From the state that watches the most porn

[ZiprHead]

I think executions should be in public if we are going to have them. Let the people see the consequences of their choices, both the voters and the criminals.

Last time they did that, it became a family outing. People brought the kids and picnic baskets.

So...

- - - Updated - - -

I'm confused. What does any of this have to do with porn?

Nothing, we just like porn. :devil-smiley-029:

 

[Keith&Co.]

I'm confused. What does any of this have to do with porn?

It's a not terribly difficult-to-grasp attempt to highlight the reputation of the state most famed for a particular religion, which claims a monopoly on morality despite the booming porn industry there, against the legislature's behavior in grabbing for yet another rung on the moral-superiority ladder.
If'n we're dependent on foreign drugs for the humane choice, let's just blow 'em straight to Hell the Outer Darkness.

 

[bilby]

For a method of execution to be painless, steps have to be taken to ensure that the brain is incapable of processing pain signals at any stage in the process.

In practical terms, there are two ways this could be achieved: A) By the painless administration of anaesthesia prior to execution; or B) By destroying the brain faster than nervous impulses can propagate.

Class 'A' killings include lethal injections, gas chambers etc; Once anaesthesia is achieved, any means of killing is equally painless, so it is irrelevant how the coup de grace is achieved.

Class 'B' killings require rapid physical destruction of the brain; Captive bolt guns, firing squads with the head as the aim-point, or the use of high explosives would achieve this, if properly managed; However these techniques may be very messy.

Most execution methods fall into neither category, and almost certainly cause pain to the executee - hanging, beheading (including guillotining), firing squad with the chest/heart as the aim-point, etc. fall into this category.

There is good evidence from the French Revolution that beheading does not cause instant (or even very rapid) loss of consciousness; it seems implausible that this method of execution is painless.

Of course, none of this answers (or even addresses) the two most important questions: Should executions be used at all? and If we do use them, should we care about whether they are painful?

These are not merely moral questions; in the USA, for example, the eighth amendment provides that 'cruel and unusual' punishments are forbidden, which I believe should rule out executions that cause pain (on the basis that this is cruel), and should also rule out executions altogether in the 21st century (on the basis that this punishment is no longer usual).

Even if we only look at capital crimes, and only in those States which have the highest rates of execution, it is hard to argue that this punishment is 'usual'; most convicts who are found guilty of capital crimes are not executed. According to the BJS, roughly 0.06 people are convicted of murder per 1000 population per annum; that's about 18,000 convictions per annum. In the decade to 2014, 51 executions have been performed (source); making the punishment of execution applicable to 0.28% of murder convicts. If a punishment that is not applied for the other (at least) 99.72% of people convicted of murder doesn't count as unusual, then what does?

The death penalty is expensive, usually inhumane, often cruel, certainly unusual (and as a result probably unconstitutional), and is ineffective as a deterrent. It is no more effective at preventing re-offending than life without parole - particularly given that a death sentence implies a long custodial term prior to execution being carried out; and it is impossible to make any attempt at restitution or compensation for any person who is subsequently exonerated. It should be discontinued.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Yup--and one person in the squad (they do not know who) is actually firing a blank so there's always a doubt whether they killed someone.

The kick is different from a blank. And people who are administering JUSTICE don't tend to think highly of an executioner who's going to regret administering it
I think they just found that the chance you're shooting a blank makes people more likely to pull the trigger in the first place, before you can tell if you have the blank....

You could make a blank with the normal kick--fire something of the right mass but which won't hold together--think shotgun with a very small pellet size.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

How about a different approach to the death penalty:

Remove the option from the jury in most cases. Instead, the death penalty is automatic upon receiving a life sentence for a crime committed while already serving a life sentence. If they're actually too dangerous to keep, kill them.

 

[Keith&Co.]

How about a different approach to the death penalty:

Remove the option from the jury in most cases. Instead, the death penalty is automatic upon receiving a life sentence for a crime committed while already serving a life sentence. If they're actually too dangerous to keep, kill them.

But then you could not recieve a life-sentence for a crime committed while serving such a sentence. If it's automatic, then there's no point in calling it anything other than a death-sentence for being found guilty. And we're back to the jury asking themselves if they can condemn a man to death...

 

[ZiprHead]

There is good evidence from the French Revolution that beheading does not cause instant (or even very rapid) loss of consciousness; it seems implausible that this method of execution is painless.

Thank you for providing that info. I'll withdraw my proposal for guillotining.

 

[Keith&Co.]

You could make a blank with the normal kick--fire something of the right mass but which won't hold together--think shotgun with a very small pellet size.

Wouldn't that be just incredibly dangerous? If you sell them as 'blanks' but with that much mass, you're going to engender a whole series of John Eric Hexum fatalities. "The box CLEARLY said blanks, but look at the wound!"

This would just be taking steps to ensure you're correct about the purpose of the blank issued to one of the squad members. If you're not, then what's it in aid of?

 

[TSwizzle]

We have a simple, safe, painless and effective system of execution available that we don't use on humans: An anoxic environment. Pump pure nitrogen into the execution chamber, keep it at a slight negative pressure in case of a leak. A face mask will make it go faster but isn't actually necessary so long as you have enough nitrogen available.

This might be workable. The use of an execution chamber is a bit grim makes for a grim spectacle. Lull the condemned into thinking they are going to the dentist's office for a check up, oops, root canal needed, face mask on, nothing to worry about, and the rest is easy.

 

[Bronzeage]

We have a simple, safe, painless and effective system of execution available that we don't use on humans: An anoxic environment. Pump pure nitrogen into the execution chamber, keep it at a slight negative pressure in case of a leak. A face mask will make it go faster but isn't actually necessary so long as you have enough nitrogen available.

This might be workable. The use of an execution chamber is a bit grim makes for a grim spectacle. Lull the condemned into thinking they are going to the dentist's office for a check up, oops, root canal needed, face mask on, nothing to worry about, and the rest is easy.

Nitrogen is used in chemical plants to purge vessels of explosive gases so they can be inspected and repaired. If someone enters the vessel before fresh air has purged the nitrogen, they collapse and die, after three breathes. Nitrogen atmosphere accidents used to claim two lives, the first man in, and the first man to see him lying on the deck. The third person who looked in the hatch and saw two men down, usually realized something was wrong. Incidents like these are why we have OSHA, today.

For all of that, nitrogen is a fast, painless, stress free way to die.

 

[bilby]

The kick is different from a blank. And people who are administering JUSTICE don't tend to think highly of an executioner who's going to regret administering it
I think they just found that the chance you're shooting a blank makes people more likely to pull the trigger in the first place, before you can tell if you have the blank....

You could make a blank with the normal kick--fire something of the right mass but which won't hold together--think shotgun with a very small pellet size.

That has already been done in at least one case in Utah; a wax (or similar) bullet, that disintegrates almost as soon as it leaves the barrel, but which has sufficient mass to 'kick' like a live round was used for the 'conscience round' in the execution of Ronnie Lee Gardner (according to the BBC report of his execution).

None of the firing squad will ever know for sure if he fired a lethal shot. One gun was loaded with a dummy - probably wax - bullet, which is said to deliver the same recoil as a live round.

 

[Bronzeage]

You could make a blank with the normal kick--fire something of the right mass but which won't hold together--think shotgun with a very small pellet size.

That has already been done in at least one case in Utah; a wax (or similar) bullet, that disintegrates almost as soon as it leaves the barrel, but which has sufficient mass to 'kick' like a live round was used for the 'conscience round' in the execution of Ronnie Lee Gardner (according to the BBC report of his execution).

None of the firing squad will ever know for sure if he fired a lethal shot. One gun was loaded with a dummy - probably wax - bullet, which is said to deliver the same recoil as a live round.

If it's all the same to everybody, if I am ever executed by firing squad, I would like to have four rifle who think they really need to kill me.

 

[bilby]

That has already been done in at least one case in Utah; a wax (or similar) bullet, that disintegrates almost as soon as it leaves the barrel, but which has sufficient mass to 'kick' like a live round was used for the 'conscience round' in the execution of Ronnie Lee Gardner (according to the BBC report of his execution).

None of the firing squad will ever know for sure if he fired a lethal shot. One gun was loaded with a dummy - probably wax - bullet, which is said to deliver the same recoil as a live round.

If it's all the same to everybody, if I am ever executed by firing squad, I would like to have four rifle who think they really need to kill me.

“...How would you like to die, Tyrion son of Tywin?"
"In my own bed, with a belly full of wine and a maiden's mouth around my cock, at the age of eighty," he replied.”

- George R. R. Martin.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

How about a different approach to the death penalty:

Remove the option from the jury in most cases. Instead, the death penalty is automatic upon receiving a life sentence for a crime committed while already serving a life sentence. If they're actually too dangerous to keep, kill them.

But then you could not recieve a life-sentence for a crime committed while serving such a sentence. If it's automatic, then there's no point in calling it anything other than a death-sentence for being found guilty. And we're back to the jury asking themselves if they can condemn a man to death...

The point is that it only applies to those too demonstrated to be to dangerous to keep around.

 

[bilby]

But then you could not recieve a life-sentence for a crime committed while serving such a sentence. If it's automatic, then there's no point in calling it anything other than a death-sentence for being found guilty. And we're back to the jury asking themselves if they can condemn a man to death...

The point is that it only applies to those too demonstrated to be to dangerous to keep around.

There is no such person. Anyone who cannot be safely allowed to mix with others can be incarcerated for life without going to the pointless expense or taking the irreversible step of executing him.

There is no support for the contention that the death penalty is needed to protect society from repeat offences.

There is also no support for the contention that the death penalty is an effective deterrent.

There isn't even any support for the contention that the death penalty is more expedient and/or cheaper than life imprisonment.

The only 'reason' to have the death penalty that has any factual support is that it satisfies the victim's, and society's desire for revenge. While this desire is real and undeniable, it is also the antithesis of civilisation; The whole point of having a criminal justice system is to take revenge out of the equation, because revenge is destructive to society itself.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The point is that it only applies to those too demonstrated to be to dangerous to keep around.

There is no such person. Anyone who cannot be safely allowed to mix with others can be incarcerated for life without going to the pointless expense or taking the irreversible step of executing him.

There is no support for the contention that the death penalty is needed to protect society from repeat offences.

There is also no support for the contention that the death penalty is an effective deterrent.

There isn't even any support for the contention that the death penalty is more expedient and/or cheaper than life imprisonment.

The only 'reason' to have the death penalty that has any factual support is that it satisfies the victim's, and society's desire for revenge. While this desire is real and undeniable, it is also the antithesis of civilisation; The whole point of having a criminal justice system is to take revenge out of the equation, because revenge is destructive to society itself.

There are murders even in supermax prisons.

 

[bilby]

There is no such person. Anyone who cannot be safely allowed to mix with others can be incarcerated for life without going to the pointless expense or taking the irreversible step of executing him.

There is no support for the contention that the death penalty is needed to protect society from repeat offences.

There is also no support for the contention that the death penalty is an effective deterrent.

There isn't even any support for the contention that the death penalty is more expedient and/or cheaper than life imprisonment.

The only 'reason' to have the death penalty that has any factual support is that it satisfies the victim's, and society's desire for revenge. While this desire is real and undeniable, it is also the antithesis of civilisation; The whole point of having a criminal justice system is to take revenge out of the equation, because revenge is destructive to society itself.

There are murders even in supermax prisons.

No shit, Sherlock.

I am slightly disturbed that you imagine this to be a useful contribution to the debate.

Do you have any reason to imagine that capital punishment could eliminate these murders without doing more harm than good?

Or do you think that executing hundreds of wrongfully convicted prisoners for each murder prevented is completely acceptable?

Or more plausibly, did you not stop to think what level of capital punishment would be needed to reduce the rate of murders inside prisons; or what the implications of that number of executions would be on the rate of 'false positives'?

There is no perfect answer. The fact remains that the solutions with the minimum number of non-judicial deaths are also the solutions with the minimum number of executions.

Increasing the number of executions above zero, and/or reducing the amount of prison time served between arrest and execution, does not defend the prison population nor the general population from being unjustly killed; it just exchanges a handful of murders in prison for a large number of miscarriages of justice involving the executions of innocent people.

It saddens me that you cannot seem to grasp this without having it spelled out for you.

 

[TSwizzle]

The only 'reason' to have the death penalty that has any factual support is that it satisfies the victim's, and society's desire for revenge. While this desire is real and undeniable, it is also the antithesis of civilisation; The whole point of having a criminal justice system is to take revenge out of the equation, because revenge is destructive to society itself.

This notion of the death penalty as being the "antithesis of civilization" is just an opinion, it's sentimental claptrap, espoused by navel gazing right on types of privelage. Just admit you're a bit squeamish.

 

[Archimedes]

Do you have any reason to imagine that capital punishment could eliminate these murders without doing more harm than good?

Loren doesn't seem to be advocating a murder prevention methodology. He seems to more advocating in this thread that certain people who are advocated to be "too dangerous to keep around" should be executed by the powers-that-be.

Which somehow fits in with his "moderate libertarian" ideals. It seems that armed government employees shooting civilians and/or beating them to death, and the government actively killing people deemed "too dangerous to keep" is somehow compatible with "moderate libertarianism". Like you implicated in a previous thread, Loren's libertarianism is so moderate as to be practically non-existent.

Loren's automatic kneejerk defense of armed government employees killing civilians seems to me to be incompatible with libertarianism, but what do I know?

 

[thentian]

Accurate as of March 2015, when Surinam abolished capital punishment. Make of it what you like.

Red: Capital punishment.
Brown: Capital punishment, but not practised.
Green: Capital punishment in extreme circumstances, such as war.
Blue: I was tempted to write Civilized Countries, but okay... no capital punishment.