“Kenny just began to gasp for air repeatedly and the execution took about 25 minutes total.”
Pretty compassionate way to kill a person.
Once again, the Law in the south is brutal.
Good that there is extensive evidence on the effectiveness of (brutal) death sentences as means to reduce crime!
Oh wait…
There are many accounts of workers accidentally entering confined spaces that have been purged with nitrogen and they were all unconscious in seconds. (OSHA records). If it took the prison 22 MINUTES to execute this guy, then they totally botched that execution.
America is such a funny place. They dont have a problem with execution just experimental ones…
“Funny”
Many of us have a problem with all executions. And capital punishment was illegal in America from 1962-1976 until the Supreme Court reversed their original decision.
Ik i should have added /s to my comment but its still disturbing to me that there are people who are okay with execution.
There are but there are currently only 20 states that have the ability to execute death sentences, and that number is slowly going down luckily.
The only people I’m ok with killing are the ones we have undeniable poof for. Like the Uvalde school shooter. They have footage of him in the school with the gun and know he killed the kids. In my book he’s OK to execute. if there’s even a shred of doubt in anyone’s case then execution should be off the books period.
The only people I’m ok with killing are the ones we have undeniable poof for.
The problem with that logic is that every criminal conviction is supposed to have “undeniable proof!”
No it’s not. In the context of the justice system in question, reasonable doubt is a MUCH lower bar than undeniable proof.
I can’t see the hair that you’re splitting here. If proof is deniable, then it’s not beyond reasonable doubt.
There is a room with a candy bar in it, a biometric scan to enter, and a camera outside the only door.
You scan your retina to go in, you come out a few moments later, and after 5 minutes a security guard goes in, finds the room intact, and also sees the candy bar gone.
By deductive reasoning, you took the candy bar beyond a reasonable doubt.
There is a remote possibility that after you left and before the guard arrived, a mission impossible crew came in from the ceiling and took the candy bar specifically to frame you. Or perhaps the entire candy bar quantum tunnelled or was teleported by aliens in an event that denies conventional understanding.
The guy you replied to is making this point. If it is in any way theoretically possible that guilt is in question, no execution. Reasonable doubt as a standard assumes the natural order of the universe and logic are preserved such that inferences are possible.
Reasonable doubt as a standard assumes the natural order of the universe and logic are preserved such that inferences are possible.
But that also seems like a foundation that “undeniable proof” would rest on. If the only way for a proof to be denied is for the “natural order of the universe and logic” to not apply, then there’s simply no such thing.
It isn’t supposed to be, though.
Edit: hey downvoter, what part of Blackstone’s Ratio do you not fucking understand?
A reasonable doubt is less strict than undeniable proof. If I go outside and see that the lawn and road is wet then I can beyond a reasonable doubt ascertain that it has rained, but that’s not undeniable proof. If I go outside and get rained on and measure that rainfall in a scientific way then that is undeniable proof. Blackstone’s ratio is irrelevant; too many people are wrongfully imprisoned and executed on dubious evidence. We seem to fucking agree about that, so calm down.
I downvote comments that are obtuse or don’t actually contribute to the conversation and I don’t see anything wrong with that.
I don’t support the execution of the Uvalde shooter.
What does killing him accomplish?
Justice? Not really.
Restitution? Not at all.
Vengeance? Not really.
Deterrence? Not really.
Closure for the families of the victims? I suppose.
I don’t know about this case, but some families of victims oppose the death penalty, even in the case of the murder of their children.
Some reasons for this view could be religious beliefs, or the view that death is the easy way out, or the deterrence value of being able to point at a person in jail, or the potential for the person to do some good in the world.
These people would object to closure for them being used as justification for killing their child’s murderer.
It’s not fair to victim families to make them choose life or death for a murderer. It would be a decision they’d have to live with forever. We can’t do that to them.
My opinion is that capital punishment should only be used where a person guilty of a ‘capital crime’ can’t be reliably imprisoned.
Ie I’m not sure Iraqis were wrong to execute Saddam Hussein. I don’t think it would be wrong for countries that struggle with corruption in their penal system to execute cartel leaders (that have been convicted of ‘capital crimes’). War crimes, insurrection leaders, that sort of thing.
What does killing him accomplish?
One thing and one thing only: saves tax payer money long term.
Nope. The math has been done on this many times, and death sentence is more expensive than life without parole. And that’s according to the State’s own numbers.
Well said. Great point about Saddam.
The state tells you murder is illegal. Except when the state does it. You can’t expect people to follow, “do what I say, not what I do.”
It’s cruel, it’s a reflection of our morals. The death penalty is not a deterrent for murder. The death penalty is hypocrisy. The death penalty is for an unserious society.
But the death penalty is just a symptom of a greater chronic illness we suffer from. We’ll just continue to kill ourselves until we find a cure for the disease.
Edit: I see many do not like my wording for state sanctioned murder. If you are reading this and don’t understand, imagine if listening to George Bush (can’t remember which) tell the tv America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists. He’s drawing a moral line in the sand with terrorism. That’s my point. We need to figure out where our moral line in the sand is with the death penalty, because right now it’s all over the place. Do I think outlawing the death penalty will solve our societal woes? No, I do not. The people will demand it until it is reinstated. For me I ask what is the purpose of the death penalty? Does it serve a greater good for a society? Obviously it does not. Americans are murdered all the time, so it serves no purpose.
deleted by creator
Very Christian of them…
These are more fans of the Old Testament stuff where God was metal.
Yeah nothing more “metal” than a supposedly all-powerful being that openly describes itself using such petty human emotions as jealously.
Nothing more metal than an insecure god that has a tantrum if people don’t worship him above all else.
He got more easy listening in the later years but lost his edge.
Yet these people are Jesus freaks but without the compassion and anti materialism. Good old “religion buffet”.
You’re right brother. At times like this, I remember Exodus 21:17, Deuteronomy 22:24 and Genesis 9:5-6.
That’s old testament and old covenant. You should listen to Jesus and the new covenant instead. E.g. Matthew 5, 38-42.
While you’re at it, read though verse 48. Would suit a lot of Christians better if they didn’t conveniently skip over those verses on a regular basis.
Sorry, I forgot. Give me a list of the parts of the Bible I’m supposed to ignore. I want to make sure I’m paying attention only to the parts of the Lord’s written word that are correct.
No fan of Christianity, but it is pretty consistently stated that the old testament is basically the old religions book.
Kinda like how Islam and Christianity have a common origin, but don’t follow the same religious text.The story being that the deity of the abrahamic faiths has issued a series of different holy books and prophets for different eras, with the new one obsoleting the previous one.
Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Mormonism. Each says the previous was valid, but they get the new word of God and the old ones were true, but now the old rules are gone.So it’s actually internally consistent for a Christian to say the Torah doesn’t apply, which is basically what the old testament is. Similar to how we don’t latch onto Islam saying the old and new testament are obsolete, and only the Quran is true now.
There are plenty of examples in each of the chunks to point out the cruelty inherent in all of them without having to fall back to the “old canon”.
No it’s not internally consistent. Sure, that’s what many modern Christians who recognize just how problematic their god and religion are and want to selectively ignore the parts they don’t like, will try to tell you. But it’s bullshit.
As I said to another Christian in this thread…
Jesus himself stated:
17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.
That’s Matthew 5:17-18, and if you ask me it’s very clear
In context and less shit translations, it’s pretty clear that he’s saying he’s fulfilling the prophesies and the promise of the old covenant, not that literally he’s changing nothing.
In the same context, you have him saying that the entirety of the law is to love your neighbor as you love yourself.Or, more bluntly from the same story:
Before the coming of this faith,[a] we were held in custody under the law, locked up until the faith that was to come would be revealed. 24 So the law was our guardian until Christ came that we might be justified by faith. 25 Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian.
I have now googled more Bible shit than I care to to cite my dim recollections of religious history studies.
Tldr, Jesus supposedly came to fullfil the promise of the old testament via a vis the relationship between man and God, and to replace that covenant with a new, more chill covenant with less shellfish and more love.And, this is important to your point, a lot of flaying people alive for failing to obey their slave masters or properly worship God. You don’t have to cite the old bit of the book, that they believe is obsolete, to find gnarly shit that makes it not look great.
It doesn’t feel too ridiculous to me that religions that came about in the same area would reference each others texts, but aren’t beholden to be responsible for their content. 1000 years of telephone was not kind to that translation.
It’s funny (“funny”) because they ignored the part of Matthew 5 where Jesus explicitly says that he didn’t come to abolish the law, and that not a thing about it will be changed until the end of time essentially (verses 17 & 18)
Tells you to read parts of Matthew 5, but skips the part of the chapter that directly contradicts their point.
Typical Christian rationalization.
As far as I know, you’re not supposed to ignore anything. But there is a new covenant and an old covenant. For example, that’s why you probably know Christian women with short hair. Same thing with capital punishment.
For example, that’s why you probably know Christian women with short hair.
I know Jews that eat shrimp… doesn’t make it any more kosher.
17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.
Matthew 5:17-18
That’s Jesus speaking, by the way.
Seems very clear to me, guy.
I like that you reference Matthew 5, yet seem to completely ignore a big part of the chapter.
Sucks right? You can’t be a Christian and still distance yourself from the horrific things that occurred in the Old Testament. Your god is a petty, jealous, slavery-promoting, genocidal piece of shit.
It may not be Christ-like but it is very god-like. The Christian god made man in his own image, and god killed over 2 million people in the Bible.
Yeah, God would rather you bash their head against rocks as they’re still babies
That is the purpose of states and of nations, to hold the monopoly on legitimate violence.
That is a really bad idea
Welcome to government.
Okay. What do you believe the purpose of states and nations is?
To represent the interests of the people on an inter and intra national level. Not to have a monopoly on violence. If only the cops/military have the ability to enact force both legally and practically, it will be abused. We can see that all over the United States and the world.
Representing the interests of people is the purpose of governments, not nations.
Has there ever been a nation without a government?
Perhaps not, but there are governments without nations. The EU or the UN, for instance.
That ain’t just murder… that’s 25 minutes of panic and fear…
With a tiny bit of torture and inhumanity thrown in for good measure
Use a bolt gun. It is good enough for the cows and pigs it is fast, it probably hurts but likely less time than even a needle.
I suggest starting by testing it out on the person that though slow suffocation for 25 minutes was humane.
another good one. Not quite as theatrical as a canon execution, but a funny idea nonetheless.
deleted by creator
I feel like I have heard someone say it tastes better that way. I’m sure that would make it justifiable.
Anyone still want to use the cool nitrogen based suicide pods from Austria?
I wonder how long Elizabeth Sennett struggled to live after Kenneth stabbed her to death. May she and her family rest in peace knowing justice has been served.
I don’t support capital punishment.
But hypoxia in humans is well studied. Unless they were using monumental stupid gas like CO2 (which triggers your breathing reflex) then the problem wasn’t the method, in principle.
I wouldn’t put it past a execution supporter to fuck it up somehow, though.
Smith’s death came after the US Supreme Court denied a final, 11th-hour bid to stay of execution. The ruling received dissent from Justice Sonia Sotomayor who wrote that the state had selected Smith as a “guinea pig” by using the untested method.
Because it’s ok to use a human as a “guinea pig”.
I guess they should have killed a random selection of people with nitrogen first, so that it wouldn’t be an “untested” method.
When is America going to learn that you can’t punish murder with murder? You are literally saying “rules for thee but not for me.”
I mean if they on death row. Just hang them.
As someone well versed in inhaling Nitrous Oxide, why not not just use Nitrous Oxide? That’d be a quick way out, and it’s cheap, you can buy enough to kill a person on Amazon for like $30. Even if you fuck it up, they’re unconscious and feeling nothing.
The liquid? It would be excruciating. Burning your insides with frostbite.
You’re thinking of liquid nitrogen. Nitrous oxide is commonly found in whip cream cannisters, and is actually quite pleasurable imo.
Drowning in whip cream? You could probably just eat your way out.
agustus gloop soundin’ ass
Same reason they don’t just OD them on morphine: those are enjoyable drugs, and we can’t be giving our death row inmates that.
There’s functionally no difference. The way that they messed this up would have still created suffering because they weren’t letting carbon dioxide escape.
The suffocation feeling comes from CO2 buildup, not lack of oxygen. The same issue can happen with nitrous oxide if you don’t let the CO2 escape.
Also, and keep in mind I have never killed myself using this method, so I don’t know first hand, but, nitrogen is lighter than carbon dioxide, so if the person had 100% pure nitrogen to breathe, and no carbon dioxide, and is maintained with their head near the top of the pod, they would have died fast and allegedly without feeling it.
However, I am absolutely convinced that the people responsible for this execution did research on how to make this method as painful as possible (done right, it is apparently euphoric, and there is NO WAY they would even remotely take the risk of this happening), so they probably went out of their way to have a nitrogen-oxygen mix (like our atmosphere), but with lower amounts of oxygen, and forced the person to stay in a position that would guarantee they would die from CO2 asphyxiation rather than nitrogen.
It is even more inhumane than just using CO2 (as is done in meat “production”), because it prolongs the suffering quite a lot… The whole point of using CO2 on animals is to expedite the process… at the expense of their suffering.
CO2 is also cheap and safer for human workers.
Nitrogen is undetectable with human senses, whereas you’ll instantly know if you enter an area with a high CO2 concentration. CO2 is also heavier than air, so it tends to stay in the “pit” they lower the animals into.
deleted by creator
I’m going to take a wild guess here and say no one knows. The folks who put the mask on the dude are probably not any sort of experts in masks, gas, or not being an ass, and everyone in this thread is speculating.
From a purely academic/scientific perspective, is there a reason why they do not administer some form of benzodiazepine to gently sedate the prisoner before conducting the execution protocol? I’m not a medical professional, but I do have prescription benzo and it works miraculously in calming me down and lets me drift off to an incredibly deep sleep.
Medical professionals, particularly doctors who have sworn an oath against causing harm, refuse to take part in the executions. This is partly why lethal injections are so hit and miss. Even if you can get the drugs, the dosages are tricky. IV placement is a skill. All of it being done by untrained individuals leads to a high rate of failure- and that was before the pharmaceutical companies started refusing to supply prisons.
I would imagine that if benzos became part of the nitrogen hypoxia protocols prisons would then have a hard time sourcing them, which is terrible for those other inmates who might need them for other reasons (anxiety, alcohol withdrawal, seizures)
deleted by creator
Cost
pharmaceuticals manufacturers won’t sell you this stuff, this already happened with lethal injection
taiwan (?) gets this well, as far as you can get death penalty well. prisoner is sedated with injectable benzos and then shot, no pain, no consciousness at all, very hard to fuck it up and no pretence of subtlety
They’re worried about the prisoner becoming addicted.
deleted by creator
