292 replies to this topic

[Shryke]

Wouldn't it be easiest to just put them to under, like for surgery, and then kill them?

Or like Min's suggestion above. There's plenty of ways to die that are just "fall asleep, never wake up".

[Ser Robin Hill]

Khal Pono, on 17 June 2012 - 12:00 PM, said:

The answer is the good old fashion guillotine.  The machine's blade is so sharp and the downward momentum so great, it can't miss.  Just a quick instant, and the deed is done.

As long as those guilty of particularly heinous crimes can be placed face up, I'm all for it.

[snookyrump]

Death by old age.

[Ser Robin Hill]

snookyrump, on 17 June 2012 - 03:47 PM, said:

Death by old age.

Only happens to those on death row in California.

[MercenaryChef]

Deathwalker, on 17 June 2012 - 03:27 PM, said:

As long as those guilty of particularly heinous crimes can be placed face up, I'm all for it.

Deathwalker, on 17 June 2012 - 03:54 PM, said:

Only happens to those on death row in California.

why all the bloodlust?

is someone serving a life sentence, never to again be a influence upon society offending you in such a way that they need to be killed? does killing a death row inmate resurrect their victims? does it stop other people from killing? what if in fact they did not do it? i know crazy. some people in prison are innocent.

but, if you are cool with potentially innocent people dying for crimes they did not commit, cool for you.

[Ser Robin Hill]

I'd answer, but out of respect for the OP's wishes, I won't.

The first line of the first post in this topic was:

Quote

Let me say right up front that I don't want this to be a debate about the pros/cons of the death penalty, nor about what sorts of crimes warrant execution. It's not my intention to start a political discussion.

[MercenaryChef]

Deathwalker, on 17 June 2012 - 04:13 PM, said:

I'd answer, but out of respect for the OP's wishes, I won't.

The first line of the first post in this topic was:

honor all you want. but, as in any conversation outside of a courtroom they are free to wander however they will. if you don't believe me read just about every thread in general chat.

[Grey Stark]

Cristiano Ronaldo, on 17 June 2012 - 04:19 PM, said:

honor all you want. but, as in any conversation outside of a courtroom they are free to wander however they will. if you don't believe me read just about every thread in general chat.

Simple answer, why not start your own thread in general chat for that discussion?

[The Iceman of the North]

Khal Pono, on 17 June 2012 - 12:34 PM, said:

I wonder why the U.S. doesn't use a guillotine....

Because it's too bloody. In the US, the feelings of those watching the execution trumps the feeling of the one they are murdering.

[Darth Arya]

Surely some form of opiate overdose would be a good way to go.

[Aemon Stark]

Shryke, on 17 June 2012 - 03:22 PM, said:

Wouldn't it be easiest to just put them to under, like for surgery, and then kill them?

General anesthesia with induction agents like isoflurane or propofol drops blood pressure and, more importantly, causes central respiratory depression. So normally people require ventilation at the very least - in essence these induction agents would be lethal on their own without it, and there would be irreversible brain injury/death within 10-15 minutes. No need for further intervention to cause death. "Humanely" you'd add a big dose of morphine to a high dose of propofol and that would be it.

[Ser Robin Hill]

Katherine Of House Sith, on 17 June 2012 - 04:27 PM, said:

Surely some form of opiate overdose would be a good way to go.

There would be too many volunteers.

[Lord-Kail-Stark]

Aemon Stark, on 17 June 2012 - 04:35 PM, said:

General anesthesia with induction agents like isoflurane or propofol drops blood pressure and, more importantly, causes central respiratory depression. So normally people require ventilation at the very least - in essence these induction agents would be lethal on their own without it, and there would be irreversible brain injury/death within 10-15 minutes. No need for further intervention to cause death. "Humanely" you'd add a big dose of morphine to a high dose of propofol and that would be it.

Well said, i was about to reply and say almost the same exact thing, and with the usual lethal injections they do give general anesthesia, the problem is the drugs they usually use are short acting. basically the same duration of action that paramedics have when they are intubating somebody. lethal injection wouldn't be so bad if they would use a longer acting anesthetic

[Res ipsa loquitur]

Aemon Stark, on 17 June 2012 - 04:35 PM, said:

General anesthesia with induction agents like isoflurane or propofol drops blood pressure and, more importantly, causes central respiratory depression. So normally people require ventilation at the very least - in essence these induction agents would be lethal on their own without it, and there would be irreversible brain injury/death within 10-15 minutes. No need for further intervention to cause death. "Humanely" you'd add a big dose of morphine to a high dose of propofol and that would be it.

Except the cocktail for lethal injections often includes potassium with the propofol; a tech who doesnt get that IV done right or infiltrates the solution OR screws up the proportions of potassium to propofol and sodium pentothol will cause immense pain and suffering to the one being executed.

I dont understand why they dont use the same mix of drugs on people that they do to euthanize animals, if they must do the deed of executing people who dont consent to it at all...Ive had plenty of sick pets humanely killed and it was seemingly pain free.

But aside from that, beheading...done correctly...is the most humane. Kosher slaughter is supposed to be one of the most humane types of animal slaughters; beheading a human is sort of on the same general principle.

[peterbound]

Grey Stark, on 17 June 2012 - 04:25 PM, said:

Simple answer, why not start your own thread in general chat for that discussion?

Why the fuck would we do that?

[Howdyphillip]

There is no "humane" way to take a person's life. It is the least humane act that anyone can ever do as it strips a person from continuing to be human.  Quit trying to dress it up pretty and tying a bow on it. Killing is brutal.

If it makes people feel better to do it in ways that make them feel better about it, then they should realize that is all it is, because it certainly doesn't make a fucks bit of difference to the corpse in the grand scope of things.

[Aemon Stark]

Lord-Kail-Stark, on 17 June 2012 - 05:41 PM, said:

Well said, i was about to reply and say almost the same exact thing, and with the usual lethal injections they do give general anesthesia, the problem is the drugs they usually use are short acting. basically the same duration of action that paramedics have when they are intubating somebody. lethal injection wouldn't be so bad if they would use a longer acting anesthetic

Hmm, perhaps a nice big dose of midazolam (100 mg iv?) along with rocuronium and morphine?

Res ipsa loquitur, on 17 June 2012 - 09:11 PM, said:

Except the cocktail for lethal injections often includes potassium with the propofol; a tech who doesnt get that IV done right or infiltrates the solution OR screws up the proportions of potassium to propofol and sodium pentothol will cause immense pain and suffering to the one being executed.

Well, I think it goes without saying that the technical aspect is a source of considerable (and sometimes fundamental) variability.

Quote

I dont understand why they dont use the same mix of drugs on people that they do to euthanize animals, if they must do the deed of executing people who dont consent to it at all...Ive had plenty of sick pets humanely killed and it was seemingly pain free.

But aside from that, beheading...done correctly...is the most humane. Kosher slaughter is supposed to be one of the most humane types of animal slaughters; beheading a human is sort of on the same general principle.

Not being a particular fan of execution of any sort, I'll take your word for it.

Holafernando Torres, on 17 June 2012 - 09:39 PM, said:

There is no "humane" way to take a person's life. It is the least humane act that anyone can ever do as it strips a person from continuing to be human.  Quit trying to dress it up pretty and tying a bow on it. Killing is brutal.

If it makes people feel better to do it in ways that make them feel better about it, then they should realize that is all it is, because it certainly doesn't make a fucks bit of difference to the corpse in the grand scope of things.

Don't be so serious. This thread seems more like a subset of a "1,000 ways to die" than anything else.

[Khal Pono]

Holafernando Torres, on 17 June 2012 - 09:39 PM, said:

There is no "humane" way to take a person's life. It is the least humane act that anyone can ever do as it strips a person from continuing to be human.  Quit trying to dress it up pretty and tying a bow on it. Killing is brutal.

If it makes people feel better to do it in ways that make them feel better about it, then they should realize that is all it is, because it certainly doesn't make a fucks bit of difference to the corpse in the grand scope of things.

This is what I was trying to avoid.  No one (or almost no one) said killing is "okay" or "pretty" or even that it will matter in the afterlife whether the person died in pain or not.

This is a purely academic discussion on what method of execution causes the condemned the least physical pain and suffering from fear, etc.  It also has at least somewhat of a bearing on real-world problems as well.  I don't think capital punishment is going away in my country (USA) anytime soon, so let's at least talk about ways to make the METHOD of execution less horrific than lethal injection.

As other posters have said, if you want to start a thread called "I think the death penalty is wrong" where others can respond and say "Yeah, I also think it's wrong" you are welcome to do so.

Meanwhile, no one said capital punishment is ethical and cool; we're just discussing a narrow and nitty-gritty topic at the moment.

[MercenaryChef]

Khal Pono, on 17 June 2012 - 09:44 PM, said:

This is a purely academic discussion on what method of execution causes the condemned the least physical pain and suffering from fear, etc.  It also has at least somewhat of a bearing on real-world problems as well.  I don't think capital punishment is going away in my country (USA) anytime soon, so let's at least talk about ways to make the METHOD of execution less horrific than lethal injection.

academic, eh?

how about putting the same brain power towards discussing how to prevent the need for a death penalty than discussing the merits of the guillotine and a cocktail of drugs?

you are wanting to discuss killing. that is all your are interested in talking about.

[Khal Pono]

Cristiano Ronaldo, on 17 June 2012 - 09:54 PM, said:

academic, eh?

how about putting the same brain power towards discussing how to prevent the need for a death penalty than discussing the merits of the guillotine and a cocktail of drugs?

you are wanting to discuss killing. that is all your are interested in talking about.

Ever heard of Temple Grandin?

She was an autistic lady who fought *hard* and *successfully* for big industrial farms to come up with more HUMANE ways to slaughter cattle, and she made a difference.

Now a vegan or an animal rights activist can say WHY DIDNT SHE EXPEND HER BRAINPOWER TRYING TO OUTLAW MEAT ALTOGETHER BECAUSE KILLING ANIMALS IS WRONG.... but that would be goofy.  Maybe she didn't have any good ideas that would ban the killing of animals.  Maybe she doesn't even believe that meat is murder.  Maybe sometimes you have to choose your battles.

Baby steps, baby steps.

Oh and by the way I'm not saying that killing humans is THE SAME as killing animals.  It's just an analogy.

Let's stay focused here.  And do go ahead and start that anti-death penalty thread.  Most civilized people are against it, as it happens, so you'll be preaching to the choir, which is easier than what I'm doing.