If Capital Punishment Must Be The Law Of The Land, What Is The Best Way To Administer It?

a reply to: skunkape23

argon = expensive

nitrogen = cheap

as an asphixiant execution method - argon has zero advantage over nitrogen

save argon for industrial processes that cannot use nitrogen

a reply to: skunkape23

argon = expensive

nitrogen = cheap

as an asphixiant execution method - argon has zero advantage over nitrogen

save argon for industrial processes that cannot use nitrogen

How about these people give back to society in some way as part of their execution.
We could let gun owners hunt them in a made for TV environment, with the last criminal to survive each episode given a pardon

Hunger Games, Running Man type enjoyment for all.

a reply to: CharlesT

I think the whole process is far too tidy. I say, just get a massive, forty tonne, seven foot thick, high pressure, gas powered ram or piling device, wheel the subject in, clamp them down, and drop the thing on them. Instant, so utterly destructive that there would be no possibility of pain, because the entire body would be disrupted to the point of liquefaction, and afterward you just hose the liquid remains off, down some sluice traps built into the floor.

It requires no mortuary processing, because you cannot process liquid remains and bone fragments as if they were a corpse, the remains would not require any burial, just washing away like so much dirt, and this would have several beneficial effects on proceedings. First of all, of course you have the financial aspect. Its a damned sight cheaper to flush liquid remains into a septic tank or similar, in which their component parts can be deconstructed on a molecular scale, than it is to put them in even a cheap box, and throw them in the ground, or even burn them in a cremation process. Cutting out anyone who has ever even MET a funeral director from the process, would be financially beneficial.

Second, you have other, more... emotive benefits. For example, if there is no burial, no service, if the individual who commits egregious enough atrocity against his fellow human beings, that the community insist he dies for it, then that individual forfeits their rights as a citizen, and ought to forfeit their right to be buried according to their faith. Let them be damned according to their own philosophy, who cares? It does not matter what THEY want, because the individual under the hammer (both literally and figuratively) has given away their rights by violating others. They have no right to be considered, and are lucky that the execution method does not first involve years of very deliberate, crippling, well thought out torture. No, screw their beliefs and their preferences. If you are bad enough to die for your crimes, then you are bad enough to be denied burial rights. Sluiced down the chute it is.

Also, using this method would be a damned sight quicker and more certain than using the currently available methodologies. There are some states, I believe... at least one, which up until recently still permitted death by firing squad, and the noose, the chair, the chamber and the lethal injection are all still options as far as I am aware. But NONE of these methods is certain to kill the individual in question, all have, at some stage, failed to kill the offender.
But there is no way for forty tonnes of steel, assisted by gas pressure, to fail to totally destroy the body of an offender if they are hit with it at all. Forty tonnes will render that body into paste no thicker than good ketchup, in less than a second. Total annihilation, absolutely immediately. No suffering, no pain, just instant oblivion, total bodily destruction. Nothing left for the family to mourn, nothing left for victims families to fear or hate, just a mess like an accident in a soup kitchen on tomato day.

This rig would require no medical professional to operate, would require no degree at all in order to correctly maintain and operate in fact, there would be no need to have a coroner on hand to deal with the body, no need to have a doctor standing by in case the subject survives, because they will not. They just will not survive that, there is no physical way for that to happen at all, even in the event of a system failure, because you would build it in such a way that all that happens during a failure, is the same thing that happens when the machine is functioning, in that the only things that could fail, are the lifting mechanism, and the only consequence of such a failure, would be the dropping of the hammer, which would be lethal regardless of situation, especially if the subject is placed into the machinery head first.

Its impossible to survive, it will, once assembled and running, be a hell of a lot cheaper, it would make the paper work simpler (because you would deny the condemned any choice other than what to have for lunch), makes the logistics simpler, requires no involvement from the pharmaceutical industry (therefore runs cheaper by an awful lot than having to replenish stocks of lethal injection components), it reduces the need for burial arrangements, and as well as all that, it sends positive messages to the victim, and negative messages to the next person thinking of doing something awful.

It says "The law provides that some crimes are too sick to permit their perpetrators to live. Break these laws, commit these particular crimes, and we will not simply kill you as a society, will will destroy your mortal vessel and deny you spiritual passage to whatever afterlife you believe in, by preventing your burial. There will be not be enough to bury, and you will lack even a grave to mark your presence here, leave alone your journey to the beyond."

The hammer, at the end of the long arm of the law. Immediate, brutally effective, and utterly impossible to survive through, under any circumstance.

originally posted by: CharlesT
How about giving the subject blood thinners in advance, administering a local anesthetic at the site or sites of entry, insert a large gauge IV needle attached to a very low vacuum system and simply drain the condemn's blood. They simply pass out and expire peacefully.

Can execution be any more humane, simple and pain free than that? People slit their wrists every day.

No? Tell me why and what would you consider more efficient and humane.

That actually sounds pretty ruthless, almost ISIS-like. I'm firmly with ignorant_ape on this;

[...] Nitrogen asphyxiation has been suggested by a number of lawmakers and other advocates as a more humane way to carry out capital punishment. In April 2015, the Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin signed a bill authorizing nitrogen asphyxiation as an alternative execution method in cases where the state's preferred method of lethal injection was not available as an option.[5][6]

[...] After just two or three breaths of nitrogen, the oxygen concentration in the lungs would be low enough for some oxygen already in the bloodstream to exchange back to the lungs and be eliminated by exhalation.

Unconsciousness in cases of [..] asphyxia can occur within 1 minute. Loss of consciousness results from critical hypoxia, when arterial oxygen saturation is less than 60%.[9] "At oxygen concentrations [in air] of 4 to 6%, there is loss of consciousness in 40 seconds and death within a few minutes".[10]

Wiki - Inert Gas Asphyxiation

A 3D-printed "death pod" has been created by Australian scientist and euthanasia advocate Dr Philip Nitschke which will let users die "peacefully and reliably" with the press of a button. First teased last month by Nitschke, who critics have dubbed Dr Death, the suicide machine is known as Sarco and was developed by the scientist's organisation, Exit International.

Reclining in the capsule, the user can click a button to release liquid nitrogen as the oxygen level falls. Nitschke claimed a peaceful death would result in "just a few minutes".

[,,,] "Sarco does not use any restricted drugs or require any special expertise such as the insertion of an intravenous needle," Nitschke said.

Controversial Euthanasia Proponent Releases 3D Printing Blueprints for Assisted Suicide Pod

For the most part, I'm against capital punishment, but I can't say how I'd truly feel if I were in certain situations. However, I do feel like if it's a road that humanity is going to continue down, then executions should be carried out in the most peaceful, calm, and pain-free environment as possible.

For example, the gas chamber and the chair are barbaric, and the lethal injection isn't too far behind in terms of heinousness, in my own view.

Others views may differ, and that's fine with me.

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: CharlesT

nitrogen

Ummm...liquid...?





YouSir

a reply to: TrueBrit

Damn, man.
Swatting flies with a sledge hammer.
I suppose your proposition leaves little room for error.

originally posted by: xuenchen
Forget the technology.

Hanging is sufficient 😎

China has this perfected. One shot to the back of the head where the spine meets the neck. Instant lights out. SPonsor it with a ammo and gun manufacturer and broadcast it on live TV.

Although... I would prefeer it to return to gladiator days where convicted killers fight to the death where the winner gets to live another day. Youre never more alive than when you are fighting for your life.

a reply to: TrueBrit

F_ _ _ man just....

originally posted by: ketsuko
In all seriousness, people who advocate for euthanasia on demand ... you tell us. How do you off someone who wants to go? If that method is good enough for someone who wants to die, then it's good enough for someone who doesn't want to.

I am sure with the growing demand of those that do choose to be euthanized that the money to research the lethal cocktail will be there and, so, hopefully, we'll get it right very soon.

a reply to: skunkape23

The pschological horror to his suggestion is too cruel.

a reply to: skunkape23

Thats the entire idea.

I have no problem with the death penalty in theory, as long as you can be DAMNED sure that the convicted were actually guilty, not just set up or used as a convenient scapegoat somehow. But there are so many things that have gone wrong with other methods of execution. Ropes breaking, people being injured but not actually killed by rifle fire, failed gas chamber systems, botched injections, all so costly and time consuming, and failure prone. But theres no failure that can prevent forty tonnes of steel, dropped from pretty much any height, from making a definite and immediate kill.

It may seem over the top, but the fastest and therefore most humane kill, is the one which is closest to an overkill.

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: skunkape23

The pschological horror to his suggestion is too cruel.

Cruel for the janitor.
How about just chucking them into the Grand Canyon with a catapult and let the coyotes clean up the mess?

originally posted by: skunkape23

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: skunkape23

The pschological horror to his suggestion is too cruel.

Cruel for the janitor.

Tell that to the family. People involved in this will have horrible nightmares and depression.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: CharlesT

Capital punishment should be reserved only for active duty military personnel or operatives of intelligence agencies.

And why would that be? If it's good enough for the military it's good enough for some scumbag civilian who murdered a child.

Personally if I were to be executed I'd probably select firing squad. It's actually pretty reliable if you look into it, and pretty quick.

a reply to: yuppa

yuppa,

Please explain... why is my suggestion horrifying to you? I assure you, I only suggested what I did, because it eliminates the main issues from a humane perspective, which is that people suffer when they die, or fail to by other methods, but suffering is impossible via this method, because there is no time for suffering. There is no creeping death, no slow action of chemicals on the body, no possibility of crippling injury and extended agony. Just bang, gone.

originally posted by: CharlesT
a reply to: smurfy

My position is that I do not oppose it and any means of getting rid of deserving individuals that doesn't torture them in the process is humane.

Is that explanation sufficient?

Who are you to say they deserve it.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6


In herds? I like it, certainly solves the prison overcrowding problem efficiently.

So would legalizing marijuana...and the US could effectively eliminate personal income tax....

originally posted by: kelbtalfenek

originally posted by: burdman30ott6


In herds? I like it, certainly solves the prison overcrowding problem efficiently.

So would legalizing marijuana...and the US could effectively eliminate personal income tax....

And the biggie - poverty.

a reply to: CharlesT

Ii don't think it matters nor does any good anyway.. Yeah... give them death. Great... Like "That'll teach him now he's dead. Yeah! "


No matter how...drugs, hanging, firing squad, electric chair etc... It doesn't seem to deter others at all committing crimes.. but I don't think we should have to board and feed them for life in prison either...

Maybe abandonment to some God-forsaken island with nothing.. "Naked and Afraid"!!!!!!