First, I'm NOT trying to re-start the debate on the penalty itself. Second, please pay attention to the big IF. IF you have a preference to HOW the death penalty should be carried out, what would it be: . Electric Chair . Gas Chamber . Firing Squad . Hanging .Lethal Injection I respect those of you who oppose the penalty, and once again, I'm NOT trying to flame anyone, just curious. Thanx.
I think gas would be the most humane way to go. A firing squad might be the most "honorable", in some situations. I generally like the idea of poetic justice, a "punishment that fits the crime", so maybe a firing squad is more appropriate when the murderer used a gun to kill his victims. That being said, I am generally not a supporter of the death penalty, but believe it should still be available for the most horrific crimes (such as serial killer rapists). I do not think lethal injection is as "humane" an execution method as many people make it out to be. It is not instantaneous, and in many cases can be excruciatingly painful.
I've always believed the punishment fits the crime option might be the best. After the entire process, when guilt has been established, and all appeals run out, there should only be two sentences: . Turn the offender over to the family/friends of the victim, or . The offender should suffer the same death as the victim.
That might be "fair", but I do not believe it would be the best for society. There is such a thing as mercy, and there are multiple advantages to being hesitant to mete out the harshest punishments. I really believe society could still continue to function perfectly fine even if a murder sentence was only 7 years (just speaking hypothetically). 7 years is still enough to dissuade most who could be dissuaded by punishment. If someone is not dissuaded from killing by the threat of 7 years in prison, chances are very small they would be dissuaded by the threat of 30 years either. Most people who commit murder do not think they will get caught. If they did, they would not have murdered in the first place. Or they simply lose control in a fit of rage, and no amount of certain punishment would be enough to stop them. Plus if you punish every murder with the death penalty, if someone kills once there's really not much incentive for them not to kill again. Some criminals find themselves in a situation where they have killed someone when that was not their original intention when they set out to commit their crime in the first place. Suddenly they find that they have become murderers unexpectedly. Many criminals who rob a bank, for example, really do not think they will have to hurt anyone, and really do not want to. But a situation could arise where they might have to so that they can escape. Or you might have a man who walks in on his wife in bed with another man, and kills the man in a fit of jealous anger. Maybe he is on the border about killing his wife, could go either way. Well, if he is facing the death penalty either way, why not? I just think the death penalty could lead to more people getting killed in many situations.
Hanging should be the default method for many reasons. First the sight---the image---of one of your peers dead on the end of the rope, has a strong psychological impact. And will serve as a warning not to "break bad." Second, it is almost foolproof, as long as the hangman follows a simple table of weights and measures to insure the condemed does not strangle to death or have his head torn off. Third, it is eco-friendly. Ropes are made from hemp---the wonder weed. Natural, organic, reusable, and biodegradable.
About the method. 1. It must be safe (in terms of rates of success) 2. It must not be cruel 3. It shouldn't create an association between commercially availabe products and "killing" (which presently is a problem, European drug makers not wanting to see their products intentionally killing people). My suggestion: Heroin. Heroin in the 1930s was patented under that name by the BAYER company as a pain killer. It has a known lethal dose and heroin overdose death (known as "Golden Shot") is anything but painful. In addition: Heroin deserves a bad reputation, its association with "death" would be helpful to society.
Gladiator battles or nitrogen asphyxia... or helium for laughs. More can go wrong with hanging, but done right there's nothing wrong with it. The problem with things like lethal injection is that it requires more technical expertise than is always available. Doctors won't help with executions, so they get botched. Years ago when I looked into this... I think 6 years was the average actual time served for non-1st degree murder. Sure they were sentenced for much longer than that, but the prisons had mandatory minimums for drug offenders to deal with... and you know, priorities.
Personally I am against the death penalty except in heinous crime circumstances, and then only when there is conclusive DNA evidence that ties the accused to the crime .. problem is none of the recognised methods of execution are without issues.
I suggested gladiatorial games a while ago, but I got a lot of "Cruel and unusual" punishment responses. My personal preference would be firing squad, dispensed by professional marksmen. Your standard prison guard just doesn't have the necessary training. Enjoy!
Until the DP can be carried out with a 100% non failure rate (no innocent people murdered by the state ie you and us), I do not support it even though I sometimes want to kill some of the criminals with my bare hands (sorry God). Even with a 100% rate I dont know which would be more humane. What about say a 400 ton weight being raised 50 meters inside a 6' tube of reinforced concrete where the criminal would be placed in the bottom, release the weight and it would be instant death. If the state wanted to be real nice the criminal could receive some Valium etc in his cell and be sleeping when the deed was done. Not mush could go wrong with that eh? It would be messy though. ~Yes pun was intended~ reva
Hanging in the town square at high noon, lunch vendors available except for federal government, then the White House lawn would be appropriate.
Any crime that ganders the support of twelve of the perpetrators peers should be a hanging offense like in days of old a man's horse was stolen. Humane? You're trying to kill them so just what does humane have to do with it? God save us from all the "politically" correct citizens.
I say use the most inhumane method possible, Toothpick their eyes wide open and force them to watch an endless loop of all Republican debates.
