Utah state legislators approve firing squads

[The United Neptumousian Empire]

There's no need for capital punishment.

It's expensive and barbarian.

[Genivaria]

Making the experience humane for those employed to carry it out is also a concern. Also those who'll be witnessing it, and those who'll be cleaning up afterwards.

As I said, a bullet isn't really messy or inhumane.

I see you've never shot a man before.

[Genivaria]

Yeah man your right.

We need more blood. Bloody, dirty vengeance. That's what civilization is about.

Vengeance would be deliberately making sure the criminal suffers. As it stands capital punishment is more equivalent to waste disposal. Despite inane attempts to paint it in dramatic tones.

Waste disposal? Way to sound like a fucking sociopath.

[Benuty]

Vengeance would be deliberately making sure the criminal suffers. As it stands capital punishment is more equivalent to waste disposal. Despite inane attempts to paint it in dramatic tones.

Waste disposal? Way to sound like a fucking sociopath.

At least they sound like they are honest about their opinions of prisoners on death row. Even if it is morally abhorrent.

[Untaroicht]

Please don't waste the valuable bullets, they can be saved for when the SHTF- an axe or a rope can do the job just as well and doesn't have to be reloaded.

[Gun Manufacturers]

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/utah-lawmakers-ok-firing-squad-execution-backup-n321141


As some of you may be aware, several US states have been unable to carry out sentences for those convicts sentenced to receive capital punishment. This has been due to a lack of availability of approved drugs for executions, causing the wheels of justice to grind to a halt. Now, however, that may soon change.

In my view, this is a much needed move. The dispensation of justice shouldn't depend on the whims of corporate PR teams. If drugs aren't available for use, then falling back on more conventional methods is entirely sensible and appropriate. It is reasonably humane, and has long been proven effective at reliably accomplishing the task. It is admittedly a less clinical procedure, which may offend the sensibilities of the squeamish, but such is the price of protecting the many.

It's cheaper to just house them in prison for the rest of their natural life (compared to the legal costs of putting someone to death), and IF there's a mistake in the conviction, much easier to reverse than the death penalty.

[Fartsniffage]

Please don't waste the valuable bullets, they can be saved for when the SHTF- an axe or a rope can do the job just as well and doesn't have to be reloaded.

If you're in a situation where 5 rounds makes the difference then you've lost anyway....

[Yukonastan]

Please don't waste the valuable bullets, they can be saved for when the SHTF- an axe or a rope can do the job just as well and doesn't have to be reloaded.

If you're in a situation where 5 rounds makes the difference then you've lost anyway....

Four. One of the rifles in a 5-man firing squad has a round with a wax bullet loaded.

[Greed and Death]

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/utah-lawmakers-ok-firing-squad-execution-backup-n321141


As some of you may be aware, several US states have been unable to carry out sentences for those convicts sentenced to receive capital punishment. This has been due to a lack of availability of approved drugs for executions, causing the wheels of justice to grind to a halt. Now, however, that may soon change.

In my view, this is a much needed move. The dispensation of justice shouldn't depend on the whims of corporate PR teams. If drugs aren't available for use, then falling back on more conventional methods is entirely sensible and appropriate. It is reasonably humane, and has long been proven effective at reliably accomplishing the task. It is admittedly a less clinical procedure, which may offend the sensibilities of the squeamish, but such is the price of protecting the many.

You leave out an important fact about the law, firing squads are only at the request of the condemned and the reason for this is because Mormons believe you must answer blood with blood.

[Pope Joan]

I think their old tradition of hanging is more humane than the botched or experimental lethal injections we've seen lately.

Just because something is dressed up in the trappings of science does not make it wonderful, or humane.

[Scomagia]

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/utah-lawmakers-ok-firing-squad-execution-backup-n321141


As some of you may be aware, several US states have been unable to carry out sentences for those convicts sentenced to receive capital punishment. This has been due to a lack of availability of approved drugs for executions, causing the wheels of justice to grind to a halt. Now, however, that may soon change.

In my view, this is a much needed move. The dispensation of justice shouldn't depend on the whims of corporate PR teams. If drugs aren't available for use, then falling back on more conventional methods is entirely sensible and appropriate. It is reasonably humane, and has long been proven effective at reliably accomplishing the task. It is admittedly a less clinical procedure, which may offend the sensibilities of the squeamish, but such is the price of protecting the many.

You leave out an important fact about the law, firing squads are only at the request of the condemned and the reason for this is because Mormons believe you must answer blood with blood.

I'm not familiar enough with the Mormon faith to know whether you're telling the truth. I am, however, familiar enough with you to ask for a source.

[Yukonastan]

I think their old tradition of hanging is more humane than the botched or experimental lethal injections we've seen lately.

Just because something is dressed up in the trappings of science does not make it wonderful, or humane.

Hanging is less humane than nitrogen asphyxiation.

[Draakonite]

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/utah-lawmakers-ok-firing-squad-execution-backup-n321141


As some of you may be aware, several US states have been unable to carry out sentences for those convicts sentenced to receive capital punishment. This has been due to a lack of availability of approved drugs for executions, causing the wheels of justice to grind to a halt. Now, however, that may soon change.

In my view, this is a much needed move. The dispensation of justice shouldn't depend on the whims of corporate PR teams. If drugs aren't available for use, then falling back on more conventional methods is entirely sensible and appropriate. It is reasonably humane, and has long been proven effective at reliably accomplishing the task. It is admittedly a less clinical procedure, which may offend the sensibilities of the squeamish, but such is the price of protecting the many.

It's cheaper to just house them in prison for the rest of their natural life (compared to the legal costs of putting someone to death), and IF there's a mistake in the conviction, much easier to reverse than the death penalty.

In the US. I bet that most executions in the world are cheaper than life inmprisonment in the countries were those sentences are executed.

Also, while i prefer firing squad over the injection, why not just use a rope? Seems much easier to clean up, ignoring the far lower risk of botchering the execution.

[Draakonite]

I think their old tradition of hanging is more humane than the botched or experimental lethal injections we've seen lately.

Just because something is dressed up in the trappings of science does not make it wonderful, or humane.

Hanging is less humane than nitrogen asphyxiation.

How do you measure "humaneity"?

[Yukonastan]

Hanging is less humane than nitrogen asphyxiation.

How do you measure "humaneity"?

In this case; by suffering. The onset of hypoxia is not something that causes suffering, and nitrogen asphyxiation works by inducing hypoxia.

Capital punishment[edit]
After a number of accidents in which humans suffocated in nitrogen without any warning, the suggestion was made in 1995 that hypoxic atmospheres be used for the humane killing of humans.

Execution by nitrogen asphyxiation was discussed briefly in print as a theoretical method of capital punishment in a National Review article, "Killing with kindness – capital punishment by nitrogen asphyxiation".[27] The idea was then proposed by Lawrence J. Gist II, an Attorney at Law, under the title, International Humanitarian Hypoxia Project.[28]

In a televised documentary in 2007, the British political commentator (and former Member of Parliament) Michael Portillo examined execution techniques in use around the world and found them unsatisfactory; his conclusion was that nitrogen asphyxiation would be the best method.[29]

In early 2015, the State of Oklahoma administratively approved the use of "nitrogen hypoxia" as a secondary capital punishment method. [30]

References:

27 - Creque, S.A. "Killing with kindness – capital punishment by nitrogen asphyxiation" National Review. 1995-9-11.
28 - http://www.gistprobono.org/ihhp/index.html
29 - http://videosift.com/video/How-to-Kill- ... less-death
30 - http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/nitr ... l-28863664

[Fartsniffage]

How do you measure "humaneity"?

In this case; by suffering. The onset of hypoxia is not something that causes suffering, and nitrogen asphyxiation works by inducing hypoxia.

Capital punishment[edit]
After a number of accidents in which humans suffocated in nitrogen without any warning, the suggestion was made in 1995 that hypoxic atmospheres be used for the humane killing of humans.

Execution by nitrogen asphyxiation was discussed briefly in print as a theoretical method of capital punishment in a National Review article, "Killing with kindness – capital punishment by nitrogen asphyxiation".[27] The idea was then proposed by Lawrence J. Gist II, an Attorney at Law, under the title, International Humanitarian Hypoxia Project.[28]

In a televised documentary in 2007, the British political commentator (and former Member of Parliament) Michael Portillo examined execution techniques in use around the world and found them unsatisfactory; his conclusion was that nitrogen asphyxiation would be the best method.[29]

In early 2015, the State of Oklahoma administratively approved the use of "nitrogen hypoxia" as a secondary capital punishment method. [30]

References:

27 - Creque, S.A. "Killing with kindness – capital punishment by nitrogen asphyxiation" National Review. 1995-9-11.
28 - http://www.gistprobono.org/ihhp/index.html
29 - http://videosift.com/video/How-to-Kill- ... less-death
30 - http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/nitr ... l-28863664

Here's the thing that gets me. Execution is a barbaric practice that should be unpleasant event. Making it just like floating away into the clouds seems to cheapen the fact that a human life is being taken.

It should be horrific and it should be visible to everyone who thinks it's a good idea. Those who press the button, pull the trigger, put the rope around the neck, should end up feeling that what they have done is fundamentally wrong.

Killing people is not okay. The below image seems very relevant to this discussion.

[Greed and Death]

You leave out an important fact about the law, firing squads are only at the request of the condemned and the reason for this is because Mormons believe you must answer blood with blood.

I'm not familiar enough with the Mormon faith to know whether you're telling the truth. I am, however, familiar enough with you to ask for a source.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_atonement

[Imperializt Russia]

Quoth the man who lives in a society with more prison convicts than some countries have people, an incredible amount of income inequality, and a lack of basic social services available in other Western countries.

So, the United States has a lot of convicts in prison, I'd say that's a lot better than having a lot of convicts that have escaped prison, it means our system is working. I'd also like to point out that we make up for whatever lack of social services we supposedly have with the fact that it's possible to find affordable living in the U.S.. It's simply absolutely absurd how expensive it is to live in Europe, taxes and such.

Income inequality is another thing, you see, income inequality is a necessity for any community to function, provided it is not outrageous, and no western state has outrageous levels of income inequality. If you want outrageous levels of inequality, compare the average Chinese politician with the average Chinese worker, you'll find the inequality levels are in fact, at 'outrageous' levels, much higher than that of any western state.

If America feels it has to imprison more people as a portion of its populace than Russia and fucking China, the system clearly doesn't fucking work.

America has "outrageous" income inequality.

[Camelza]

In this case; by suffering. The onset of hypoxia is not something that causes suffering, and nitrogen asphyxiation works by inducing hypoxia.

References:

Here's the thing that gets me. Execution is a barbaric practice that should be unpleasant event. Making it just like floating away into the clouds seems to cheapen the fact that a human life is being taken.

It should be horrific and it should be visible to everyone who thinks it's a good idea. Those who press the button, pull the trigger, put the rope around the neck, should end up feeling that what they have done is fundamentally wrong.

Killing people is not okay. The below image seems very relevant to this discussion.

I approve of this message.

[Uxupox]

As long as it's convicted rapists and murderers then it's an excellent idea.

[Big Jim P]

Yeah man your right.

We need more blood. Bloody, dirty vengeance. That's what civilization is about.

Vengeance would be deliberately making sure the criminal suffers. As it stands capital punishment is more equivalent to waste disposal. Despite inane attempts to paint it in dramatic tones.

More like just putting down a dangerous animal. No different than putting down a known vicious dog.

[Risottia]

I am opposed to capital punishment, but if you're going to have it, I'd say that the advantages of lethal injection over firing squad are largely cosmetic, and ultimately more to help us feel better about executing people than to make the experience more humane for the condemned.

Making the experience humane for those employed to carry it out is also a concern. Also those who'll be witnessing it, and those who'll be cleaning up afterwards.

Frankly I don't give a damn about the sensibilities of the people employed to carry it out. They could have chosen another job. Witnesses, same story: they aren't forced to witness it.
As for the cleaning-up, it's not different from cleaning up a murder scene.

[Camelza]

Vengeance would be deliberately making sure the criminal suffers. As it stands capital punishment is more equivalent to waste disposal. Despite inane attempts to paint it in dramatic tones.

More like just putting down a dangerous animal. No different than putting down a known vicious dog.

However, humans are different than other animals ever since that one monkey started thinking how to steal his mate's bananas and built an empire based in the divification of aforementioned bananas.
Of course those monkeys have improved snce then, developed philosophical ideas and the concept of morality and justice.
As such, we get into a deep and difficult territory when examining the right to put another human to death.
So, who has the moral right to take away a human life if morality is subjective?

[Big Jim P]

More like just putting down a dangerous animal. No different than putting down a known vicious dog.

However, humans are different than other animals ever since that one monkey started thinking how to steal his mate's bananas and built an empire based in the divification of aforementioned bananas.
Of course those monkeys have improved snce then, developed philosophical ideas and the concept of morality and justice.
As such, we get into a deep and difficult territory when examining the right to put another human to death.
So, who has the moral right to take away a human life if morality is subjective?

What do you mean if morality is subjective? Who said anything about moral right? Executions are merely putting down known dangerous animal. The only issue I have with it is insuring that only those who are guilty are the ones being executed.

[New Werpland]

However, humans are different than other animals ever since that one monkey started thinking how to steal his mate's bananas and built an empire based in the divification of aforementioned bananas.
Of course those monkeys have improved snce then, developed philosophical ideas and the concept of morality and justice.
As such, we get into a deep and difficult territory when examining the right to put another human to death.
So, who has the moral right to take away a human life if morality is subjective?

What do you mean if morality is subjective? Who said anything about moral right? Executions are merely putting down known dangerous animal. The only issue I have with it is insuring that only those who are guilty are the ones being executed.

It's not a matter of putting down dangerous animals, it's about giving people what they deserve(Some people don't deserve life). In fact killing animals is probably less justified than killing certain humans, as animals don't have conscious and humans do.