this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2023
470 points (98.4% liked)

News

23409 readers
2807 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Alabama is seeking to become the first state to execute a prisoner by making him breathe pure nitrogen.

The Alabama attorney general’s office on Friday asked the state Supreme Court to set an execution date for death row inmate Kenneth Eugene Smith, 58. The court filing indicated Alabama plans to put him to death by nitrogen hypoxia, an execution method that is authorized in three states but has never been used.

Nitrogen hypoxia is caused by forcing the inmate to breathe only nitrogen, depriving them of oxygen and causing them to die. Nitrogen makes up 78% of the air inhaled by humans and is harmless when inhaled with oxygen. While proponents of the new method have theorized it would be painless, opponents have likened it to human experimentation.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Serious question. Why don't we just shoot them? I'm pretty sure bullets are cheaper than any chemical we use and it's instantly effective. You can't really mess it up either especially if you built a contraption the make sure the bullet hits the base of the skull.

Or fuck even one of those things they use for cattle. I just don't understand why we seem to choose expensive options when the cheapest solution is right there.

[–] [email protected] 56 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (6 children)

Nitrogen is pretty cheap, and would be considered way more human. Bullets aren't an instant death, the cattle thing would be but considered brutal. Both a firing squad and cattle thing would be considered cruel and unusual punishment, the SCOTUS has already said firing squads are cruel and unusual. The classic three drug cocktail was painless but no one will.make it.

Nitrogen makes you feel.like.your drunk, nitrogen narcosis, until you pass out. It is considered painless.

But the real question you should be asking is, why do we even still allow the death penalty. Innocent people have been put to death. Or at least enough doubt that they shouldn't have been killed.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But revenge is more important then justice. /s

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

The 3 drug cocktail worked, but it was often a minimally-trained technician charged with placing the actual IV lines. I know most of us have had an IV sometime in our life with relatively little pain, but that seems not to be the case for some inmates. Anxiety, old age, obesity, dehydration, and myriad other reasons can make it more challenging to place a catheter.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Bullets aren't an instant death, the cattle thing would be but considered brutal.

Bullets and the cattle thing are both instant when they are fired at the right part of the brain. Why is more brutal and less humane? If it kills them immediately, then it’s as humane as killing someone gets.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Firing squads didn't shoot you in the head.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I didn’t say they should use a firing squad. I said they could shoot you in the part of the brain with a bullet that will kill you instantly.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And it is illegal per cruel and unusual punishment clause.of the Constitution

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Why is it cruel and unusual to kill someone instantly with a bullet and not cruel and unusual to electrocute or hang someone?

It’s not actually written in the constitution that killing someone instantly with a bullet is a cruel and unusual punishment. It’s an interpretation of the constitution that is frankly bizarre considering the ways we do actually execute people.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Bullets are as instant death as it gets. For a couple bucks you can headshot someone with a 50 cal, you can vaporize the brain way before neurons can propagate... Literally impossible to feel pain physically

Humane isn't about the victim though, it's about the observers. Nitrogen is painless and it's not until the last moments the victim even notices, but in those last months there might be panic

If you disagree with my point, ask yourself... Heroin or fentanyl OD is probably about the cheapest and most pleasant death, why has it never even been considered?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I think fentanyl is a great solution, if you're going to allow the death penalty, which I'm against. And it's more than just a bullet. Read the SCOTUS decision that banned firing squads. The cruel and inhuman part isn't even the pain felt, it's the terror inflicted waiting for it to happen. Psychologically it is far worse waiting for a gun shot than an injection that will put you to sleep and numb you. Mentally there is a huge difference. It is psychological terror, and therefore cruel and inhuman punishment.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 year ago

I would rather be shot than nitrogen then because I want to die sober.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

People can survive gunshots (even momentarily), it's messy, and it looks scary. Honestly nitrogen hypoxia is not the worst way to go, I'd choose it over getting my brain blasted. Ideally we wouldn't do it at all.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They want to look painless and bloodless.

I am against the death penalty. Its only purpose is vengeance.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm torn on it honestly.

On one hand I don't want innocent people killed by it but on the other I believe certain people don't deserve to keep living after their crimes.

But I'll never understand how "humane" just means "doesn't leave a mess"

If it's faster and cheaper it should be implemented.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

You're correct to identify that your position is inconsistent - (A) not wanting the innocent to be wrongly executed and (B) wanting the option to enact retributive punishment against certain offenders.

Let's analyze these two imperatives:

The benefits of (A) are quite self evident. It's bad to execute people for no reason. It's maybe the most brutal and terrifying thing the state can do to a person. And where there exists capital punishment, it happens with non-zero probability.

The benefits of (B) are that you get a nice bellyfeel that you've set the universe into karmic alignment. Since there's no evidence that capital punishment has a deterrent effect on crime (this can be proven by comparison of statistics between states/countries with capital punishment and without), this is really the ONLY benefit of position (B).

So if you want to prioritize what's best overall for reducing harm in society, then select (A). If you enjoy appointing yourself the moral arbiter of karma by enforcing who "deserves" to live and die (and killing some innocent people is a price worth paying), then select (B).

Simples!

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

It’s hard for the people doing the execution. That’s why the traditional firing squad gives some of the shooters blanks: so they can convince themselves they’re not the killer.

Pulling a lever in another room for a method that looks calm and painless is a lot easier for the killers.