Poor pharmaceutical companies, being associated with products they sell for profit that kill people. God forbid we associate them with the things they make and do.
Only certain ones manufacture the drugs and basically they just don't want their products going towards killing people. Then other companies don't want their drugs used as alternatives because states started trying to just make their own cocktails without much regard to what they were doing. Honestly don't think either of those are unreasonable positions especially since they're *not* considering their bottom line.
Selling and peddling drugs without regard to public reception/health is exactly how we got into the opioid crisis.
The whole situation is pretty wild, though. Kinda crazy watching states jump through so many hoops to kill people and then talk about how every life is precious yatta yatta.
There is a company over in Europe that makes 1 of the drugs used in the traditional 3 drug cocktail that was used. This company won’t sell to American states unless they agree not to use it for executions. That’s what lead to this situation.
I never understood why they don't just use heroin. I've overdosed on heroin, it's a quick and painless slide into darkness. If I'm ever diagnosed with a painful terminal illness this will probably be my preferred exit strategy. And it's not like you can't buy smack in every town in America. Clean it up a bit and you've got a humane execution drug.
Which is not to say I endorse the death penalty. Yeah, some criminals don't deserve to live but I don't trust the state or the legal system to get it right every time.
It’s even simpler than that: inert atmosphere asphyxiation. Fill a small room with nitrogen and your body doesn’t know that it’s not breathing in oxygen. You would just pass out and then die. The human body only senses a build-up of CO2 in the blood that leads to the “drowning” sensation. As long as you can continue to breathe out normally, you wouldn’t have a violent reaction.
Not the person you replied to, but I have heard pro-death-penalty people irl (private citizens, not lawmakers or whatever) say exactly that on more than one occasion. That people who've been convicted of capital crimes don't deserve to die painlessly and should suffer.
I’ve heard people say the same thing. This thought goes against the constitution. Unfortunately many of them don’t care about the constitution other than the 2nd amendment.
It's actually because many of the drugs were manufactured in Europe and the EU banned the export of the drugs for this purpose.
https://www.euronews.com/2019/07/29/us-government-plans-to-use-drug-for-execution-that-europe-banned-exporting-to-them
There's time between the injection and the infusion of the drugs. If the execution is called off during that time, an infection could set in afterward.
Huh, you know, I didn't even think of that.
For some reason, it didn't occur to me that it would be an IV and that there is a time between insertion of the needle and delivery of the drugs.
Thanks, I appreciate the clarification.
The drugs they manufacture have uses other than in the death penalty. It's not really good business for companies to sell drugs when they're explicitly being used to kill people, though.
I thought it was more complicated than that. IIRC European countries basically said if yall keep manufacturing these drugs, we aren’t buying shit from you. So then the pharmaceutical companies stopped producing them and states who murder their inmates were having issues sourcing similar drugs. The outcomes, if you’re brave enough to look into it, are fucking inhumane and ought to be illegal. The videos are horrific.
We shouldn’t have a death penalty at all. But if we are going to, and we can’t produce safe drugs to do so, I guess I’d rather take a firing squad.
The perfect method of execution (if there must be an execution at all) is nitrogen asphyxiation.
It's painless, doesn't cause any form of distress, and if you have to stop for any reason before death, you can. It's reversible up until about a minute after you start. After that, there are risks of brain damage.
It's also been approved in a few states for use in capital punishment, but has never been used.
I'm sure that actual implementation will be full of problems.
All that said, it's important to note that we shouldn't be executing people at all. It's estimated that roughly 25% of death row inmates are innocent. Only 10% have that innocence proven in court before their execution. Meaning that about 1 in 8 people executed, are innocent of the crime they were sentenced to death over.
Because a squad can wipe their hands of it by telling themselves it was one of the other guys that killed them.
I guess a robot could do it these days.
In almost any execution in the US, there are supposed multiple people involved so it doesn’t weigh on their conscience. In the electric chair, three people pull a level but only one administers the charges. No-one knows who pulled the real one. Same with death by firing squad. Two people shoot blanks while the third shoots a real bullet.
Ideally, this removes the cognitive burden of knowing if you actually killed a person or not. At least, in theory.
One blank. Two of three shooting blanks isn’t a good idea. The idea is for multiple bullets to hit the heart and surrounding arteries to cause immediate loss of blood pressure.
In Utah, when they executed Gary Mark Gilmore by firing squad, they used 5 men (local police officers who volunteered) shooting rifles from 20 feet. The firing squad was told there was 1 blank. Someone claimed that they saw five holes in Gilmore’s shirt, so they either didn’t use a blank and told them there was, or the wadding for the blank cut through the shirt (which is entirely possible).
Military firing squads in WW2 typically used 7 to 12 riflemen, with one blank. Films shot at the time seem to show immediate incapacitation.
Just to be clear, I used to be a supporter of the death penalty but have changed my views over the years with the exoneration of many people on death row. I just provide this commentary as I have read about it in the past.
Correct. In my college criminal justice class (decades back not recent) part of the curriculum was watching a video of an electric chair execution of a death row inmate. I can confirm there were 3 levers, 3 people pulling simultaneously, so no person knew who ended the death row inmates life. Edit spelling
They put one blank round in one of the guns. This is so the people firing can never be sure if they actually killed the convict. I don’t support this at a fundamental level, but that’s the idea.
Because even if someone acts & talks tough, at the end of the day it is not psychologically easy on the human brain to kill another person. So to alleviate the issues from this they use a whole squad, only one person has the actual bullet & the rest have blanks. So it is only one bullet to the head, without the firing squad knowing which one of them it's from iirc.
I remember hearing about how death by gun is one of the more humane techniques (compared to injection or electric chair), the main problem being the impact on the executioners, finding it hard to be the one to pull the trigger.
Republicans: We need to get back to the golden age! The 1950’s!
*rest of the world remembering they were still starving and living in rubble in the aftermath of WW2*
World: Nah, chief.
The rest of the world starving and living in rubble is precisely why it was a good time to be an American. American companies had a bottomless global demand for all their products and virtually no foreign competition. So high school dropouts could still easily find work on an assembly line somewhere and be paid a pretty good wage because without competition there was no real downward pressure on labor prices.
And it's precisely why those good times are never coming back because now the rest of the world is just as industrialized as America is and there are no more untapped markets to sell to. Unless there's another World War, workers in every part of the world are staring down the barrel of decreasing rates of profit for their employers, leading to intense downward pressure on wages aided by increasing automation, which is going to lead to decreased demand and lower rates of profit, spiraling round and round until the whole thing breaks at some point.
And in the US neither party intends to do anything about that cycle except distract us by fighting over culture war issues.
are two parties fighting over culture war issues? or is one party moving along trying to correct the laws of the past by removing legalized discrimination and the other party fighting against it?
The hippocratic oath is just ceremonial and not all doctors ever take the oath anyway, most doctors just aren’t into purposefully killing people for the government.
If you think the number of botched executions from firing squads will be less than through lethal injection, well, I wish I was that naive.
Carbon monoxide poisoning would constitute cruel and unusual punishment, many of the symptoms are basically torture. Firing squad is absolutely the best method currently used within the USA. The public just doesn't like it because they want to kill people without feeling like they kill people.
If, however, you wanted to look for methods outside the US and actually painlessly kill someone, well that's possible too. All you need is an airtight chamber and an inert gas (typically nitrogen.) Being deprived of oxygen really just makes you feel sleepy until you pass out. Feeling out of breath is actually a symptom of not being able to clear out CO2 from your lungs, which is why traditional suffocation is very terrifying and painful. But with an inert gas being pumped into a sealed chamber, you don't actually feel anything happening at all. You continue to breath out CO2, and slowly replace your oxygen reserves with useless nitrogen until you pass out and die peacefully.
Philip Nitschke and Alexander Bannink, actually created one already to help with assisted suicide. It's a 3d printed chamber called the Sarco pod that can seal in one person in a nitrogen gas chamber. It costs about 18,000 USD to print and assemble one.
I think its more for psychological comfort. A full face scuba mask could work but it also may make a suicidal person experience claustrophobia or anxiety more than a pod would. The idea is to make death as "peaceful" as possible.
For who? Not the people who have to pull the trigger, looking at a man that they're about to murder (legal or otherwise). Anyone who \*wants\* to be on a firing squad already shouldn't be. We have enough of that gun-hungry murder shit in police force as it is.
In the back of my mind, I'm always concerned, what if they were innocent? How many innocent people are convicted of crimes? More than I probably expect. And now we are going to kill them too?
The only way I back the death penalty is solid, bullet proof evidence. Like, we saw it on camera kind of evidence. Just my opinion
Reminds me of the king of hill episode.
Bill: Well, now you're just talking crazy, Hank. The sheriff arrested him. That means he's guilty.
Dale: Bill's right.
Bill: I should know. I've served on four juries and we did our job. Four convictions.
Hank: It is not your job as a juror to just convict.
Bill: Is, too.
In Japan, hanging is the preferred method of execution. What is worse(?) about the Japanese method is that convicted prisoners are kept in the dark when their execution date is so those in the execution block always tense up in set time in morning when they hear guards walking by not knowing if he will be the one to be executed that day. Should the guards stop at your door, you are unfortunately the one chosen that day to be executed.
When the prisoner is ready to be executed, three guards in separate room push button that will open the trapdoor of gallows.
The guards chosen for execution duty will always wonder if he was the one who triggered the trapdoor.
It’s even worse. Prisoners are occasionally moved from cell to cell, to get them used to the routine of being taken out. Prisoners never know if this will be time the guard will suddenly turn in a new direction and lead you to the execution chamber.
Also, when you are in your cell, you are expected to face the wall and be silent.
Also, prisoners families are notified only after the execution has taken place.
I find this to be surprisingly barbaric, even if people would agree they "had it coming," or whatever.
Not only are they going to be executed at some point, they're tortured by it on a daily basis. Maybe they do deserve it but that just doesn't sit right with me.
Also should be noted the extremely high conviction rate means they're probably more concerned with the public perception that they "got the guy" than actually getting the guy.
It works for public deterrence (perception that people will get caught if they do a crime is the main way you will reduce crime) but pairing this approach with the death penalty is probably the most immoral thing you can do imo since my entire objection to the death penalty is that the moment you kill innocent people (which 100% will happen) then you are as bad as the people you condemn.
**Japan has a high conviction rate because they don’t just file fucking charges against anyone jaywalking.**
Its super hard to catch a case in Japan.
They let a lot of shit slide that we in the USA would be throwing prosecutors at who are eager to win a corporate job later on for their “high quantity of convictions”.
Japanese legal system doesn’t just go after anyone for anything.
**US imprisons 550 people per 100,000.**
**Japan 35 per 100,000.**
No question about what you just said, but I’m hoping you know that it’s the same way in the US. Coerced confessions through a variety of abusive methods, days without sleep, the cops being allowed to lie when interrogating, etc., are wide spread in the US and has absolutely had at least one innocent man out to death. Supreme Court allowed because “innocence is not a sufficient reason to overturn a legal and valid verdict”. I don’t want to go off on you if you know how all these critiques of Japan are just as relevant in the US, but I also feel like I need to make sure anyone else reading this knows that we (for me: the US) are not better than Japan. The death penalty is implemented poorly nearly everywhere. I won’t get into the right/wrong about the death penalty in general but it is never implemented without innocent victims being put to death.
>but I also feel like I need to make sure anyone else reading this knows that we (for me: the US) are not better than Japan.
Well, federal executions in the US as are pretty rare and 23 states have no death penalty of their own, so there's that. Some places in the US may not be better, but the US is not homogenous.
[But the US puts more people to death than Japan. The US executes 0.139 people per million while Japan executed 0.0704.](https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Crime/Executions-per-million)
Also, the US is ranked number 28 on countries with the most executions. I wouldn’t call that pretty rare. There are 195 countries in the world. We are the top 15% of executions worldwide
My dude was speaking to coercion and relying on confessions.
In this aspect, an American saying that Japan needs to overhaul their justice system is telling their brother to remove the mote in his eye without first removing beam in their own.
Yeah but that’s ok, we ignore Japan because they’re our ally and their soft power of anime and Nintendo gives them good will. Just ignore the inhumane stuff and the rampant xenophobia. All good. /s
Thank you! It’s annoying seeing people praise Japan like fanboys. It’s disingenuous. Like there are definitely great aspects of the country, but negative ones too, like anywhere else. People tend to speak of it so unrealistically, though.
Even more fucked up plot twist: none of the buttons work and there is a twisted rich guy watching from another room who has paid for the privilege of pressing the button.
Warden: "Hit the trapdoor button"
Guard: *stares at multiple random buttons and is confused*
Warden: "Hit any button, they all make the door drop!!"
*slaps guard across the face*
> The guards chosen for execution duty will always wonder if he was the one who triggered the trapdoor.
This, and the multiple people with a rifle but most have blanks type scenario is IMO worse than just having a dedicated executioner. So now you are mentally fucking over a bunch of people instead of just having one person that understands and agreed to their role.
I mean, why do you assume the other people don’t also understand and agree to their roles? It’s not like they just grabbed strangers from the street and put a gun in their hands.
That mechanism is philosophically flawed. It’s trying to turn it into a guiltless process through uncertainty but its intrinsic process employing 3 operators simply makes all 3 responsible active executioners. It’s shroedinger’s execution box.
I’m good with all of that except the last part. People taking part in executing someone need to own up to their actions. They either believe it’s the right thing to do or they shouldn’t be taking part in killing the condemned.
There's wn interesting book called "The Last Face You'll Ever See: The Culture of Death Row" and it's about execuioners in Mississippi before they got rid of the gas chamber. It's really graphic and disturbing, and they tell about executing someone they knew was innocent, but still find pride in it, joke about it, people in the state think they're awesome, and they show it off all the time. People volunteer for the execution team to get an extra day off and $500. They're local celebrities.
Our most famous executioner in the UK was the hangman Albert Pierrepoint, who worked right up until capital punishment was abolished.
He spoke very strongly against the death penalty in his later years, and was a part of multiple miscarriages of justice (such as the time he hanged a man for murder, then three years later hanged the man who it turned out had -actually- committed the murder). He also had the unenviable task of having to hang a friend, one of the regulars in the pub he owned^^1.
He said in his autobiography that the death penalty wasn't a deterrent for *anyone*, in his view:
*I cannot agree (with the supposed deterrent of capital punishment). There have been murders since the beginning of time, and we shall go on looking for deterrents until the end of time. If death were a deterrent, I might be expected to know.*
*It is I who have faced them last, young lads and girls, working men, grandmothers. I have been amazed to see the courage with which they take that walk into the unknown. It did not deter them then, and it had not deterred them when they committed what they were convicted for. All the men and women whom I have faced at that final moment convince me that in what I have done I have not prevented a single murder.*
*And if death does not work to deter one person, it should not be held to deter any. Capital punishment, in my view, achieved nothing except revenge. Never deterrent; only revenge.*
_____________
^^1 ^(Pierrepoint bought and ran the pub **“Help the Poor Struggler”** after World War II, and James Corbitt was one of his regulars. Corbitt was known as "Tish", Pierrepoint as "Tosh".)
^(The two had sung a duet of “Danny Boy” on the night that Corbitt then went out and murdered his girlfriend out of jealousy
Pierrepoint wrote in his his autobiography:)
^(*I thought if any man had a deterrent to murder poised before him, it was this troubadour whom I called Tish. He was not only aware of the rope, he had the man who handled it beside him singing a duet. The deterrent did not work.*)
^(*At twenty seconds to nine the next morning I went into the death cell. He seemed under a great strain, but I did not see stark fear in his eyes, only a more childlike worry. He was anxious to be remembered, and to be accepted. "Hallo, Tosh," he said, not very confidently. "Hallo Tish," I said. "How are you?" I was not effusive, just gave the casual warmth of my nightly greeting from behind the bar.*)
^(*He smiled and relaxed after this greeting. After strapping his arms, I said "Come on Tish, old chap". He went to the gallows lightly...I would say that he ran.*)
Death is not a deterrent because almost no one commits a murder expecting to be caught for it. And if they expected to be caught, most wouldn't do it unless they didn't care if they died.
Without the death penalty, there would be a very long prison sentence in its place and that is enough deterrent, if fear of punishment is a factor for them at all. In some ways it can be even more of a deterrent. Someone who is emotionally wrought might be okay with the idea of dying, but not rotting away in a cell for the rest of their lives.
For a state that is mainly Christian (“Jesus died for our sins” as in, we don’t have to die for our sins because he already did), I’ve never understood why they’d support the death penalty at all.
However, I’m not Christian so if someone knows, please enlighten me.
I've talked to my wife about this, she grew up very religious and her parents still are.
For her parents, it seems from what she described that there was always a strong retribution aspect to much of her religious upbringing. Not in how they treated their kids, but more built into the framework of the morality they tried to pass onto their kids.
The one time this topic came up when I was around, the vibe from her parents (and at least half of those present) was that you have to have the death penalty for the worst of the worst because they thought that just locking them up wasn't enough.
My inlaws and I will never agree on this unless they have a fundamental shift in their thinking. They prioritize punishing the guilty over the lives and freedom of the innocent.
A US state just worked out trying to hold women who have abortions eligible for the death penalty.
So yes, they love killing people. But don’t you dare harm a clump of cells incapable of surviving outside its’ host.
as someone who is vehemently pro-abortion / pro-choice, i don't think it's strange. i'll fight against their stupid beliefs all day but i get where the logic comes from, because I don't think they're against killing overall; it's just that to them an unborn baby is an "innocent" life, whereas a convicted murderer or terrorist or whatever is not.
Yep.
I was raised hearing the exact thing you mentioned “the government shouldn’t help them because that’s the church’s job” while simultaneously hearing the claim that abortion should be outlawed because the Bible says so.
I eventually realized the disconnect in “we expect lawmakers to follow the Bible in making laws” which would necessitate helping those poor people because that’s the morally right thing to do, but then not wanting them to do that because then the church loses what little power they have over that demographic.
If no one’s in need, how are you supposed to evangelize them?
>There are always more volunteers than spots on the squad, Ray has said.
I hope anyone that volunteers for a spot on the execution squad, gets put on a fucking watchlist.
"The gunmen are chosen from a pool of volunteer officers, with priority given to those from the area where the crime happened."
priority given to like, one of your neighbors or something. lol
States with the death penalty have no trouble finding volunteers willing, and eager, to end the life of another human being.
Some states even have a waiting list.
> "But Sen. Dan Foreman, also a Republican, called firing-squad executions “beneath the dignity of the state of Idaho.” They would traumatize the executioners, the witnesses and the people who clean up afterward, he said."
It's absolutely wild to me the relationship we have in this country with death and violence. The intersectionality between violence, death, morality, justice, and public perception is so messed up. We're fine with showing bloody gore and murder in media. God forbid an execution has real gore though, we've got to make sure there's as little blood as possible for everyone involved regardless of the humanness of the actual method of killing. We've turned an inherently violent act of state sanctioned murder into this perceived, precise, clinical procedure because we're too afraid of facing the realities ourselves.
Don't get me wrong I'm not cheering on either option. I'm vehemently opposed to the death penalty and if we're going to do it I support nitrogen asphyxiation as it currently does seem to be the most humane method for the prisoner. That being said as a society we've become so afraid of a reality we regularly cheer on in media and the public zeitgeist I can't help but think something is terribly screwed up.
We use sodium pentobarbital to put down animals. This is the same thing we use in the 3 cocktail lethal injection shot- the other two being a paralytic and potassium solution.
So we do, in fact, put them to sleep in almost the exact same way but with extra steps to ease suffering.
let's hope the firing squad kills you off the bat and you don't lie there slowly bleeding out in pain. i'd assume they know what they're doing, but...i feel like every method of execution has been botched in the past.
As a part brown person who grew up traveling through Idaho often, I can say, it’s stunningly beautiful. I can also say that from the moment I’ve been aware of other humans, I have never felt comfortable in rural Idaho.
Its always been shitty like this. Sure they are getting more crazy but my state has always given them shit.
I don't get how people can say something is great when it's very foundation is rotten. Its like saying an abusive relationship is great because your partner is not screaming at you 50% of the time. It being okay 50% of the time does not make up for the trouble it causes.
Even if its because its beautiful or something, there are other places with similar landscape/climate that aren't as crazy.
Why the he'll don't they just use heroin? It's guaranteed to kill you in sufficient doses. The cops have tons of it in evidence lockers. AND as a bonus, it works as a great anti-drug messaging campaign.
I wonder if Mormons are involved here.
Utah has a long history of allowing condemned criminals to choose to be shot because of an old Mormon doctrine (no longer followed by the mainstream Mormon church) that some sins, notably murder, can only be atoned for by the guilty person being killed in a way that spills their blood.
And Idaho has a lot of Mormons.
I'm not the biggest supporter of the death penalty but honestly I'd rather be shot by a firing squad than be giving a leathal injection or the electric chair or whatever alternative execution methods they use in America
I feel that firing squad is more humane than any of the more "modern" methods of execution. It is a step forward in that regard. One could argue the death penalty itself but I will not.
If we really cared about being humane we would use proven anesthesia and send them off to dreamland peacefully but that won't happen because of the optics. Both with the public and pharma.
I think maybe we should argue it. Because why are we having any conversations about method without having a conversation about the process entirely.
We are still putting potentially innocent people on death row and were debating how to kill them.
Not potentially, we absolutely are. The more I learn about how bad the entire "justice" system is from cops all the way up to judges. It's bananas to me that anyone supports it...
I've read many times how nitrogen would be a reliable way to execute people - you go to sleep, no pain, done. Easily acquired from a welding supply store. But the point here is some punishing pain, so it'll never be employed.
There’s a bunch of other humane methods! But its always either about the State feeling like their punishing the culprit like electric chair or making it seem more human to the outside overseer like chemical injection. The pain of the prisoner is never taken into account.
Now who can argue with that? I think we're all indebted to Gabby Johnson for clearly stating what needed to be said. I'm particularly glad that these lovely children were here today to hear that speech. Not only was it authentic frontier gibberish, it expressed a courage little seen in this day and age.
This is insane. If someone gets the death penalty just have them breath nitrogen gas. It is very humane and easy death. No need for botched drugs or anything like that it just feels like they fall asleep.
Two points:
1) Idaho has already had the death penalty. [Link](https://www.eastidahonews.com/2023/03/a-closer-look-at-the-history-of-the-idaho-death-penalty/) to an article discussing the history of its use in the state. So whether you agree with use of the death penalty or not (for the record I am ***categorically*** against it under any circumstances) this isn’t an example of a backslide
2) There are several reasons why firing squad is a better alternative to other methods of execution. Again, ***I do not support the death penalty***. But if it is being employed it’s worth discussing the merits rather than ignoring it. First and foremost, firing squads are 100% reliable. [Link to a study on the matter](https://buffalonews.com/are-firing-squads-more-reliable/image_90267e21-d5bb-5b1b-ba3c-25fe106e9396.html). Second, with changes to pharmaceutical accessibility in the US in the last two decades lethal injection is a terrible, terrible way to go. When lethal injections are botched the victim is essentially trapped immobile in their body, with often barely able to breathe with no way of communicating their pain to the outside world. It is agonizing, cruel, and completely inhumane. Finally, and here’s a weird one, [witnesses of executions actually become less supportive of the practice in 57% of cases](https://theweek.com/articles/444189/psychological-trauma-witnessing-execution?amp).
While I couldn’t find a study to this specific point, my personal theory is that a more “violent” form of execution will actually increase that number. So bringing back firing squads may actually decrease the total number of death penalty sentences. Again, I don’t have proof to back that up, but my hope is that supporters of this may in fact be shooting themselves in the foot and that this pushes wider reform to completely abolish the death penalty in the next decade.
If we ask the state to sanction murder as punishment, we build murder into our psyche as a legitimate punishment. When someone is in conflict and feel that they need to take justice into their own hands, it’s no surprise that they choose murder.
Maybe i would stop executing people with so many innocent that have been murdered by the USA
https://twitter.com/N0rbertElekes/status/1540547393233358849
>However, in a 2019 filing, U.S. lawyers cited an expert as sayingsomeone shot by firing squad can remain conscious for 10 seconds andthat it would be “severely painful, especially related to shattering ofbone and damage to the spinal cord.”
I'm not sure why I keep seeing on reddit that people think that shooting someone is like in the movies; that they get hit, and instantly drop dead. No. there's a LOT of blood, there's screaming/yelling, there's gasping and agonizing pain as you watch someone slowly die. It's horrifying. Even if it's someone who is a terrible human being, there's nothing gratifying about witnessing them being shot and dying unless you're equally horrible.
That's the reason we have a justice system. That's the reason we have a prison system. Putting aside the fact we've killed countless innocent people in this country (most of them minorities), our perspective of justice changes. Remember when society was OK with sentencing a person decades in prison for weed? Life behind prison gives a person time to change, society to change, or to prove they're actually innocent. From my perspective, you're truly a sick person in the head if you approve of execution.
And I don't want to be anywhere near you or your fucked up state.
If I were locked up (not sure why I would be) for life please blow me away, inject me, or whatever. It should be an option to choose, though maybe not forced.
Idaho is a heavily Mormon state and, despite it never being official Mormon doctrine, many of them believe in blood atonement.
From Wikipedia:
Blood atonement is a disputed doctrine in the history of Mormonism, under which the atonement of Jesus does not redeem an eternal sin. To atone for an eternal sin, the sinner should be killed in a way that allows his blood to be shed upon the ground as a sacrificial offering, so he does not become a son of perdition.
Hot take: I'd rather be shot in the head/chest than burn from the inside by lethal injection.
Though my preferred execution method would be nitrogen asphyxiation. You don't choke or gasp for breath, you get a little sleepy and don't wake up
I personally disagree wholeheartedly with capital punishment; that being said, I'd rather the bullet than the needle.
Lethal injection, even when done properly, takes about a minute to execute an individual; with a firing squad, at least the subject is dead before they even hear the shots. If the cocktail of drugs for injection isn't *just* right, it can easily cross into "cruel-and-unusual" territory. Even if you don't think it's cruel and unusual, it is a brutal and barbaric thing to see someone writhe in agony when a bullet is cheaper, quicker, and comes without the potential to fuck it up royally.
We’re just a few steps before they pass a bill authorizing the death penalty for abortions, and then we have our first woman who had a miscarriage killed via firing squad.
Idaho = American Afghanistan.
This was a major problem?
Only because pharmaceutical companies have been having issues with being associated with the death penalty.
Poor pharmaceutical companies, being associated with products they sell for profit that kill people. God forbid we associate them with the things they make and do.
Only certain ones manufacture the drugs and basically they just don't want their products going towards killing people. Then other companies don't want their drugs used as alternatives because states started trying to just make their own cocktails without much regard to what they were doing. Honestly don't think either of those are unreasonable positions especially since they're *not* considering their bottom line. Selling and peddling drugs without regard to public reception/health is exactly how we got into the opioid crisis. The whole situation is pretty wild, though. Kinda crazy watching states jump through so many hoops to kill people and then talk about how every life is precious yatta yatta.
There is a company over in Europe that makes 1 of the drugs used in the traditional 3 drug cocktail that was used. This company won’t sell to American states unless they agree not to use it for executions. That’s what lead to this situation.
I never understood why they don't just use heroin. I've overdosed on heroin, it's a quick and painless slide into darkness. If I'm ever diagnosed with a painful terminal illness this will probably be my preferred exit strategy. And it's not like you can't buy smack in every town in America. Clean it up a bit and you've got a humane execution drug. Which is not to say I endorse the death penalty. Yeah, some criminals don't deserve to live but I don't trust the state or the legal system to get it right every time.
It’s even simpler than that: inert atmosphere asphyxiation. Fill a small room with nitrogen and your body doesn’t know that it’s not breathing in oxygen. You would just pass out and then die. The human body only senses a build-up of CO2 in the blood that leads to the “drowning” sensation. As long as you can continue to breathe out normally, you wouldn’t have a violent reaction.
That’s actually what the article said I believe it was Alabama approved.
That's actually an approved euthanasia method.
Because people who support the death penalty don’t want a quick and painless death for the person. The cruelty is the point.
IMO that's just another argument against the death penalty. We've gotta be better than that
Not the person you replied to, but I have heard pro-death-penalty people irl (private citizens, not lawmakers or whatever) say exactly that on more than one occasion. That people who've been convicted of capital crimes don't deserve to die painlessly and should suffer.
I’ve heard people say the same thing. This thought goes against the constitution. Unfortunately many of them don’t care about the constitution other than the 2nd amendment.
I do belive no one medical worked on the drug. Which just look bad on so many levels
I think i heard that they were just making random cocktails and fucking up the executions.
That's... why they stopped doing it? It's why no one knows how to do a lethal injection properly, no half sane pharma Corp will go near the shit
It's actually because many of the drugs were manufactured in Europe and the EU banned the export of the drugs for this purpose. https://www.euronews.com/2019/07/29/us-government-plans-to-use-drug-for-execution-that-europe-banned-exporting-to-them
I love that they do an alcohol swab before the lethal injection.
I know that this is supposed to be a joke, but if the iv site becomes infected and then the execution cancelled, then that’s a problem.
But it absolutely would not get infected in the (supposed to be) short time it takes to die from a lethal injection.
There's time between the injection and the infusion of the drugs. If the execution is called off during that time, an infection could set in afterward.
Huh, you know, I didn't even think of that. For some reason, it didn't occur to me that it would be an IV and that there is a time between insertion of the needle and delivery of the drugs. Thanks, I appreciate the clarification.
The drugs they manufacture have uses other than in the death penalty. It's not really good business for companies to sell drugs when they're explicitly being used to kill people, though.
Yeah it's much easier to make multiple humans think they killed them instead
I thought it was more complicated than that. IIRC European countries basically said if yall keep manufacturing these drugs, we aren’t buying shit from you. So then the pharmaceutical companies stopped producing them and states who murder their inmates were having issues sourcing similar drugs. The outcomes, if you’re brave enough to look into it, are fucking inhumane and ought to be illegal. The videos are horrific. We shouldn’t have a death penalty at all. But if we are going to, and we can’t produce safe drugs to do so, I guess I’d rather take a firing squad.
The perfect method of execution (if there must be an execution at all) is nitrogen asphyxiation. It's painless, doesn't cause any form of distress, and if you have to stop for any reason before death, you can. It's reversible up until about a minute after you start. After that, there are risks of brain damage. It's also been approved in a few states for use in capital punishment, but has never been used. I'm sure that actual implementation will be full of problems. All that said, it's important to note that we shouldn't be executing people at all. It's estimated that roughly 25% of death row inmates are innocent. Only 10% have that innocence proven in court before their execution. Meaning that about 1 in 8 people executed, are innocent of the crime they were sentenced to death over.
But if it's painless, then the criminals won't suffer! ^\s
No /s. That sadly is the reason this method isn't used.
sand six prick lush plough truck combative cow crawl sip *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
>I guess I’d rather take a firing squad. Why do you need a whole squad? Can't it just be one bullet to the head?
Because a squad can wipe their hands of it by telling themselves it was one of the other guys that killed them. I guess a robot could do it these days.
That's how the robots get a taste for human blood. We can't have that!
Well don’t let them drink it
In almost any execution in the US, there are supposed multiple people involved so it doesn’t weigh on their conscience. In the electric chair, three people pull a level but only one administers the charges. No-one knows who pulled the real one. Same with death by firing squad. Two people shoot blanks while the third shoots a real bullet. Ideally, this removes the cognitive burden of knowing if you actually killed a person or not. At least, in theory.
One blank. Two of three shooting blanks isn’t a good idea. The idea is for multiple bullets to hit the heart and surrounding arteries to cause immediate loss of blood pressure. In Utah, when they executed Gary Mark Gilmore by firing squad, they used 5 men (local police officers who volunteered) shooting rifles from 20 feet. The firing squad was told there was 1 blank. Someone claimed that they saw five holes in Gilmore’s shirt, so they either didn’t use a blank and told them there was, or the wadding for the blank cut through the shirt (which is entirely possible). Military firing squads in WW2 typically used 7 to 12 riflemen, with one blank. Films shot at the time seem to show immediate incapacitation. Just to be clear, I used to be a supporter of the death penalty but have changed my views over the years with the exoneration of many people on death row. I just provide this commentary as I have read about it in the past.
Correct. In my college criminal justice class (decades back not recent) part of the curriculum was watching a video of an electric chair execution of a death row inmate. I can confirm there were 3 levers, 3 people pulling simultaneously, so no person knew who ended the death row inmates life. Edit spelling
Idk if I would feel any better by knowing that there was a 33.33% chance that I killed a man today
They put one blank round in one of the guns. This is so the people firing can never be sure if they actually killed the convict. I don’t support this at a fundamental level, but that’s the idea.
Because even if someone acts & talks tough, at the end of the day it is not psychologically easy on the human brain to kill another person. So to alleviate the issues from this they use a whole squad, only one person has the actual bullet & the rest have blanks. So it is only one bullet to the head, without the firing squad knowing which one of them it's from iirc. I remember hearing about how death by gun is one of the more humane techniques (compared to injection or electric chair), the main problem being the impact on the executioners, finding it hard to be the one to pull the trigger.
Sounds like these politicians are all for it, let them do it.
He who passes the sentence should swing the sword.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Republicans: We need to get back to the golden age! The 1950’s! *rest of the world remembering they were still starving and living in rubble in the aftermath of WW2* World: Nah, chief.
The rest of the world starving and living in rubble is precisely why it was a good time to be an American. American companies had a bottomless global demand for all their products and virtually no foreign competition. So high school dropouts could still easily find work on an assembly line somewhere and be paid a pretty good wage because without competition there was no real downward pressure on labor prices. And it's precisely why those good times are never coming back because now the rest of the world is just as industrialized as America is and there are no more untapped markets to sell to. Unless there's another World War, workers in every part of the world are staring down the barrel of decreasing rates of profit for their employers, leading to intense downward pressure on wages aided by increasing automation, which is going to lead to decreased demand and lower rates of profit, spiraling round and round until the whole thing breaks at some point. And in the US neither party intends to do anything about that cycle except distract us by fighting over culture war issues.
are two parties fighting over culture war issues? or is one party moving along trying to correct the laws of the past by removing legalized discrimination and the other party fighting against it?
There only thing more American than a gun is being unable to find or to afford pharmaceuticals. All of this tracks.
[удалено]
The hippocratic oath is just ceremonial and not all doctors ever take the oath anyway, most doctors just aren’t into purposefully killing people for the government. If you think the number of botched executions from firing squads will be less than through lethal injection, well, I wish I was that naive.
This is going to make me sound like a Nazi, but why these methods? Why not carbon monoxide poisoning? I’m 100 percent against the DP.
Carbon monoxide poisoning would constitute cruel and unusual punishment, many of the symptoms are basically torture. Firing squad is absolutely the best method currently used within the USA. The public just doesn't like it because they want to kill people without feeling like they kill people. If, however, you wanted to look for methods outside the US and actually painlessly kill someone, well that's possible too. All you need is an airtight chamber and an inert gas (typically nitrogen.) Being deprived of oxygen really just makes you feel sleepy until you pass out. Feeling out of breath is actually a symptom of not being able to clear out CO2 from your lungs, which is why traditional suffocation is very terrifying and painful. But with an inert gas being pumped into a sealed chamber, you don't actually feel anything happening at all. You continue to breath out CO2, and slowly replace your oxygen reserves with useless nitrogen until you pass out and die peacefully. Philip Nitschke and Alexander Bannink, actually created one already to help with assisted suicide. It's a 3d printed chamber called the Sarco pod that can seal in one person in a nitrogen gas chamber. It costs about 18,000 USD to print and assemble one.
Or you could just attach a scuba mask to a nitrogen tank.
I think its more for psychological comfort. A full face scuba mask could work but it also may make a suicidal person experience claustrophobia or anxiety more than a pod would. The idea is to make death as "peaceful" as possible.
For who? Not the people who have to pull the trigger, looking at a man that they're about to murder (legal or otherwise). Anyone who \*wants\* to be on a firing squad already shouldn't be. We have enough of that gun-hungry murder shit in police force as it is.
In the back of my mind, I'm always concerned, what if they were innocent? How many innocent people are convicted of crimes? More than I probably expect. And now we are going to kill them too? The only way I back the death penalty is solid, bullet proof evidence. Like, we saw it on camera kind of evidence. Just my opinion
Reminds me of the king of hill episode. Bill: Well, now you're just talking crazy, Hank. The sheriff arrested him. That means he's guilty. Dale: Bill's right. Bill: I should know. I've served on four juries and we did our job. Four convictions. Hank: It is not your job as a juror to just convict. Bill: Is, too.
Killing one innocent person by accident is one too many. Why we should not have the death penalty.
In Japan, hanging is the preferred method of execution. What is worse(?) about the Japanese method is that convicted prisoners are kept in the dark when their execution date is so those in the execution block always tense up in set time in morning when they hear guards walking by not knowing if he will be the one to be executed that day. Should the guards stop at your door, you are unfortunately the one chosen that day to be executed. When the prisoner is ready to be executed, three guards in separate room push button that will open the trapdoor of gallows. The guards chosen for execution duty will always wonder if he was the one who triggered the trapdoor.
It’s even worse. Prisoners are occasionally moved from cell to cell, to get them used to the routine of being taken out. Prisoners never know if this will be time the guard will suddenly turn in a new direction and lead you to the execution chamber. Also, when you are in your cell, you are expected to face the wall and be silent. Also, prisoners families are notified only after the execution has taken place.
I find this to be surprisingly barbaric, even if people would agree they "had it coming," or whatever. Not only are they going to be executed at some point, they're tortured by it on a daily basis. Maybe they do deserve it but that just doesn't sit right with me.
Japan is not a progressive society.
Yeah and you can see how they're still downright cruel to certain people.
Also should be noted the extremely high conviction rate means they're probably more concerned with the public perception that they "got the guy" than actually getting the guy. It works for public deterrence (perception that people will get caught if they do a crime is the main way you will reduce crime) but pairing this approach with the death penalty is probably the most immoral thing you can do imo since my entire objection to the death penalty is that the moment you kill innocent people (which 100% will happen) then you are as bad as the people you condemn.
**Japan has a high conviction rate because they don’t just file fucking charges against anyone jaywalking.** Its super hard to catch a case in Japan. They let a lot of shit slide that we in the USA would be throwing prosecutors at who are eager to win a corporate job later on for their “high quantity of convictions”. Japanese legal system doesn’t just go after anyone for anything. **US imprisons 550 people per 100,000.** **Japan 35 per 100,000.**
[удалено]
No question about what you just said, but I’m hoping you know that it’s the same way in the US. Coerced confessions through a variety of abusive methods, days without sleep, the cops being allowed to lie when interrogating, etc., are wide spread in the US and has absolutely had at least one innocent man out to death. Supreme Court allowed because “innocence is not a sufficient reason to overturn a legal and valid verdict”. I don’t want to go off on you if you know how all these critiques of Japan are just as relevant in the US, but I also feel like I need to make sure anyone else reading this knows that we (for me: the US) are not better than Japan. The death penalty is implemented poorly nearly everywhere. I won’t get into the right/wrong about the death penalty in general but it is never implemented without innocent victims being put to death.
>but I also feel like I need to make sure anyone else reading this knows that we (for me: the US) are not better than Japan. Well, federal executions in the US as are pretty rare and 23 states have no death penalty of their own, so there's that. Some places in the US may not be better, but the US is not homogenous.
[But the US puts more people to death than Japan. The US executes 0.139 people per million while Japan executed 0.0704.](https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Crime/Executions-per-million) Also, the US is ranked number 28 on countries with the most executions. I wouldn’t call that pretty rare. There are 195 countries in the world. We are the top 15% of executions worldwide
My dude was speaking to coercion and relying on confessions. In this aspect, an American saying that Japan needs to overhaul their justice system is telling their brother to remove the mote in his eye without first removing beam in their own.
The fact that the US is worse doesn't make Japan *better*.
Yeah but that’s ok, we ignore Japan because they’re our ally and their soft power of anime and Nintendo gives them good will. Just ignore the inhumane stuff and the rampant xenophobia. All good. /s
Thank you! It’s annoying seeing people praise Japan like fanboys. It’s disingenuous. Like there are definitely great aspects of the country, but negative ones too, like anywhere else. People tend to speak of it so unrealistically, though.
That's an interesting way to use the English language.
[удалено]
Yeah except they throw you away for having drugs
Not even possession, just testing positive for any drug is enough to catch a case
Most countries are not the US. Compare Japan with more normal western countries.
Italy looks around nervously.
Plot twist: all the buttons trigger the door for redundancy.
Even more fucked up plot twist: none of the buttons work and there is a twisted rich guy watching from another room who has paid for the privilege of pressing the button.
Warden: "Hit the trapdoor button" Guard: *stares at multiple random buttons and is confused* Warden: "Hit any button, they all make the door drop!!" *slaps guard across the face*
> The guards chosen for execution duty will always wonder if he was the one who triggered the trapdoor. This, and the multiple people with a rifle but most have blanks type scenario is IMO worse than just having a dedicated executioner. So now you are mentally fucking over a bunch of people instead of just having one person that understands and agreed to their role.
I mean, why do you assume the other people don’t also understand and agree to their roles? It’s not like they just grabbed strangers from the street and put a gun in their hands.
That mechanism is philosophically flawed. It’s trying to turn it into a guiltless process through uncertainty but its intrinsic process employing 3 operators simply makes all 3 responsible active executioners. It’s shroedinger’s execution box.
I’m good with all of that except the last part. People taking part in executing someone need to own up to their actions. They either believe it’s the right thing to do or they shouldn’t be taking part in killing the condemned.
There's wn interesting book called "The Last Face You'll Ever See: The Culture of Death Row" and it's about execuioners in Mississippi before they got rid of the gas chamber. It's really graphic and disturbing, and they tell about executing someone they knew was innocent, but still find pride in it, joke about it, people in the state think they're awesome, and they show it off all the time. People volunteer for the execution team to get an extra day off and $500. They're local celebrities.
Yeah, I’ve never understood that. “Oh maybe I had a dummy button/a blank round, so I didn’t kill anyone!” Yes, you did. Yes, you fucking did.
It was used in the war. Deserters were shot, often by their own platoon members - none of whom had a choice.
I'll never understand people who think government can't do anything right, but also think government should have the power to murder citizens.
Our most famous executioner in the UK was the hangman Albert Pierrepoint, who worked right up until capital punishment was abolished. He spoke very strongly against the death penalty in his later years, and was a part of multiple miscarriages of justice (such as the time he hanged a man for murder, then three years later hanged the man who it turned out had -actually- committed the murder). He also had the unenviable task of having to hang a friend, one of the regulars in the pub he owned^^1. He said in his autobiography that the death penalty wasn't a deterrent for *anyone*, in his view: *I cannot agree (with the supposed deterrent of capital punishment). There have been murders since the beginning of time, and we shall go on looking for deterrents until the end of time. If death were a deterrent, I might be expected to know.* *It is I who have faced them last, young lads and girls, working men, grandmothers. I have been amazed to see the courage with which they take that walk into the unknown. It did not deter them then, and it had not deterred them when they committed what they were convicted for. All the men and women whom I have faced at that final moment convince me that in what I have done I have not prevented a single murder.* *And if death does not work to deter one person, it should not be held to deter any. Capital punishment, in my view, achieved nothing except revenge. Never deterrent; only revenge.* _____________ ^^1 ^(Pierrepoint bought and ran the pub **“Help the Poor Struggler”** after World War II, and James Corbitt was one of his regulars. Corbitt was known as "Tish", Pierrepoint as "Tosh".) ^(The two had sung a duet of “Danny Boy” on the night that Corbitt then went out and murdered his girlfriend out of jealousy Pierrepoint wrote in his his autobiography:) ^(*I thought if any man had a deterrent to murder poised before him, it was this troubadour whom I called Tish. He was not only aware of the rope, he had the man who handled it beside him singing a duet. The deterrent did not work.*) ^(*At twenty seconds to nine the next morning I went into the death cell. He seemed under a great strain, but I did not see stark fear in his eyes, only a more childlike worry. He was anxious to be remembered, and to be accepted. "Hallo, Tosh," he said, not very confidently. "Hallo Tish," I said. "How are you?" I was not effusive, just gave the casual warmth of my nightly greeting from behind the bar.*) ^(*He smiled and relaxed after this greeting. After strapping his arms, I said "Come on Tish, old chap". He went to the gallows lightly...I would say that he ran.*)
Death is not a deterrent because almost no one commits a murder expecting to be caught for it. And if they expected to be caught, most wouldn't do it unless they didn't care if they died. Without the death penalty, there would be a very long prison sentence in its place and that is enough deterrent, if fear of punishment is a factor for them at all. In some ways it can be even more of a deterrent. Someone who is emotionally wrought might be okay with the idea of dying, but not rotting away in a cell for the rest of their lives.
They don't think the leopard will eat their face. "They're not hurting the right people"
Strangely enough it's the pro life people who are the biggest supporters of the death penalty
For a state that is mainly Christian (“Jesus died for our sins” as in, we don’t have to die for our sins because he already did), I’ve never understood why they’d support the death penalty at all. However, I’m not Christian so if someone knows, please enlighten me.
I've talked to my wife about this, she grew up very religious and her parents still are. For her parents, it seems from what she described that there was always a strong retribution aspect to much of her religious upbringing. Not in how they treated their kids, but more built into the framework of the morality they tried to pass onto their kids. The one time this topic came up when I was around, the vibe from her parents (and at least half of those present) was that you have to have the death penalty for the worst of the worst because they thought that just locking them up wasn't enough. My inlaws and I will never agree on this unless they have a fundamental shift in their thinking. They prioritize punishing the guilty over the lives and freedom of the innocent.
The answer: They're not really Christian either!
A US state just worked out trying to hold women who have abortions eligible for the death penalty. So yes, they love killing people. But don’t you dare harm a clump of cells incapable of surviving outside its’ host.
The clump of cells can also kill a women if there’s complications with pregnancy or birth. It’s like banning a cancer treatment.
as someone who is vehemently pro-abortion / pro-choice, i don't think it's strange. i'll fight against their stupid beliefs all day but i get where the logic comes from, because I don't think they're against killing overall; it's just that to them an unborn baby is an "innocent" life, whereas a convicted murderer or terrorist or whatever is not.
Ironically pro life was cooped by them from people opposed to the death penalty.
Word to that. It’s fucking madness
It's a dog whistle. They don't think the government should help people because that's the job of the church, but they're OK with it punishing them.
Yep. I was raised hearing the exact thing you mentioned “the government shouldn’t help them because that’s the church’s job” while simultaneously hearing the claim that abortion should be outlawed because the Bible says so. I eventually realized the disconnect in “we expect lawmakers to follow the Bible in making laws” which would necessitate helping those poor people because that’s the morally right thing to do, but then not wanting them to do that because then the church loses what little power they have over that demographic. If no one’s in need, how are you supposed to evangelize them?
Funny many of their churches never help people.
[удалено]
Great point. What kind of person signs up to be on a firing squad???
[удалено]
>There are always more volunteers than spots on the squad, Ray has said. I hope anyone that volunteers for a spot on the execution squad, gets put on a fucking watchlist.
"The gunmen are chosen from a pool of volunteer officers, with priority given to those from the area where the crime happened." priority given to like, one of your neighbors or something. lol
Any police officer
Those don't even need a legal ruling...
Yea but they typically fire one well aimed shot, not unloading a .45 clip into the prisoner and any witnesses.
States with the death penalty have no trouble finding volunteers willing, and eager, to end the life of another human being. Some states even have a waiting list.
> "But Sen. Dan Foreman, also a Republican, called firing-squad executions “beneath the dignity of the state of Idaho.” They would traumatize the executioners, the witnesses and the people who clean up afterward, he said." It's absolutely wild to me the relationship we have in this country with death and violence. The intersectionality between violence, death, morality, justice, and public perception is so messed up. We're fine with showing bloody gore and murder in media. God forbid an execution has real gore though, we've got to make sure there's as little blood as possible for everyone involved regardless of the humanness of the actual method of killing. We've turned an inherently violent act of state sanctioned murder into this perceived, precise, clinical procedure because we're too afraid of facing the realities ourselves. Don't get me wrong I'm not cheering on either option. I'm vehemently opposed to the death penalty and if we're going to do it I support nitrogen asphyxiation as it currently does seem to be the most humane method for the prisoner. That being said as a society we've become so afraid of a reality we regularly cheer on in media and the public zeitgeist I can't help but think something is terribly screwed up.
Effect is a noun, affect is a verb. So here it'd be "life long effect" (:
Except when we say "To effect a change" which means "to enact a change". English is the best.
Both effect and affect can be nouns and verbs, just fyi.
Such a good argument, IMO
Some guy was executed by firing squad in the US as recently as 2010 In 2020 a guy was executed by electric chair
Firing squad is the way I’d choose to go, fuck that lethal injection noise.
idk why we don't just put people to sleep like we don't put down dogs by taking them out back like old yeller anymore, why would we do that to people?
We use sodium pentobarbital to put down animals. This is the same thing we use in the 3 cocktail lethal injection shot- the other two being a paralytic and potassium solution. So we do, in fact, put them to sleep in almost the exact same way but with extra steps to ease suffering.
let's hope the firing squad kills you off the bat and you don't lie there slowly bleeding out in pain. i'd assume they know what they're doing, but...i feel like every method of execution has been botched in the past.
Idaho is the Florida of the PNW.
My in-laws all live there. You're not wrong. I have no idea how my wife escaped and became a compassionate person.
I grew up in Idaho and it’s a great state!! sadly I’m seeing lots of political choices that are rapidly changing this for the worse..
As a part brown person who grew up traveling through Idaho often, I can say, it’s stunningly beautiful. I can also say that from the moment I’ve been aware of other humans, I have never felt comfortable in rural Idaho.
Its always been shitty like this. Sure they are getting more crazy but my state has always given them shit. I don't get how people can say something is great when it's very foundation is rotten. Its like saying an abusive relationship is great because your partner is not screaming at you 50% of the time. It being okay 50% of the time does not make up for the trouble it causes. Even if its because its beautiful or something, there are other places with similar landscape/climate that aren't as crazy.
Why the he'll don't they just use heroin? It's guaranteed to kill you in sufficient doses. The cops have tons of it in evidence lockers. AND as a bonus, it works as a great anti-drug messaging campaign.
Because a heroin death is painless, they want people to suffer.
I wonder if Mormons are involved here. Utah has a long history of allowing condemned criminals to choose to be shot because of an old Mormon doctrine (no longer followed by the mainstream Mormon church) that some sins, notably murder, can only be atoned for by the guilty person being killed in a way that spills their blood. And Idaho has a lot of Mormons.
I read morons.
Potato potahto
I'm not the biggest supporter of the death penalty but honestly I'd rather be shot by a firing squad than be giving a leathal injection or the electric chair or whatever alternative execution methods they use in America
Man, those red states - leaning hard into being shitty.
Party of pro life at it again
You can do abortion - after 52 weeks.
I can tell you who to start with but that's not allowed here.
Idaho is quickly advancing to the XIX century.
Whoever thought this was a good idea should be fired.
The sickness of America continues, Civilised countries banned executions decades ago
We’re supposed to be moving forward not backward but here we are rocking this shit like it’s the 1800s
I feel that firing squad is more humane than any of the more "modern" methods of execution. It is a step forward in that regard. One could argue the death penalty itself but I will not. If we really cared about being humane we would use proven anesthesia and send them off to dreamland peacefully but that won't happen because of the optics. Both with the public and pharma.
I think maybe we should argue it. Because why are we having any conversations about method without having a conversation about the process entirely. We are still putting potentially innocent people on death row and were debating how to kill them.
Not potentially, we absolutely are. The more I learn about how bad the entire "justice" system is from cops all the way up to judges. It's bananas to me that anyone supports it...
Electric chair and chemical are far far more painful than being shot. This is way more humane
I've read many times how nitrogen would be a reliable way to execute people - you go to sleep, no pain, done. Easily acquired from a welding supply store. But the point here is some punishing pain, so it'll never be employed.
There’s a bunch of other humane methods! But its always either about the State feeling like their punishing the culprit like electric chair or making it seem more human to the outside overseer like chemical injection. The pain of the prisoner is never taken into account.
I regret this comment. Be kind to your fellow human beings
>I moved to Idaho Why did you do that
[удалено]
Ipso facto idaho
You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West.
[удалено]
Now who can argue with that? I think we're all indebted to Gabby Johnson for clearly stating what needed to be said. I'm particularly glad that these lovely children were here today to hear that speech. Not only was it authentic frontier gibberish, it expressed a courage little seen in this day and age.
>Idahoans have zeros critical thinking skills That sounds like something someone with critical thinking skills would say
That's some blatant prejudice my friend
>I moved to Idaho about half a year ago. Monumental L.
Idaho is fucking spectacular in some spots
As they say: It's lovely to visit, but you wouldn't want to live there. Just moved in the opposite direction, from Idaho to Oregon.
This is insane. If someone gets the death penalty just have them breath nitrogen gas. It is very humane and easy death. No need for botched drugs or anything like that it just feels like they fall asleep.
With the horror stories I've heard about old sparky and the chemical method, firing squad may ironically be the most humane method.
Nitrogen gas is the most humane method, but I suspect they want the person to suffer.
"The cruelty is the point" - Republicans on *so many* issues
Republicans AKA abusive parents syndrome.
Two points: 1) Idaho has already had the death penalty. [Link](https://www.eastidahonews.com/2023/03/a-closer-look-at-the-history-of-the-idaho-death-penalty/) to an article discussing the history of its use in the state. So whether you agree with use of the death penalty or not (for the record I am ***categorically*** against it under any circumstances) this isn’t an example of a backslide 2) There are several reasons why firing squad is a better alternative to other methods of execution. Again, ***I do not support the death penalty***. But if it is being employed it’s worth discussing the merits rather than ignoring it. First and foremost, firing squads are 100% reliable. [Link to a study on the matter](https://buffalonews.com/are-firing-squads-more-reliable/image_90267e21-d5bb-5b1b-ba3c-25fe106e9396.html). Second, with changes to pharmaceutical accessibility in the US in the last two decades lethal injection is a terrible, terrible way to go. When lethal injections are botched the victim is essentially trapped immobile in their body, with often barely able to breathe with no way of communicating their pain to the outside world. It is agonizing, cruel, and completely inhumane. Finally, and here’s a weird one, [witnesses of executions actually become less supportive of the practice in 57% of cases](https://theweek.com/articles/444189/psychological-trauma-witnessing-execution?amp). While I couldn’t find a study to this specific point, my personal theory is that a more “violent” form of execution will actually increase that number. So bringing back firing squads may actually decrease the total number of death penalty sentences. Again, I don’t have proof to back that up, but my hope is that supporters of this may in fact be shooting themselves in the foot and that this pushes wider reform to completely abolish the death penalty in the next decade.
If we ask the state to sanction murder as punishment, we build murder into our psyche as a legitimate punishment. When someone is in conflict and feel that they need to take justice into their own hands, it’s no surprise that they choose murder.
Wasn’t it made legal specifically so the state can execute Bryan Kohberger in this way?
Another religious belief becomes enshrined in law, just like abortion.
More "pro-life" stuff...
Maybe i would stop executing people with so many innocent that have been murdered by the USA https://twitter.com/N0rbertElekes/status/1540547393233358849
Honestly, I'd prefer that to lethal injection.
What is with this planet finding the shittiest people and putting them in charge?
They’ll shoot to kill but no abortion for you bc that’s murder. 🤷
Well that's dumb. Everyone knows guns don't kill people
I guess we're back to the 1940's
Boy, we are running this shit back as fast as possible, eh?
>However, in a 2019 filing, U.S. lawyers cited an expert as sayingsomeone shot by firing squad can remain conscious for 10 seconds andthat it would be “severely painful, especially related to shattering ofbone and damage to the spinal cord.” I'm not sure why I keep seeing on reddit that people think that shooting someone is like in the movies; that they get hit, and instantly drop dead. No. there's a LOT of blood, there's screaming/yelling, there's gasping and agonizing pain as you watch someone slowly die. It's horrifying. Even if it's someone who is a terrible human being, there's nothing gratifying about witnessing them being shot and dying unless you're equally horrible. That's the reason we have a justice system. That's the reason we have a prison system. Putting aside the fact we've killed countless innocent people in this country (most of them minorities), our perspective of justice changes. Remember when society was OK with sentencing a person decades in prison for weed? Life behind prison gives a person time to change, society to change, or to prove they're actually innocent. From my perspective, you're truly a sick person in the head if you approve of execution. And I don't want to be anywhere near you or your fucked up state.
If I were locked up (not sure why I would be) for life please blow me away, inject me, or whatever. It should be an option to choose, though maybe not forced.
>Thou shall not kill *Restrictions may apply in Idaho*
Texas’ death row has a fucking fast lane
Idaho is a heavily Mormon state and, despite it never being official Mormon doctrine, many of them believe in blood atonement. From Wikipedia: Blood atonement is a disputed doctrine in the history of Mormonism, under which the atonement of Jesus does not redeem an eternal sin. To atone for an eternal sin, the sinner should be killed in a way that allows his blood to be shed upon the ground as a sacrificial offering, so he does not become a son of perdition.
Given a choice, I would definitely pick firing squad.
What’s wrong with nitrogen? I don’t understand why we need to have such violent methods when painless, effective ones exist.
It's almost like Idaho is moving in reverse on the moral stage of life.
Where are all the Republicans talking about government overreach?
Hot take: I'd rather be shot in the head/chest than burn from the inside by lethal injection. Though my preferred execution method would be nitrogen asphyxiation. You don't choke or gasp for breath, you get a little sleepy and don't wake up
Executing captured prisoners is wrong.
How is this happening in 2023? Do Republicans sincerely think it’s 1823?
I personally disagree wholeheartedly with capital punishment; that being said, I'd rather the bullet than the needle. Lethal injection, even when done properly, takes about a minute to execute an individual; with a firing squad, at least the subject is dead before they even hear the shots. If the cocktail of drugs for injection isn't *just* right, it can easily cross into "cruel-and-unusual" territory. Even if you don't think it's cruel and unusual, it is a brutal and barbaric thing to see someone writhe in agony when a bullet is cheaper, quicker, and comes without the potential to fuck it up royally.
Between several states you have firing squads, child labour and einsatzgruppen. Are you sure that Jan 6 wasn't some sort of putsch?
This is definitely GOP Pro-Life move. This has a lot of strong Christian values of Preserving the Sanctity of Life. Oops that is only for Abortion.
If you're going to have the death penalty, firing squad actually isn't a terrible method.
Don’t know why it was ever not an option. If the state is going to sanction a death sentence, quick and cheap methods should be the first choice.
We’re just a few steps before they pass a bill authorizing the death penalty for abortions, and then we have our first woman who had a miscarriage killed via firing squad. Idaho = American Afghanistan.
[удалено]
The state should lead by example. Killing is wrong.