Total Posts:5|Showing Posts:1-5
Jump to topic:

Good article on capital punishment

16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2015 5:50:07 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/11/2015 12:54:26 PM, ben2974 wrote:
http://www.theatlantic.com...

I am not going to really refute the costs and innocent argument, but the argument of pain.

It would reduce pain. It cites a few examples of bungled executions. So what? Honestly I don't care about how much the murderer feels, as he lost his right to life. Regardless, I still think on balance the firing squad would be effective.

The bullets don't have to hit a heart to kill someone. The marksman must have been totally incompetent. The 1800s example is weak because we do not know which firearms were used.

Actually, he never tells us. For all we know they could have used 5.56 NATO in the second execution. I can (almost) guarantee .30, 4 shots, in the chest would cause death. And we do not know if hollow point is used. Hollow point makes a 9mm a .45. A .30 hollow point would cause a huge amount of tearing damage, and 4 bullets on the chest would cause death even if there is no *direct* heart hit. Arteries and lungs would be punctured, he would die within seconds.

This also might sound evil, but if he fell why call in doctors? The goal is to kill him. Honestly they should have shot again :P

You can also increase the size of the firing squad (I think the article said 5), to seven or ten. I also think that you should have some competence with a gun. Being a cop =/= good shot. Only people with certain scores at the firing range should be allowed in.

I mean there are a lot of things which could be done to reform the firing squad system and make it painless. Maybe even use double tap :P

It should also be noted the supreme court ruled the method constitutional.

And, on balance, death occurs faster under firing squads, despite the two horror stories.
http://www.csmonitor.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
Varrack
Posts: 2,410
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2015 6:09:44 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/11/2015 5:50:07 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 3/11/2015 12:54:26 PM, ben2974 wrote:
http://www.theatlantic.com...

I am not going to really refute the costs and innocent argument, but the argument of pain.

It would reduce pain. It cites a few examples of bungled executions. So what? Honestly I don't care about how much the murderer feels, as he lost his right to life. Regardless, I still think on balance the firing squad would be effective.

The bullets don't have to hit a heart to kill someone. The marksman must have been totally incompetent. The 1800s example is weak because we do not know which firearms were used.

Actually, he never tells us. For all we know they could have used 5.56 NATO in the second execution. I can (almost) guarantee .30, 4 shots, in the chest would cause death. And we do not know if hollow point is used. Hollow point makes a 9mm a .45. A .30 hollow point would cause a huge amount of tearing damage, and 4 bullets on the chest would cause death even if there is no *direct* heart hit. Arteries and lungs would be punctured, he would die within seconds.

This also might sound evil, but if he fell why call in doctors? The goal is to kill him. Honestly they should have shot again :P

You can also increase the size of the firing squad (I think the article said 5), to seven or ten. I also think that you should have some competence with a gun. Being a cop =/= good shot. Only people with certain scores at the firing range should be allowed in.

I mean there are a lot of things which could be done to reform the firing squad system and make it painless. Maybe even use double tap :P

It should also be noted the supreme court ruled the method constitutional.

And, on balance, death occurs faster under firing squads, despite the two horror stories.
http://www.csmonitor.com...

The firing squad may give someone a 1 minute death but how do we know the 9 minute death from the lethal injection is more painful? That one minute is probably extremely painful with a bullet in your chest and a lethal injection may just be: you sit there...you sit there...you're dead.
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2015 6:11:30 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/11/2015 6:09:44 PM, Varrack wrote:
At 3/11/2015 5:50:07 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 3/11/2015 12:54:26 PM, ben2974 wrote:
http://www.theatlantic.com...

I am not going to really refute the costs and innocent argument, but the argument of pain.

It would reduce pain. It cites a few examples of bungled executions. So what? Honestly I don't care about how much the murderer feels, as he lost his right to life. Regardless, I still think on balance the firing squad would be effective.

The bullets don't have to hit a heart to kill someone. The marksman must have been totally incompetent. The 1800s example is weak because we do not know which firearms were used.

Actually, he never tells us. For all we know they could have used 5.56 NATO in the second execution. I can (almost) guarantee .30, 4 shots, in the chest would cause death. And we do not know if hollow point is used. Hollow point makes a 9mm a .45. A .30 hollow point would cause a huge amount of tearing damage, and 4 bullets on the chest would cause death even if there is no *direct* heart hit. Arteries and lungs would be punctured, he would die within seconds.

This also might sound evil, but if he fell why call in doctors? The goal is to kill him. Honestly they should have shot again :P

You can also increase the size of the firing squad (I think the article said 5), to seven or ten. I also think that you should have some competence with a gun. Being a cop =/= good shot. Only people with certain scores at the firing range should be allowed in.

I mean there are a lot of things which could be done to reform the firing squad system and make it painless. Maybe even use double tap :P

It should also be noted the supreme court ruled the method constitutional.

And, on balance, death occurs faster under firing squads, despite the two horror stories.
http://www.csmonitor.com...

The firing squad may give someone a 1 minute death but how do we know the 9 minute death from the lethal injection is more painful? That one minute is probably extremely painful with a bullet in your chest and a lethal injection may just be: you sit there...you sit there...you're dead.

The question is who cares? I support electrocution even though it is probably the most painful method.

The one minute doesn't hurt at all. Blood loss = pass out. They would immediately pass out and die. But again, who cares
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
ford_prefect
Posts: 4,138
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2015 6:14:04 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
People who support capital punishment should be used as test subjects to see which of the methods is most efficient and causes the correct amount of pain :)