'witchcraft'. Of course, there is absolutely no media uproar because we are in a tight business link with their people and are not willing to compromise that on our cultural differences.

It is double standards because a large part of the media campaign here in the UK, and in the USA, is based around the apparent barbarism of these groups, and that we 'must' put a stop to this - when in reality one of our best international friends does it on a regular basis.

It goes to show the extent of control the policy and decision makers seem to have over the media corporations as well.

As for decapitation as a bad act - I guess it depends. If you do it properly by cutting the neck correctly (which is how humans have always practised it with animals for ethical reasons) then it is quite a painless and quick death.

What happens is that if you slice the jugular veins, the carotid, the trachea and the esophagus in one clean slice, the animal experiences practically no pain (this has been confirmed by EEG/ECG measurements) for the first 3-4 seconds, and then enters a sort of twilight zone as blood rapidly drains from the brain, before entering an unconscious and ultimately dead state.

Of course, there's no such data for humans, but there's no reason why the same principle shouldn't apply.

If the initial slice was done correctly, the resulting procedure of removing the head, as barbaric as it looks, is actually not so bad on the receiving end. In fact, it can be a rather blissful last moment, as opposed to death by firing squad for example.

That's all assuming it's done correctly however, which I'm sure is unfortunately not the case with many of these beheadings/decapitations.

Well, those who are doing it, if held to the same standards/laws the others are...would they get to keep their heads?

originally posted by: Jonjonj
Execution, by any means, is not humane. Whoever says any different is inhuman. The definition of humane is what? Showing benevolence or compassion. I would love somebody to explain how execution can encapsulate either, never mind both, of these concepts.

Honestly, that is how I feel on the issue of capital punishment. However, I hope this thread will not go in that direction.
Simply put, why can some peeps cut heads off and be be ignored and REWARDED! While some other peeps cut heads off and are evil and need bombing.(even when it doesnt happen after they raise their flag over a government building...an easy target for even a drone .nevermind a 5000lb bomb. But lets allow the rawr)

a reply to: the owlbear

Good tune you should give it a listen, regardless I was an infantry soldier and I was all up in their business over there and all I've got to say as long as they keep their bull # over their let em have it. Now I do get going about the mass genocide taking place by Isis, and feel our efforts were in vain.if those boys want to cut each others heads off let em have it, cut one of our heads of and we will crush them. Everytime

a reply to: the owlbear

I understand your point, and I agree. There is no justification whatsoever. If you want an answer though it really is rather simple. Those that want the world a certain way will have the world a certain way.

That does NOT mean that we should just accept it in our hearts, even if we have no choice about accepting it in our lives.

a reply to: TechniXcality

You're always honest TechniXcality, that's why I like you although our tastes in music may differ. I gave it a chance...not my thing but I can see where others like it. Thank you for the chance to hear it.
You are so right in that so much over there is tribal conflict. wahhabism is viral. And they have billions of saudi oil money to spend. Unchecked. Saudi Arabia isnt on the list of state sponsors of terror.

a reply to: Jonjonj

Silent protest never achieved much brother.

originally posted by: Jonjonj
a reply to: the owlbear

I understand your point, and I agree. There is no justification whatsoever. If you want an answer though it really is rather simple. Those that want the world a certain way will have the world a certain way.

That does NOT mean that we should just accept it in our hearts, even if we have no choice about accepting it in our lives.

Haven't gave up yet, j, yet, not going to try to sway others here.
show them their ugliness...show them how ugly it is, derives from, etc. Maybe then people can make up their own minds.

originally posted by: TechniXcality
a reply to: Jonjonj

Silent protest never achieved much brother.

There is no vocal protest brother. Let us rather just accept that we don't accept it, right?

Isis will use a blunt knife, and do it for just about any reason, Saudi Arabia does it quickly and in accordance to their laws, however wrong said laws may be.

Besides, they cut the heads from murderers and rapists who in all fairness have it coming to them.

originally posted by: TechniXcality
a reply to: Jonjonj

Silent protest never achieved much brother.

Been thinking on this statement.
The Buddhists that lit themselves on fire, during the vietnam war and just a few years ago, might not have screamed. But I wouldnt exactly call that silent protest.
I feel the sentiment, however, and it is a shame we can't be better as a species.

originally posted by: Themarkedone
Isis will use a blunt knife, and do it for just about any reason, Saudi Arabia does it quickly and in accordance to their laws, however wrong said laws may be.

Besides, they cut the heads from murderers and rapists who in all fairness have it coming to them.

How do you know how sharp the Saudi knife is?
How do you know the people that the Saudis kill "had it coming to them"?

I can ask more questions...
what makes one a "freedom fighter" and what makes one a "subversive"?

The IS views that the people they cut the heads off of "had it coming to them" from their point of view.

a reply to: the owlbear

Speaking as a person of a roughly law abiding sort, who has been a very good lad, and not killed every last bastard who has caused him a problem over the years (an expression of restraint which I consider inhuman, given some of the nonsense which has passed before these eyes of mine), I personally believe that there is a very good reason to have a legal system which includes a death penalty.

There are some things that a human being can do, some States a human being can get into, which cause them to be a) a threat to every other individual that they can get their hands on, and b) totally incapable of being pulled away from that behavioural model. For those people, and those people alone, the death penalty should be considered, not as a matter of punishment, but as a matter of civic responsibility to the masses.

Does any body remember the loony bastard that shot two police officers, and then blew them up with a grenade?
www.express.co.uk...

This fellow for example. This individual is a threat to everything on the face of the planet. This is the sort of person, and I use the term so lightly that photons feel fat around it, who should never walk the face of this world unsupervised. The threat he would pose to society if he ever got out, is beyond anything that the citizens of my nation should ever have to suffer.

I think a single twelve bore round to the base of the skull, aimed at an angle so that it not only severs the cerebrospinal connection, but totally disrupts the contents of the skull itself, would be sufficiently immediate as to be considered humane. It would also be cheaper than virtually any other method of getting the job done. Ending this persons fleshly existence would be no less horrid an affair for all that, but it would totally end the threat. A dead man cannot break out of jail, and massacre people in revenge for the incarceration he bought upon himself. A dead man cannot kill whilst in jail. A dead man, is, without wanting to put to fine a point on it, dead.

I believe that while jails do not exclusively contain persons such as the fellow I have mentioned, they do contain a fair number in total. Can you imagine what a mass break out of persons like this would do to society? Imagine for a moment, if you will, a vast number of inmates getting out of jail. Imagine furthermore, that the number contains at least a percentage of truly untreatable, criminally insane individuals, who cannot be treated effectively, and will be a mortal threat to every individual they encounter, without exception.

Is it just, or humane, to expect innocent people to perhaps encounter an escaped maniac like this man, in the event of a break out or some other catastrophic release event? I would say that it is not. I would say that until someone buries the creep, and a few others who have come to light over the years as well, that innocent people are still endangered, until these people have either been rendered dead, or have been physically crippled beyond their ability to effect their own lives worth a damn, let alone anyone else's.

I have no problem with capital punishment what so ever. I just think it is done for the wrong reasons. One must never kill to keep others in line, one must never kill to enforce a mere law. One must kill, if one must kill at all, to protect ones fellow human beings, from those unfortunate few who have given themselves over to chaos and ruination, who have made it their mission in thought and deed, to destroy all that stands before them, to carry with them at all times the promise of apocalyptic rage, and depthless savagery, those who are prepared to murder, maim and kill for reasons petty and meaningless.

I would not say that Saudi Arabia have the mix right, but it is not my place to judge really. I think that their death penalty is too broadly applied for my liking, but I have to remember that it is my liking which is the issue here, rather than the right and wrong of the matter. And that is why my attitude toward capital punishment is the way it is. I believe that all the machinations of law ought to serve the ends of justice, and there is nothing just about allowing those who prove themselves incapable of mercy or restraint, to live another day, to pose that risk they pose, just by breathing in and out, to the innocent and the law abiding, something they do whether they are behind a jail cell, or waiting for their next victim out on the streets.

But I will never be able to understand killing a person who poses no physical threat to anyone. There is no crime which does not involve an assault on another human being, lethal or otherwise, which is worth applying a death penalty over.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: the owlbear

Speaking as a person of a roughly law abiding sort, who has been a very good lad, and not killed every last bastard who has caused him a problem over the years (an expression of restraint which I consider inhuman, given some of the nonsense which has passed before these eyes of mine), I personally believe that there is a very good reason to have a legal system which includes a death penalty.

There are some things that a human being can do, some States a human being can get into, which cause them to be a) a threat to every other individual that they can get their hands on, and b) totally incapable of being pulled away from that behavioural model. For those people, and those people alone, the death penalty should be considered, not as a matter of punishment, but as a matter of civic responsibility to the masses.

Does any body remember the loony bastard that shot two police officers, and then blew them up with a grenade?
www.express.co.uk...

This fellow for example. This individual is a threat to everything on the face of the planet. This is the sort of person, and I use the term so lightly that photons feel fat around it, who should never walk the face of this world unsupervised. The threat he would pose to society if he ever got out, is beyond anything that the citizens of my nation should ever have to suffer.

I think a single twelve bore round to the base of the skull, aimed at an angle so that it not only severs the cerebrospinal connection, but totally disrupts the contents of the skull itself, would be sufficiently immediate as to be considered humane. It would also be cheaper than virtually any other method of getting the job done. Ending this persons fleshly existence would be no less horrid an affair for all that, but it would totally end the threat. A dead man cannot break out of jail, and massacre people in revenge for the incarceration he bought upon himself. A dead man cannot kill whilst in jail. A dead man, is, without wanting to put to fine a point on it, dead.

I believe that while jails do not exclusively contain persons such as the fellow I have mentioned, they do contain a fair number in total. Can you imagine what a mass break out of persons like this would do to society? Imagine for a moment, if you will, a vast number of inmates getting out of jail. Imagine furthermore, that the number contains at least a percentage of truly untreatable, criminally insane individuals, who cannot be treated effectively, and will be a mortal threat to every individual they encounter, without exception.

Is it just, or humane, to expect innocent people to perhaps encounter an escaped maniac like this man, in the event of a break out or some other catastrophic release event? I would say that it is not. I would say that until someone buries the creep, and a few others who have come to light over the years as well, that innocent people are still endanger, until these people have either been rendered dead, or have been physically crippled beyond their ability to effect their own lives worth a damn, let alone anyone else's.

I have no problem with capital punishment what so ever. I just think it is done for the wrong reasons. One must never kill to keep others in line, one must never kill to enforce a mere law. One must kill, if one must kill at all, to protect ones fellow human beings, from those unfortunate few who have given themselves over to chaos and ruination, who have made it their mission in thought and deed, to destroy all that stands before them, to carry with them at all times the promise of apocalyptic rage, and depthless savagery, those who are prepared to murder, maim and kill for reasons petty and meaningless.

I would not say that Saudi Arabia have the mix right, but it is not my place to judge really. I think that their death penalty is too broadly applied for my liking, but I have to remember that it is my liking which is the issue here, rather than the right and wrong of the matter. And that is why my attitude toward capital punishment is the way it is. I believe that all the machinations of law ought to serve the ends of justice, and there is nothing just about allowing those who prove themselves incapable of mercy or restraint, to live another day, to pose that risk they pose, just by breathing in and out, to the innocent and the law abiding, something they do whether they are behind a jail cell, or waiting for their next victim out on the streets.

But I will never be able to understand killing a person who poses no physical threat to anyone. There is no crime which does not involve an assault on another human being, lethal or otherwise, which is worth applying a death penalty over.

I feel honored to have your response. No kidding. I hold you in regard as having a well-informed opinion.

I do disagree with your opinion this time, but respect yours nonetheless.

The state should NEVER have the power to determine death as a punishment for any crime. My opinion, yours is different, we can be friends.

See how that works ATS at large?

a reply to: the owlbear

Remember those old "documentary's" called faces of death? They show a Saudi beheading on one of them. I watched the video they had of the Saudi execution. The swordsman was well trained and knew what he was doing. The sword appeared sharp and in good condition and the heads came right off in one go. Beheading by sword is pretty efficient. The Japanese used to behead people in the early 20th century. Those heads came off clean in one go too.

ISIS uses a small knife just to be bigger Assholes than they already are.

a reply to: the owlbear

I respect your opinion on this matter as well. I think it is necessary that the human race be comprised of a greater than evident percentage of persons whose compassion is greater than their pragmatism. There ought to be more of you in the world, owlbear, because if there were then a) there would be more Adventure Time marathons, and b) there would be less cause for folk like me to develop thought models like mine, with regard to these matters!

originally posted by: chelsealad
a reply to: the owlbear

The only reason I can think of is it depends on "who" does it. Is it capital punishment by a government or is it done by a criminal group because they are pissed at the world?
Example, man kills wife, gets caught and then faces death by lethal injection or depending on your country, stoning, hanging, beheading.
Man beheads another man for not being of a certain religion or not believing in a certain god or just been from another country.
That I believe is the reason for mixed media coverage. It is only my opinion.

I see where you are coming from, but the reality is far worse. Fact is, IS have simply machine gunned to death far more helpless people than they have beheaded for just the same reasons. The beheadings are staged and choreographed, to provoke revulsion, and get a media response of compliance to the revulsion. The Saudis executions are generally public, but you see they also have secret executions...IS just mimics. When you realise that, you realise the hypocrisy both IS and the Saudis indulge in, and that religion just does not come into it, but power does, because it all suits. They are not alone in the world, other countries that execute are much the same, while nitpicking over the detail, usually some law or other/AKA laws that build on power.