• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Deathrow Inmate Files Lawsuit Over "Inhumane" Execution Drug

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
SlitheryDee said:
You said that the death penalty should be carried out "gently" while implying that a bullet to the brain is unacceptable for societal reasons. What is the difference between the two from the perspective of the person being executed? It is arguably true that the bullet to the brain causes death before any pain is registered. It has been demonstrated that even sedation can cause some pain, but for the sake of the argument let's call them equal from the perspective of the person being executed. In each case he feels no pain and simply dies.

This means that any difference between them from a moral perspective stems from how society views the two acts, and has nothing to do with the experience of the person in question. Do you really want to choose the method that feels less repellent to you in that case? Don't you want the brutality of the act to be on full display so that people will come around to your side of the issue out of pure disgust? If your only objection amounts to "But it's loud, sudden, and icky so we shouldn't do it that way", then you are not thinking things through.
Click to expand...

If your father was being put to death, would you care?
 
slayer202 said:
If your father was being put to death, would you care?
Click to expand...

If my father was convicted of a capital offense, no, I wouldn't care unless I knew absolutely they were innocent. But, since it isn't instant, I would have plenty of time to gather evidence to prove that during appeal.

Guess what? People die, even ones you love. Yes, it sucks, but crying about isn't going to stop it from happening.
 
slayer202 said:
If your father was being put to death, would you care?
Click to expand...

Yes, but then my father was never the type to put himself in a situation where he might face the death penalty. I suppose it isn't out of the realm of possibility that I could have had a different kind of father. One who did things that got him on death row. Who knows how I would feel about that hypothetical man.

In actuality, my father died years ago. He was a victim in a double homicide in which the killer was not put to death. Before you make the obvious assumption, I have no desire to see the killer executed. If it happened I wouldn't care, but I'm not bitter about it.
 
SlitheryDee said:
Yes, but then my father was never the type to put himself in a situation where he might face the death penalty. I suppose it isn't out of the realm of possibility that I could have had a different kind of father. One who did things that got him on death row. Who knows how I would feel about that hypothetical man.

In actuality, my father died years ago. He was a victim in a double homicide in which the killer was not put to death. Before you make the obvious assumption, I have no desire to see the killer executed. If it happened I wouldn't care, but I'm not bitter about it.
Click to expand...

Sorry for the uncomfortable scenario

All I'm saying is that in the hypothetical situation, we can accept that they are going to die, and I don't see any harm is doing it in a way society deems "humane." And that is still completely separate from my belief that it shouldn't happen at all.
 
slayer202 said:
you people are sick. stand on your high horse bashing the guy for his terrible act, and then preach the same inhumanity. or maybe worse, because you think it's just
Click to expand...

One is murder, one is justice. I see no problem with his death. He didnt value anothers life so we dont value his. He is a waste of space.
 
boomerang said:
Look, I can't stop you from being a pillow biter and I know I can't get you to understand how the law works because others have tried to explain it to you already in this thread. The conclusions you have drawn are not logical but make no mistake about it, they are your conclusions. They are based in hope. People that think like yourself have created this problem. Then, you wail and moan about it. If you feel the sky is falling, blame yourself. The people that are suffering are suffering because of you. It didn't have to be this way.
Click to expand...

haven't heard that one in a while.

:hmm:
 
slayer202 said:
painlessly. and because I feel you breathing down my neck with "just shoot them in the head", do it "gently." Society is very particular about certain things, and shooting someone in the head isn't going to fly. stop trying to trip me up because it's not going to work.
Click to expand...

I'm part of society and im fine with bullet to the head. Im even fine with public hangings.
 
soulcougher73 said:
This.
Click to expand...

The worst problem? While pharmaceutical companies love to charge outrageous fees for the chemicals, I do believe there is more spent on legal matters than for the chemicals themselves.
Which should actually be more shameful than any part of the entire capital punishment process, even in the eyes of those who oppose such lethal methods. But alas, when it comes to reform, I don't think legal fees are ever going to be touched.

Our entire prison system needs overhaul in the worst way imaginable. It's disgusting.
It's welcome that we aren't imprisoning people for their beliefs and statements, like good ol' Russia, but in the end, they still imprison less people than we do.
However, that could be debatable. I'm not entirely sure Russia actually reports, in their legal systems, all of those they place into the system. They like to silence people.

Point being - more than anything, we need less people incarcerated. If we manage that, then it's feasible to simply lock up the worst offenders for life and never have an issue.

Truthfully, I do believe these assholes shouldn't have their life truncated, that's the easy way out.

It'd be ideal if, at the present time, that solution cost the States less money than keeping them around until their die naturally, but due to convoluted legal reasons, I think it would cost more even if they just threw them into a pit full of rabid bears and walked away. 😛

In the end, those are a whole lot of other issues that are not at all related to the present debate of lethal injection and specific drug combinations.
 
IndyColtsFan said:
It really isn't clear IMO. "Cruel and unusual punishment" can be interpreted many ways. Maybe sticking the guy in a cell and making him watch and listen to Justin Bieber videos all day for the rest of his life could be construed as cruel and unusual punishment? Wait, nevermind, that IS cruel and unusual punishment. :biggrin:
Click to expand...

well, it's clear enough, though, and that is the general idea of the constitution. Standards do change from generation to generation and this was wisely recognized at the time.

If it were me, Bieber would be a logical inclusion in the cruel and unusual category. I mean, that's pretty much how the CIA got Noriega, isn't it?
 
Last edited:
Deep pit
+
cooled carbon dioxide


Place criminal in pit.

Pour in CO2 (more dense than air).

Simple suffocation results.
 
I know this is not a popular opinion, but my tolerance for anyone killing anyone else ends at self defense where there is immediate danger.
 
akahoovy said:
True. You simply go to sleep.
Click to expand...

Well - not quite. But it's so quick if it's nothing but CO2, the body doesn't have a chance to register pain. It's instant CO2 toxicity.

They've considered it as a replacement for animal euthanasia.
I don't get what the hold up on it is - there is so much natural evidence out there, demonstrations of natural events showing large amounts of CO2 displacing air in various regions to the point that entire villages die, without any grimacing, while going about various activities. Dinners prepared, people sitting at tables, people cleaning dishes, going for a stroll down the street, shopping, etc etc etc. It's like one moment they are doing a chore, the next moment they literally fall over dead. Amazing what pure CO2 can accomplish.

If you could slow down time, I'm sure it hurts like hell, but so much so fast, it just swamps the bloodstream a moment after inhalation, and that's it, game over.

Jeff7 said:
Deep pit
+
cooled carbon dioxide


Place criminal in pit.

Pour in CO2 (more dense than air).

Simple suffocation results.
Click to expand...

That's the beauty of CO2: it's not even suffocation - it's instant toxic overdose.

Painless suffocation = a room filled with something like Nitrogen. You can inhale and exhale without pain, and all the CO2 in your body is removed, but you get nothing. CO2 is what causes all the pain during suffocation, and is what causes such an immediate need to exhale/inhale when holding your breath.

If you created a sealed room filled with CO2 - you'd be dead before you even had a chance to suffocate. CO2 is toxic in the body, and it needs to be purged with every breath. With any air other than one containing CO2, you can shed it all and never feel extreme pain. If you only breathed in pure CO2, you wouldn't stand much of a chance of even making it to the point of appearing to struggle - it would flood your body immediately after a few breaths and shut everything down. I'd assume someone could immediately pump pure oxygen (O2) into your lungs after you passed out and proceed to save your life, but I have no idea if that would work. They've demonstrated how remarkably quick CO2 kills - holding your breath would take longer and be more painful. A few lungfuls and lights out.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top