Its time to end capital punishment in America, Another botched execution tonight...

[Sonikku]

Decapitation via Katana would be much cheaper and more honorable than some cocktail of drugs.

 

[mikeymikec]

Decapitation via Katana would be much cheaper and more honorable than some cocktail of drugs.

1) You think it is honourable to get your head chopped off?

2) I don't think the OP was making a statement with regard to the expense. The fact that the OP mentioned 'botched' in the topic title suggests that reliability ought to be a factor in despatchment method, and I doubt that anyone in the US has significant experience in decapitation.

 

[nehalem256]

Decapitation via Katana would be much cheaper and more honorable than some cocktail of drugs.

1) You think it is honourable to get your head chopped off?

2) I don't think the OP was making a statement with regard to the expense. The fact that the OP mentioned 'botched' in the topic title suggests that reliability ought to be a factor in despatchment method, and I doubt that anyone in the US has significant experience in decapitation.

The simplest solution would seem to be a remote operated gun system. Set up 2 large caliber rifles. Aim one at the head and one at the heart. Operator pushes a button which fires both simultaneously.

Quick, efficient, dead.

 

[moonbogg]

Why can't we just vaporize them with high energy weapons? Seriously, imagine they just instantly turn into a puff of steam? Would that be such a bad thing?

 

[BurnItDwn]

Why can't we just vaporize them with high energy weapons? Seriously, imagine they just instantly turn into a puff of steam? Would that be such a bad thing?

Would it be a bad thing to vaporize an innocent person? Sometimes the courts judge somebody as guilty when later, they find the judgement to be incorrect. I would not mind vaporizing a murderer, but, what is the acceptable margin where you will allow an innocent person to be murdered just for the sake of being able to terminate guilty people?

 

[Orignal Earl]

1) You think it is honourable to get your head chopped off?

Lot's of cultures do.
American culture is really one of the few that accepts and treasures blaming everything and everyone else before accepting responsibility for anything

 

[werepossum]

If what you said is true, then why do states with NO death penalty have less murders. Here is 3 articles that contradict your CBS story.

http://articles.latimes.com/2014/fe...08-tsarnaev-death-penalty-postscript-20140208

http://www.denverpost.com/ci_23374844/no-credible-evidence-whether-death-penalty-deters-experts

https://www.dartmouth.edu/~chance/teaching_aids/books_articles/JLpaper.pdf

The death penalty has been phased out more and more over the years, and crime and murders have also? Coincidence?

States without the death penalty tends to be states with fewer murders and thus, states with less pressure to have a death penalty.

I don't think there is any evidence that doing anything actually works, be it the death penalty or imprisonment or anything. I mean look through history when societies existed that didn't care about humane executions. Despite knowing that you could be tortured to death people still committed heinous crimes. In general I would say the more heinous the crime the less rational thought goes into it.

IMO when I look at the death penalty its not about deterrence or about rehabilitation. Its about making society feel better. Its about the punishment fitting the crime.

Rehabilitation is not the point of the justice system though it thinly attempts to pass that as its purpose. Think about the man for example who through violation of some law accidentally kills his family and another. He is instantly rehabilitated once he knows his evil deed; he weeps tears and begs for forgiveness from everyone he's hurt. Yet it feels wrong to say "you've learned your lesson and have suffered enough". Instead he get a long manslaughter charge despite already being rehabilitated. Most of the offenders in prison if we paid them the cost of imprisonment (60k USD) as a flat wage for the length of the term they would have served for staying out of trouble you'd dramatically slash your repeat offender rate. But it seems wrong to do that.

When I look at the justice system the actions we make as a society are not about rehabilitation or even about deterrence, but rather to achieve catharsis and if that is the case then perhaps the death penalty is justified.

Regarding this particular case, a vein blew. It happens. Its akin to a lightbulb blowing out as you're lining up a critical shot. In hindsight they should set up two IVs rather than just one. Or have a backup agent which can be given intramuscularly.

Very interesting and thoughtful post, thanks. Some good points there.

I generally agree with what you're saying.

(Re: bit in bold) - While I'm sure that this is true in some cases, how does a fair judicial system determine this? I spent a bit of time when driving between customers thinking about this yesterday, and peoples' motivations for committing crime differ and so therefore the approach for reforming them logically should be different as well - treating someone who "just wants to watch the world burn" with the same method as someone who thought they might get away with skimming their employer's accounts isn't logical. Even if one made a comparison between two violent crimes it's not even remotely logical that the causes of the crimes are the same.

So an approach that minutely examines the crime and the circumstances of the criminal and determines that person's reasons for doing what they did IMO is mostly a head job, if you want to find out what drives a particular criminal to commit crime.

I then need to make an enormous assumption that the people doing the examining have the skills and experience dealing with this branch of psychology, and they come to generally correct conclusions.

Many crimes are going to come down to very basic things, IMHO:

1 - Greed; people who want more but not having to work for it in the way that law-abiding people do.
2 - Attraction; people who are attracted to the achievement of pulling off a criminal act and haven't found an honest equivalent. Is there always an equivalent?
3 - Ignorance; (whatever crime) is the only thing they think they're good at.
4 - Lack of fear of the consequences; and possibly a combination of points 1-3.

Then responses to counter their reasons to commit crime need to be devised. The fourth is probably the most problematic to directly counter as the obvious conclusion is "give them something else to fear then". Other responses might be the sorts of things that many civilised countries already do (like ensuring that someone gets training to start them in a suitable career), but perhaps with more information about what makes that person tick, a better job can be done. According to some stats I read on a government website yesterday, the US has a reoffending rate of approximately 75%, compare that to the UK (again, stats from another gov website), apparently approximately 25-33%. Something is obviously wrong somewhere, ideally that figure should be significantly less (in both cases IMO).

IMO some of the sorts of responses could lead a judicial system down some very dark paths (e.g. 'A Clockwork Orange' or Room 101 in '1984'), but if you want better answers then you have to start asking more questions.

Another very interesting and thoughtful post. Wow! Thanks!

Together with your four, I'd add a fifth. Some people are convinced that there is no point to even trying to earn a good living legitimately because the system is stacked against them. This isn't totally true of course, but if one grows up in the ghetto, with little stable family support, on welfare, virtually everyone you know is either on welfare, a government worker, or a criminal, in a failing school system that's concerned about your sense of self-worth and whether your stomach is full but educationally will happily settle for you not killing anyone and them keeping your share of the federal dollars flowing, it's not hard to understand the feeling that "people like me only prosper by taking what we want criminally." Asians largely get around this culturally, but for many people growing up in the ghetto their tiger mom is dead, absent, or strung out if not a POS.

Regarding re-offending rates, the US doesn't have a dole for men like the UK's. We also have a lot of forces devaluing labor. Combine those two and you have a substantial population that, having once committed a violent crime, has few other options for advancement than to commit another. With such a large labor pool relative to the number of jobs, people see little reason to hire an ex-con in anything above minimum wage forever positions.

 

[nehalem256]

Most of the offenders in prison if we paid them the cost of imprisonment (60k USD) as a flat wage for the length of the term they would have served for staying out of trouble you'd dramatically slash your repeat offender rate. But it seems wrong to do that.

The problem with that solution is you are essentially paying people for committing crimes.

You would get fewer repeat offenders, but a lot more first time ones

 

[bshole]

The simplest solution would seem to be a remote operated gun system. Set up 2 large caliber rifles. Aim one at the head and one at the heart. Operator pushes a button which fires both simultaneously.

Quick, efficient, dead.

No, the best way is to drop them on island with only enough food for 2 people. The government could televise the condemned inmates killing each other for the food. FOX News would probably pay for the exclusive rights to the telecasts.

 

[Orignal Earl]

The Nazis had this down to a science didn't they?
You could just get down to their basics, in Auschwitz they had starvation rooms.
You just had to put the prisoner into the room and lock the door
That should satisfy everyone's desires here

 

[cabri]

No, the best way is to drop them on island with only enough food for 2 people. The government could televise the condemned inmates killing each other for the food. FOX News would probably pay for the exclusive rights to the telecasts.

Close but try on this - which will also reduce costs

Take an un-inhabited island up in the Aleutian chain.
Install pre-fab concrete huts;
Airlift anyone that has received life sentence (getting rid of the death penalty) onto the island.
Food packages are airdropped once a week/month based on minimal daily caloric counts required.
Nothing metallic and/or tougher than plastic allowed.
Clothing and wrapping supplies are designed to degrade when in contact with salt water.

Mother nature is able to acts as the needed security guards

 

[chihlidog]

Close but try on this - which will also reduce costs

Take an un-inhabited island up in the Aleutian chain.
Install pre-fab concrete huts;
Airlift anyone that has received life sentence (getting rid of the death penalty) onto the island.
Food packages are airdropped once a week/month based on minimal daily caloric counts required.
Nothing metallic and/or tougher than plastic allowed.
Clothing and wrapping supplies are designed to degrade when in contact with salt water.

Mother nature is able to acts as the needed security guards

Cannot tell if this is sarcastic (I assume it is) but this WOULD be cruel and unusual punishment. Also, Ray Liotta would blow the island wide open anyway.

 

[cabri]

They are being provided food and shelter.
They are not being kept in isolation from human contact.

Cheaper than the existing system for lifers.

How is it cruel and unusual punishment.

 

[LegendKiller]

How humane was it for him to beat, shoot, and bury the girl alive when she was begging for her life?

0 fucks given.

1 bullet and bill it to his parents.

 

[Sonikku]

1) You think it is honourable to get your head chopped off?

By a Katana? Yes. It would allow me to regain my honor if I had failed in life.

 

[Orignal Earl]

By a Katana? Yes. It would allow me to regain my honor if I had failed in life.

Reads your post
Looks up at TV
The Last Samurai is on AMC
cool

 

[MongGrel]

Of course not, but the other arguments typically consist of various moral musings on society's supposed responsibility to pay irredeemably violent prisoners more than the average American sees in a year in the form of housing, food and healthcare.

Not saying we should kill all prisoners, but the notions that we should put millions of dollars into incarcerating a single serial killer for decades, and that this is morally superior to spending that money on people who are actually of value or potential value to society, baffles me. The only living serial killers should be the ones we haven't caught/convicted, and the money that would have been spent on their incarceration should hire a quality teacher for decades or pay down the national debt or help launch a mission to Mars or any other of the innumerable things that would be more productive than housing an irreparably violent sociopath for life; or worse, letting him out on parole after a decade to save money, so he can kill again.

I find it ironic that the anti-death-penalty crowd claims the death penalty is about societal catharsis; that it's just around to make people feel better. I'd say SuperMAX prisons owe their entire existence to making squeamish people feel better about themselves.


Don't get me wrong I'm all for re-vamping the system to actually rehabilitate/integrate into society those prisoners that can be rehabilitated, and I'm even willing to spend more money per prisoner if someone can show me a system that does so with a good rate of success. But there are some criminals who cannot and will not ever value human life; they know right from wrong and they don't care. Society is better off with them dead; it's an Old Yeller situation, plain and simple.

What he said.

+1

 

[Pneumothorax]

What's interesting with the news coming out about this guy now is that he appears to have been coached by either his lawyer or some other muderer-lover sympathizer.

1. Refused food and drink = causes your veins to collapse - makes it much harder to set up an IV - Phlembotomist had to resort to a groin IV
2. Even cut his own arm
3. Tried to get into a fight with the wardens which resulted with a tazing when he was due for the routine X-rays prior to executions.

 

[Sunburn74]

The problem with that solution is you are essentially paying people for committing crimes.

You would get fewer repeat offenders, but a lot more first time ones

The utilitarian, unemotional society in my example would say we are paying for deterring crimes, just like today we pay to deter crimes by mass imprisonment. Except that paying the individual directly would probably get better results.

Regarding more first time offenders, maybe. I'm not really trying to make my example practical here, but more proof of concept that it intrinsically does not seem morally right to allow heinous crimes to go unpunished.

What's interesting with the news coming out about this guy now is that he appears to have been coached by either his lawyer or some other muderer-lover sympathizer.

1. Refused food and drink = causes your veins to collapse - makes it much harder to set up an IV - Phlembotomist had to resort to a groin IV
2. Even cut his own arm
3. Tried to get into a fight with the wardens which resulted with a tazing when he was due for the routine X-rays prior to executions.

I recently read the report. I think that the state did a poor job in not having a protocol for this possible event: an uncooperative victim with bad IV access.
If a prisoner refuses to give up his veins, most of the sedatives used for the execution can be given intramuscularly to rapidly reach very profound sedation (there is no need to tase him which they apparently did). After sedation, an IV can be started. If an IV can't be started quickly, then the phlebotomist should be skilled in placement of a midline or PICC, or at worst an EJ. If that is not possible, there should be a protocol for 2nd line agents for execution that is completely intramuscular or can be given via inhalation.

 

[row]

we simply need more folks like Mr. Owens

http://ladailymirror.com/2014/04/30/oklahomas-executioner-rich-owens/

 

[CitizenKain]

What's interesting with the news coming out about this guy now is that he appears to have been coached by either his lawyer or some other muderer-lover sympathizer.

1. Refused food and drink = causes your veins to collapse - makes it much harder to set up an IV - Phlembotomist had to resort to a groin IV
2. Even cut his own arm
3. Tried to get into a fight with the wardens which resulted with a tazing when he was due for the routine X-rays prior to executions.

You mean a guy about to be executed didn't want to be? That is a pretty stunning revelation you made right there.

 

[cabri]

You mean a guy about to be executed didn't want to be? That is a pretty stunning revelation you made right there.

Yet he seems to have no concerns about those that he was responsible for their deaths.

I am sure that girl did not want to die either; however, he provided no options and ensured that it was painful.

 

[nehalem256]

The utilitarian, unemotional society in my example would say we are paying for deterring crimes, just like today we pay to deter crimes by mass imprisonment. Except that paying the individual directly would probably get better results.

Regarding more first time offenders, maybe. I'm not really trying to make my example practical here, but more proof of concept that it intrinsically does not seem morally right to allow heinous crimes to go unpunished.

If you pay people $60,000 a year for committing crimes you are going to get a lot more crimes; it is in no way a deterrent.

You mean a guy about to be executed didn't want to be? That is a pretty stunning revelation you made right there.

The revelation is he took actions that would be designed to prevent an execution. Some of which almost certainly he wouldn't have known without coaching.

 

[nehalem256]

Yet he seems to have no concerns about those that he was responsible for their deaths.

I am sure that girl did not want to die either; however, he provided no options and ensured that it was painful.

There is no requirement that a person in prison or condemned to execution experience absolutely no suffering. If that is what "cruel and unusual punishment" meant it would effectively ban all punishment for crimes.

 

[rudder]

Not safe. More humane. Something about cruel and unusual punishment.

Load them up with Heroin. The convicts will die with a smile on their face yay!