Are there any humane ways to execute convicts who are sentenced to death?

[Macx]

Yup. Exactly. Punishment is most effective (speaking of general deterrent effect) when it is prompt, public and surely applied. In our current system we are doing none of that and the results of that along with other wrong minded policies like Chicago's gun control laws . . . result in weekends with high body counts.

 

[The Penitent Man]

Yup. Exactly. Punishment is most effective (speaking of general deterrent effect) when it is prompt, public and surely applied. In our current system we are doing none of that and the results of that along with other wrong minded policies like Chicago's gun control laws . . . result in weekends with high body counts.

It's not the gun-control laws that result in high body-counts. It's the fact that Americans love to shoot each other and they love do to this more than anything. More than their communities. More than their families. More than life itself.

 

[Macx]

It's not the gun-control laws that result in high body-counts. It's the fact that Americans love to shoot each other and they love do to this more than anything. More than their communities. More than their families. More than life itself.

The violent crime stats disagree with you. Higher body counts in the metros that are restrictive, lower body counts where the laws are more liberal. Fact of the matter is, criminals will use guns . . . where law abidding citizens are allowed to exercise their Constitutional rights, the violent crime rates are lower. Why you think Daley got so mad at the reporter a few weeks ago when the reporter asked him how that gun ban is working? Mayor Daley Jokingly Threatens To Shoot Reporter To Prove Effectiveness Of City's Gun Ban Daley knows that his power is largely dependant on fear & for a big criminal like him to stay in power he needs to make sure the little criminals have a free hand. If the citizens could defend themselves, they wouldn't be as dependant on Daley's extortion racket. Extortion works so much better when the people are defenseless and scared.

 

[Jpark]

What do you think? Firing squad, hanging, injection, etc...

Is there any humane way to do it?

Anything that isn't beheading. Beheading is not good.

 

[Uncle Tommy]

I'm not sure there is a "humane" way to end a human life. Perhaps a better way to ask the question is 'what method causes the least amount of pain and suffering to the condemned?"

I'm not really an expert perhaps a well functioning guillotine?

 

[visionary]

Treat them like dogs.. lethal injection.. "now go to sleep my pretty.."

 

[JC_Crust]

The death sentence actually has nothing to do with punishment int he sense that you are using the word JesusCrustHC. The death penalty is about specific and more importantly general deterrence.

The degree of humane-ness of the form of execution has no effect on general deterrence.

then the more humane it is, the less some will care lol. i get what youre saying but its for the people who do the crime. not the ones that might or might not. but if we want to deter them then i go back to my first suggestion, setting them on fire lol

 

[KCKID]

then the more humane it is, the less some will care lol. i get what youre saying but its for the people who do the crime. not the ones that might or might not. but if we want to deter them then i go back to my first suggestion, setting them on fire lol

When I read such as the above, it's easy to see why so many Christians believe in - and approve of - a fiery hell where 'the lost' receive eternal torment.

 

[Verv]

Deprivation of liberty, perhaps. But, nothing more.



Vindictiveness isn't justice. And, that anyone would willingly inflict pain on someone else - whether deemed warranted/justified or not - just to see them suffer is abominable.

If someone kills others, would it be justice for them to not suffer?

Isn't part of justice feeling a portion of the pain that you inflict on others?

While the family members of the dead will suffer emotionally the entirety of their lives, would it be fair to have the person who is the killer, the rapist, pass their days in comfort?

You have prioritized 'not having vindictiveness' so much that you have destroyed justice.

 

[Macx]

then the more humane it is, the less some will care lol. i get what youre saying but its for the people who do the crime. not the ones that might or might not. but if we want to deter them then i go back to my first suggestion, setting them on fire lol

The whole reason for having a death penalty at all it general detertence. Specific deterence is FAR cheaper in the form of life in prison. My numbers are dated, but it costs/costed tax payers about $400K to put a healthy 18 year old in prison for life, the figure for cheapest execution at that time was around $6M . . . I haven't looked at recent numbers, but I certainly haven't seen evidence that executions are getting cheaper whil the price of incarceration has been multiplying. I expect you'd find the numbers have both risen. The execution is very much for everyone but the criminal being executed.

 

[Autumnleaf]

The whole reason for having a death penalty at all it general detertence. Specific deterence is FAR cheaper in the form of life in prison. My numbers are dated, but it costs/costed tax payers about $400K to put a healthy 18 year old in prison for life, the figure for cheapest execution at that time was around $6M . . . I haven't looked at recent numbers, but I certainly haven't seen evidence that executions are getting cheaper whil the price of incarceration has been multiplying. I expect you'd find the numbers have both risen. The execution is very much for everyone but the criminal being executed.

I thought the cheapest method of execution was the cost of a bullet or a rope.

 

[Skaloop]

I think Monty Python got it right in The Meaning of Life:

Being chased off a cliff by a bunch of naked chicks on rollerskates.

 

[Macx]

I thought the cheapest method of execution was the cost of a bullet or a rope.

Were it only that simple. In a death penalty case there are mandatory appeals, and appointed lawyers, lawyers who cost money . . . extra special death row treatment including more guards per prisoner which costs money. . . . yadda, yadda. . . it all adds up. The cost isn't just in the method.

If we were going for the cheapest rather than the most humane, a room with a drop away floor and a suitable drop would do just fine, no ropes no bullets, just push the button and the floor goes away. You could even mount one on a crane and drop your prisoners between the fences, leave the bodies where they lay to make an impression on the regular prisoners.

 

[Hakan101]

Were it only that simple. In a death penalty case there are mandatory appeals, and appointed lawyers, lawyers who cost money . . . extra special death row treatment including more guards per prisoner which costs money. . . . yadda, yadda. . . it all adds up. The cost isn't just in the method.

If we were going for the cheapest rather than the most humane, a room with a drop away floor and a suitable drop would do just fine, no ropes no bullets, just push the button and the floor goes away. You could even mount one on a crane and drop your prisoners between the fences, leave the bodies where they lay to make an impression on the regular prisoners.

Kinda like Sweeney Todd, but without the throat-slashing.

 

[Bushido216]

The violent crime stats disagree with you. Higher body counts in the metros that are restrictive, lower body counts where the laws are more liberal. Fact of the matter is, criminals will use guns . . . where law abidding citizens are allowed to exercise their Constitutional rights, the violent crime rates are lower. Why you think Daley got so mad at the reporter a few weeks ago when the reporter asked him how that gun ban is working? Mayor Daley Jokingly Threatens To Shoot Reporter To Prove Effectiveness Of City's Gun Ban Daley knows that his power is largely dependant on fear & for a big criminal like him to stay in power he needs to make sure the little criminals have a free hand. If the citizens could defend themselves, they wouldn't be as dependant on Daley's extortion racket. Extortion works so much better when the people are defenseless and scared.

So, it sounds like you're saying...

"In places with restrictive gun laws, there are a lot of gun crimes, ergo, gun laws facilitate gun crimes."

I'd like to suggest...

"In places with a lot of gun crimes, stricter laws tend to be passed, ergo, gun crimes precipitate gun laws."

Places with high gun crimes rates also usually happen to be densely populated areas with lots of poverty all stacked onto each other. You don't tend to see this in "red" states with low population density, thusly you see lower rates of gun crimes and people in "red" states talking about how lax gun laws reduce gun crimes.

In "blue" states you tend to have high population density, more gun crimes, and thusly more laws, and the reverse happening...

The point I'm trying to make is that gun crimes almost certainly have more to do with population density and poverty and less to do with gun control laws.

Though that being said, I'm usually skeptical of any claim that involves "the best way to combat X is to introduce more X into the system".


Edit: I should probably add, that I have a whole list of societal issues which I think are symptoms and not primary diagnoses, like abortion and gun rights, that I really wish weren't treated in a vacuum but seen in the context of an entire environmental system. I think the gun issue makes more sense in the context of a system.

 

[Colin]

No .
They are all inhumane .

 

[Macx]

So, it sounds like you're saying...

"In places with restrictive gun laws, there are a lot of gun crimes, ergo, gun laws facilitate gun crimes."

I'd like to suggest...

"In places with a lot of gun crimes, stricter laws tend to be passed, ergo, gun crimes precipitate gun laws."

The static models look good, but once we build a mock up and test it in real world environments. . . the logic that was used (to pass the laws) is the logic you cite, the end result is what you have summarized as my position. That is, the (restrictive) gun laws don't yeild the intended results and actually make things worse. In those locations where once restrictive gun laws have been replaced with more common sense gun laws like Shall Issue Permits to Carry and Castle Doctrine, we see sharp declines in crime.

Places with high gun crimes rates also usually happen to be densely populated areas with lots of poverty all stacked onto each other. You don't tend to see this in "red" states with low population density, thusly you see lower rates of gun crimes and people in "red" states talking about how lax gun laws reduce gun crimes.

Funny that, the cause of lots of poverty stacked as you say, probably has more to do with failed democrat social programs and excessive wealth redistribution. Cause and effect, if you pay poor folk to live in your state, poor folk from outta state are apt to move to your state.

The point I'm trying to make is that gun crimes almost certainly have more to do with population density and poverty and less to do with gun control laws.

I'd rather link the two, with the common thread being failed democrat social plans.

Though that being said, I'm usually skeptical of any claim that involves "the best way to combat X is to introduce more X into the system".

You realize the option that you offer as an alternative is to make sure all the sheep are disarmed and the wolves have been schooled in knife and fork, right?

Edit: I should probably add, that I have a whole list of societal issues which I think are symptoms and not primary diagnoses, like abortion and gun rights, that I really wish weren't treated in a vacuum but seen in the context of an entire environmental system. I think the gun issue makes more sense in the context of a system.

Here we agree. Anecdotally, I (personally not figuratively) have seen guns (in the hands of citizens) reduce violent crime. Statistically I have seen evidence supporting liberal gun laws. I have never seen a criminal thwarted by a gun law. I have never see statistics that show crime rates dropping with the passage of a gun law. In short, they appear to be all cost, no benefit.

 

[No Swansong]

Is there anything humane about ending a human life?

 

[KCKID]

Deprivation of liberty, perhaps. But, nothing more.

Vindictiveness isn't justice. And, that anyone would willingly inflict pain on someone else - whether deemed warranted/justified or not - just to see them suffer is abominable.

If someone kills others, would it be justice for them to not suffer?

Illogical conclusion to your own question.

Isn't part of justice feeling a portion of the pain that you inflict on others?

No.

While the family members of the dead will suffer emotionally the entirety of their lives, would it be fair to have the person who is the killer, the rapist, pass their days in comfort?

Is the alternative to being cruel to someone tantamount to 'passing their days in comfort'? Ask anyone who has been in prison as to whether or not it was 'comfort' for them. The reason for incarcerating offenders is NOT to inflict further punishment while there. Deprivation of liberty IS the punishment. And, that's the way it should be. The rehabilitation of someone cannot be undertaken if they are to be cruelly whipped several times a day.

You have prioritized 'not having vindictiveness' so much that you have destroyed justice.

If that's the way you feel then you should have no problem with inflicting what you perceive to be 'equal punishment' on the offending party. Or, do you prefer to have the state do it for you?

 

[KCKID]

I thought the cheapest method of execution was the cost of a bullet or a rope.

It probably is; however, if you agree that someone's life should be terminated with either a bullet or a rope you should be willing to do the deed yourself.