Discussion for article #233267
Or hey, why don’t we just strap them down, tie a sufficiently sized explosive to their forehead and then instantaneously blow their head into a fine red mist? Nobody could claim they felt pain or suffering from that, right?
Oh, wait…that’s right…we’re supposed to be trying to preserve our humanity…
Edit: Isn’t that the joke though? Is the whole “no suffering, cruelty, pain, etc.” shtick for the condemned or for us? Whose humanity are we protecting, if anyone’s? A killing is a killing. He’s not going to give a fuck about ANYTHING in several seconds, so who are we really protecting? Perhaps the answer actually is to make it as brutal and disgusting and borderline unbearable to CARRY OUT as we possibly can, because then nobody would want to go through with it unless they were absolutely fucking sure and nobody would be able to comfort themselves that it’s antiseptic and sterilized and not a black mark on their very soul. “Oh, it’s just like he went to sleep and didn’t wake up.” Well, no wonder people don’t even take it seriously or consider it horrifying that SO many mistakes have been made leading to the death of people whose innocence is proven posthumously.
2 Likes
How about this: The state or country should not be killing its inhabitants. Life in prison should suffice.
3 Likes
If you just gotta kill someone, because a life sentence is just too slow and not revengeful enough, then death by guillotine is the quickest, surest way to go. It works the first time, every time; the condemned feels no pain after the spinal cord is severed; and the brain loses consciousness in 15 seconds or less because its blood supply isn’t replenished.
For the record, I am opposed to capital punishment.
3 Likes
Gary Gilmore would be proud.
1 Like
Barbaric. Parts of this country have become so sick, dysfunctional and back-assward.
Why not a bullet to the brain then? The brain controls the heart. Killing someone by gunshot who themselves may have killed someone by gunshot. Makes no fucking sense. This is just so wrong. Besides, it costs more to keep someone on death row than to keep someone locked up with a sentence of life imprisonment because of the appeals process. And states that have the death penalty have higher murder rates.
I’m against it on moral grounds. Too many have been found later to be innocent after execution. Even if one person was found innocent in my mind, that’s one too many, because you can’t bring back DEAD. And I don’t want anyone killing in my name as a citizen of a State that allows it.
Michigan, where I live, was the first territory in the country and the english-speaking world to come out against capital punishment in 1837. Our state always prided itself on this fact. It’s written into our Constitution and has been since 1847. There have been federal executions in the State but the last one occurred here in 1938. A hanging took place then, apparently for a bank robber.
Guess who wants to change Michigan’s capital punishment law? You’ll be surprised to learn its a fucking Democrat, Senator Virgil Smith from Detroit, who has the backing of two top Republicans. They are currently pushing for this in the State legislature. Smith wants to make it legal to execute a person if you kill a cop in the State. Takes all kinds of misguided foolish politicians these days. I sincerely hope his bill in Michigan does not see the light of day.
5 Likes
Hell why not drawing and quartering?
2 Likes
You might be onto something.
I’m thinking that for people to pursue the death penalty, the accuser should have to execute the person–with a baseball bat. Sure, big bad Jed will talk a great game about how he wants to beat the guy to death, and brag about getting the opportunity. But even if he were able to do it, he’d have nightmares about it for the rest of his life. And it wouldn’t ease one bit of the pain the initial crime inflicted upon him to begin with.
And televise it. Put it on network television. So everybody knows exactly what we’re allowing. And what type of person is capable of doing that. And whether they want to relate to a person like that or not.
1 Like
With a hooting and hollering crowd…alternative is a flaying alive treatment.
Beheadings & burning alive. Jeez, what’s the difference between ISIS and the GOP?..preferred clothing & the name of their magic.
3 Likes
Har! Off with their 'eads! Hang 'em from the highest yard arm! The earth is definitely flat!
1 Like
Our current form of slow, torturous poisoning is reflects our society’s undifferentiated hate toward itself. Any less vile form of execution only lessens the schadenfreude the public gets to feel about its own suicidal impulses.
How does Ray know the firing squad is the fastest, most reliable method and the most humane way to kill someone if he doesn’t volunteer to test it on himself?
1 Like
Executions take long than “several seconds” in many cases, which is part of the problem. It is a “lingering death” which can be a 8th Amendment difficulty. Now, perhaps all this concern about lethal injection or the electric chair or whatever is b.s. I’m thinking not – some means of execution are worse and when we kill, which we will in some way for some time, there is merit in trying to lessen the damage. This applies to war too.
1 Like
Next week, they plan to create legislation that will bring back … stoning.
1 Like
Another giant American step backwards. USA USA USA
There’s another reason for the push to return the firing squad and I’m kind of surprised it wasn’t mentioned in the article.
Blood Atonment has been a quiet corner of Mormon doctrine since the beginning. Utah was one of the last states to give up the firing squad because it was always felt that the guilty had to shed some blood. It’s generally not openly discussed but it’s there and has been for a long time.
While the above BYU description states “This view is not a doctrine of the Church and has never been practiced by the Church at any time…” it was often cited in my youth as why a firing squat at the Utah State Prison was essential.
(Disclamer: Justin Tyme is not LDS but lived the Promised Valley long enough (and returned for grad school) and had enough LDS friends to get, like it or not, a pretty good dose of LDS doctrine.)
2 Likes
Republicans again demonstrating how they are the party of life.
Please, sir…we’re saving that for the Peoples’ Revolution.
Indeed, I believe that if the state is going to put someone to death in my name (but against my wishes), then it should be mandatory that it be televised on every network in the state, period.
But of course, the cons don’t want that, because then little Jimmy and little Suzie might ask mommy why the bad man is dying and they might even think it looks a little cruel…and later come out against the death penalty. And we can’t have that.
No, we must keep it in the dark and tell the rubes that it’s in their interests.
3 Likes