amorea
 
Reply Tue 26 Jun, 2012 03:02 pm
..Whether we should have or not is not what I want to debate, but the existing method.
I find it cruel and too expansive to use lethal injection, or electrocution...instead a shot in the heart would be simpler, cheeper and instantenious
 
Joe Nation
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Jun, 2012 03:11 pm
http://www.cumberlandspaceman.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/no-country-old-men-anton-chigurh-cattle-gun1.jpg

How about this?

Joe(booom)Nation
nqyringmind
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Jun, 2012 04:12 pm
@Joe Nation,
Ohhhh Maaann, friendo!

One of my all time favorite movies!
nqyringmind
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Jun, 2012 04:14 pm
@amorea,
Yeah! We do need to find better ways to kill people!
Ways that are not cruel! Neutral
0 Replies
 
Lustig Andrei
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Jun, 2012 04:26 pm
@nqyringmind,
Very, very fine book, too.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  2  
Reply Tue 26 Jun, 2012 05:44 pm
@amorea,
The Guillotine!

It was invented by a humanitarian.

It got crosswise with his goal when the mob decided it was cool to play with the severed heads.
nqyringmind
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Jun, 2012 06:15 pm
@amorea,
How 'bout we stone em to death!
It's certainly simple. It's "cheep" and fits the insanityeous objective too!
And if DNA finds the deathworthy deadbeats to be not so worthy,
then pretty flowers can be painted on the stones and they can be used for a make-shift memorial.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Jun, 2012 06:42 pm
@nqyringmind,
Hardly humanitarian.

You must be one of those paleo-conservative brutes.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jun, 2012 06:45 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
No it wasn't, the idea was stolen by a Frenchman. He didn't invent it.

Quote:
A guillotine consists of a heavy blade attached to a rack, which moves on a vertical frame. When the rack is released, it will fall down and the blade will cut the convict's head off. Such devices were first invented in the Middle Ages, and used throughout Europe. But it was only during the French Revolution when guillotine rose to general usage.


http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guillotine
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jun, 2012 09:14 am
@amorea,
amorea wrote:
I find it cruel and too expansive to use lethal injection, or electrocution

On the contrary, those methods aren't cruel enough.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Reply Wed 27 Jun, 2012 09:42 am
Because of a couple of persistent medical problems, each year I have either an endoscopy or a colonoscopy. It used to be every six months.

I am prepped and wheeled into the operating room, where an anesthesiologist says, "Okay, I'm gonna put you to sleep now."

I respond, "Thank y...."...and then someone says to me, "Wake up, Frank, you are in the recovery room."

They could extract teeth or cut off my dick...and I would not feel a thing until consciousness is regained. It is instantaneous and completely effective.

Every indication is that if a lethal injection were given, I would die...peacefully and without pain.

Lethal injection is a reasonable, humane form of execution. It should be allowed. In fact, it should be expanded to be used for euthanasia where appropriate...or assisted suicide when requested.
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jun, 2012 09:46 am
@Frank Apisa,
There was an outcry when it was discovered that British pharmaceutical companies had been providing American judicial authorities with chemicals to deliver lethal injections.

Providing material that helps countries carry out the death sentence is illegal. The directors may face prison.
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Reply Wed 27 Jun, 2012 10:47 am
@izzythepush,
I get that, Izzy.

But laws are made to be changed...and a law such as you mentioned here probably needs lots of changing. I certainly hope nobody ends up being prosecuted over there for helping with the chemicals.

Executions are, in my opinion, much, much, much more humane than life in prison without the possibility of parole...which is the alternative most often offered for capital punishment. Life in prison without hope of parole is so inhumane, I cannot accept that anyone with regard for a fellow human would advocate for it.

In any case, if a chemical company in Great Britain is able to come up with a chemical that can be used to execute a condemned prisoner, surely within a century or two an American company might be able to do so also. So at that point, we switch to an American made product.
nqyringmind
 
  2  
Reply Wed 27 Jun, 2012 10:50 am
Oxymoron Alert
https://encrypted-tbn3.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTeRXNl0rSA3-l2UTBXh-WuvFYfr3cWt4OOp8FO6mmVSMIdm0FbVQ
Quote:
Hardly humanitarian

Quote:
humane form of execution
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jun, 2012 10:53 am
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:

I get that, Izzy.

But laws are made to be changed...and a law such as you mentioned here probably needs lots of changing. I certainly hope nobody ends up being prosecuted over there for helping with the chemicals.


On that we differ. I hope the exact opposite. It is illegal to provide chemicals that allow a state to carry out an act that is illegal throughout the EU.

You're just a bit sanguine because it's America. How would you feel if it was Iran?

You have to draw the line somewhere.
Setanta
 
  3  
Reply Wed 27 Jun, 2012 11:09 am
The entire idea of execution is incredibly stupid. Many years ago, i read in the Washington Post that the average cost of incarceration in the United States was $40,000 per prisoner per annum. Now, even with price inflation (and the inflation rate has been low for a long time), one could assume $50,000 per prisoner per annum. That means 20 years to spend one million dollars to warehouse the goofy son of a bitch. However, with death penalty cases, court costs, including legal aid, can eat up many millions of dollars in far less than 20 years--never mind the costs of special incarceration conditions on death row.

So, i say the best method of killing thoses convicted in what are now capital crimes is old age. It will be cheaper, and cruel for many, many years.

izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Wed 27 Jun, 2012 11:13 am
@Setanta,
How about giving them a packet of skittles and a bottle of sprite, then letting them loose on the streets of Florida?

They'll be dead in no time.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jun, 2012 12:24 pm
@izzythepush,
Quote:
On that we differ. I hope the exact opposite. It is illegal to provide chemicals that allow a state to carry out an act that is illegal throughout the EU.

You're just a bit sanguine because it's America. How would you feel if it was Iran?

You have to draw the line somewhere.


I doubt I would feel differently if it were Iran. I think the entire "capital punishment is inhumane" is greatly overdone.

As I said, keeping people alive and in prison without hope of getting out is much more inhumane...in my opinion. I think it is unnecessary torture...and that says much worse things about humans than does capital punishment.

izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jun, 2012 02:37 pm
@Frank Apisa,
You may not buy into it but I do. If nothing else there's the problem of miscarriages of justice. This was in the paper last week.

Quote:
Liam Holden was 19 years old when he became the last person in the United Kingdom to be sentenced to hang. After deliberating for just 90 minutes, at the end of a murder trial that had lasted four days, the jury returned a guilty verdict and the judge told him: "You will suffer death in the manner authorised by law."

Holden was led down the steps from the dock at Belfast's City Commission, handcuffed to a prison officer, and escorted along the underground tunnel that led to Crumlin Road jail on the opposite side of the road. There he was taken straight to C wing – to the condemned man's cell.

This was larger than most cells, and airy. Holden was permitted a black and white television and two bottles of beer a day: luxuries no other prisoner was granted. He shared the cell with two-man teams of prison officers who watched him around the clock. One officer – a Roman Catholic, like Holden – delighted in telling him that it wouldn't be long before they broke his neck.

In the event, Holden's neck wasn't broken. His sentence was commuted to life imprisonment, and shortly afterwards capital punishment was abolished in Northern Ireland, bringing it into line with the rest of the UK. It was 1973, the Troubles were at their savage worst, and hanging a man, Willie Whitelaw, the Northern Ireland secretary, later explained, "would only succeed in promoting the mayhem and killings".

But Holden did spend the next 17 years behind bars.

Now, almost four decades later, his murder conviction has been quashed by the court of appeal in Belfast, and exposed as a miscarriage of justice: one that would have been allowed to stand, had the hangman done his work.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/jun/21/army-waterboarding-victim-cleared-murder?INTCMP=SRCH
0 Replies
 
Joe Nation
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Jun, 2012 11:18 am
http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/11/11/us-usa-execution-sniper-idUSTRE5AA0B620091111<br />
Joe(Keeping up with the news)Nation
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » death penalty
Copyright © 2023 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 01/26/2023 at 11:36:29