If capital punishment is to remain in the United States, shooting should replace lethal injection as the method.
Copacetic said 03/04, 04:42 PM
It has been said that a properly executed firing squad is the most humane means of capital punishment, and the reasons why lethal injection is not as humane are going through the court system. Lethal injections are less likely to take place in the future due to the Eighth Amendment issues going through the courts as well as the fact that courts have required doctors to be present for lethal injection, but that doctors cannot participate without violating the Hippocratic Oath (this course of events stopped executions from proceeding in Missouri).
Although a firing squad generally brings about a more instant death without risk of asphyxiation, it gives the appearance as being more gruesome in the eyes of the average citizen, which may prove to be more of a deterrent. Since the restoration of capital punishment in 1976, the death penalty has statistically not deterrent crime, and perhaps the cleaner, less painful appearance of a lethal injection can join the relative scarcity of executions as a reason why.
Jvjrz said 03/04, 06:44 PM
An interesting argument you've got going here and I kindly accept. Yes your absolutely right that perhaps a firing squad is much more effective in killing a person faster, but even you yourself noted that to the eyes of the beholder, the execution is gruesome.
My question to you therefore is why stop there? Why not use the gulliotine instead? It's much cheaper (never need to by supplies like guns or bullets) and there's no screams of pain that you might feel when being shot, seeing as sometimes people live through a firing squad round and often the squad needs to reload again.
Look the whole purpose we have lethal injections is to save face. Yes your right, shooting executions and maybe even the gulliotine is quicker, but what kind of message are we sending as the modernized leader of the world, if we are executing our criminals like the 1600's? Not a very good one. With a lethal injection, there is no mess, no blood, no screams. Yes the criminal may experence asphyxiation, but as long as there is no visual proof to the audience, it is does not have that much impact on the psyche as to say, seeing a man get shoot up by 8 different guns at the same time. Imagine seeing that
Copacetic said 03/05, 07:36 PM
I would contend that the guillotine's painlessness is not a foregone conclusion. One French prisoner who was to be guillotined agreed to blink as long as he could, and got several blinks in after the blade fell. From a pragmatic standpoint, it is doubtful that the guillotine would survive the court system, though I do agree with you that it would have a stronger deterrent factor.
I agree with you that a major reason for lethal injections is to save face. Capital punishment has become even more detached from all parties other than those directly involved in the execution - the curtains are not opened to the witnesses until directly before the injection begins, and there is no visual proof that anything is going on. The implications of this are more than just what I said about deterrence in my first argument. In one case a few years ago, a prisoner complained during his final statement that he had been "butchered" when the needles were placed in. A process such as shooting brings more accountability to the whole procedure - something that is sorely missing from the whole thing under the current system.
Comments
Add Your Comment
I agree with ApatheticFighter and Copacetic. I am a firm believer in the death penalty. If a person has seen the evil that I have seen in this world he/she would believe in it too. Trust me, we don't want these people around. As far as killing them, I find killing in any manner inhumane but all together necessary in some circumstances, and the captial punishment is one of them. Shooting someone is most likely quicker and less painful, not that I would know, but it also, I would assume, saves money. Bullets are less costly than are drugs to kill with lethal injection. Not to mention I do agree with Copacetic that if this person is going to die one way or another, why not do it in a way that would deter others from following the same path that got that person there. Detering crime is the best way to fight it.
shrek | 03/05/08
Report Offensive Comment
Although i believe that the death penalty is very inmoral i believe it is completely necessary. There are too many monsters out there (see kevin underwood and the brianna denison killer who have yet to be caught). I do believe that there should be an eye-for-an-eye type of punishment but some will be violating the 8th ammendment due to the pain being felt. I also think the firing squad violates the 8th ammendment although im not sure so sadly the only option we have is the lethal injection.
nexlatinpres | 03/05/08
Report Offensive Comment
The only reason a man doesn't blink several times after being shot by a firing squad is because his eyelids are blown off; that doesn't mean that he doesn't have a few extra seconds of 'life'. I agree with Jvjrz; let's bring back the guillotine.
IamFry | 03/05/08
Report Offensive Comment
I actually think that this might be an even better method: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitrogen_asphyxiation
Copacetic | 03/05/08
Report Offensive Comment
A firing squad seems the most logical conclusion, and very cost effective too. I feel it would probably be more so than the guillotine, simply due to all the constant maintenance the blade and hinges would require to keep it sharp and lethal on the first swipe every time.
base89 | 03/06/08
Report Offensive CommentPost A Comment
Please keep it clean. Bad words will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.
Only Axl Rose remains in the group, but since 1987 GnR has been rocking with fury
More than 50 years of cover stories about the 35th President
I have to go with Copacetic. I do not believe that people who receive the death penalty deserve special treatment. And didn't we use to use an electric chair? That is a much more painful death than lethal injection or firing squad. But you know why I don't condone it? Too expensive. Bullets are much cheaper ^^
ApatheticFighter | 03/05/08
Report Offensive Comment