Death by Firing Squad still happens in the US

[teasasue]

Utah death row inmate seeking stay as firing squad execution nears - CNN.com

[Gonzo]

Are you against the death penalty?

[teasasue]

no I just didnt think anyone here in the states still used that method to kill someone. I think honestly if the punishment was a bit harsher like it used to be we would not have half the crime we did.

I mean really think about it would you rather die by injection or a firing squad,

[Gonzo]

if the punishment was a bit harsher like it used to be

So you honestly believe that one form of killing is more humane than another?

[Miisa]

The death penalty isn't half the deterrent that high case solving rates is. Ultimately, the death penalty is just the state killing people, basically to satisfy the vengeance blood lust of other people. Totally creepy.

[Ari]

Originally Posted by teasasue

no I just didnt think anyone here in the states still used that method to kill someone. I think honestly if the punishment was a bit harsher like it used to be we would not have half the crime we did.

Nah, just more dead people.

Originally Posted by teasasue

I mean really think about it would you rather die by injection or a firing squad,

Actually there are a number of concerns around lethal injection, how it is administered and the cocktail mix. There is the possibility that the dose of thiopental is too low to cause unconsciousness for long trapping the person in a stationary body. So while the firing squad looks more violent, it may actually be an easier way to go.

[teasasue]

ok no I dont really care how "humane" it is. I think if someone does a crime that they should get a punishment that would make other people stop and think about it before they commit the same crime.

I mean think about it you kill some one you get shot to death, the possibilities are endless with that, what happens if a few bullets miss, and you are still alive for a while. Bet you wished you hadnt killed that person now huh.

Were as what most other states have is the injection, you dont feel anything. I will go out and kill someone today get the last meal I want and they will pump me full of stuff that will knock me out and I feel nothing, What other than the death is there to be afraid of to stop you from the crime?

[Sock Puppet]

I'm not aware of a single study that shows the death penalty to be an effective deterrent, and have seen several that suggest the opposite. Generally people seem to consider it a deterrent because it's "common sense" or "self-evident" -- i.e, argumentum ex anus.

As for whether more gruesome methods would be more of a deterrent, I seriously doubt it. Most crime, especially violent crime, is committed by people who have serious problems with long-term thinking.

[Miisa]

By that logic, areas without a death penalty should have sky-high murder rates. Where I live, you get life for murder, which in practice means out in 12 years.

When people commit crimes they hardly ever have getting caught, let alone the punishment or how horribly they will die in mind. They commit crimes because they are desperate, poor and feel they have little left to lose, and everything to gain if (or as they see it, when) they get away with it. Or it is something that just happened because they were in a crappy situation, with bad company or strung out or whatever.

Spend a bit more money keeping kids from ever getting into those positions, and you will conquer crime in the long run much better than killing off the criminals ever might. New criminals are made every day, through school drop-outs, house foreclosures, unemployment, drug use, etc.

[BrotherMan]

Originally Posted by teasasue

ok no I dont really care how "humane" it is. I think if someone does a crime that they should get a punishment that would make other people stop and think about it before they commit the same crime.

You can't punish one person to prevent the possible crimes that might be committed by others. That is completely at odds with the purpose of the entirety of the judicial system.

[teasasue]

that is not necessarily true, not all crime is committed by kids, or people that dont have a lot of $$, a lot of crimes are actually committed by people with $$ and they use their $$ to get out of paying for the crimes they have committed. I have seen it too many times.

[teasasue]

Originally Posted by BrotherMan

You can't punish one person to prevent the possible crimes that might be committed by others. That is completely at odds with the purpose of the entirety of the judicial system.

no you would punish everyone that does that crime the same way, but it might make some stop and think about b4 they act on that crime.

[Sock Puppet]

Originally Posted by teasasue

that is not necessarily true, not all crime is committed by kids, or people that dont have a lot of $$

Nobody said either of those things. The point is not that crimes are committed only by kids and poor people, it's that people often become criminals because of problems in their lives that could be addressed and corrected. Solve those problems and you have fewer criminals, more people with decent lives, fewer prisons, and fewer executed corpses.

And as for your counterexamples, those people tend to be varying shades of sociopathic. And a sociopath isn't likely to be deterred by anything the authorities do.

[Miisa]

No, but everyone who commits crimes has been a kid, and they usually got set on some detrimental path because of their childhood/youth. Keep that from happening and get them on track and you will greatly reduce crime. Can you obliterate it? No, of course not, as people do commit crimes also because of passions such as jealousy or anger (in which case they pretty much never think of consequences and punishment) or because they are greedy (in which case they usually plan it out and honestly think they won't get caught, especially if other people have gotten away with similar crimes in the past). But think about it: where are you more afraid of getting hurt/killed: in an underprivileged neighborhood with gangs and poverty or at your (hypothetical) white-collar work in an insurance agency or whatever? In your middle-class home or at the line of the social security office?

ETA: ah, sock said it already, and more concisely to boot.

[teasasue]

Originally Posted by Sock Puppet

Nobody said either of those things. The point is not that crimes are committed only by kids and poor people, it's that people often become criminals because of problems in their lives that could be addressed and corrected. Solve those problems and you have fewer criminals, more people with decent lives, fewer prisons, and fewer executed corpses.

And as for your counterexamples, those people tend to be varying shades of sociopathic. And a sociopath isn't likely to be deterred by anything the authorities do.

ok so maybe murder is a bad example, not everyone that commits a crime has problems in their lives and/or are not sociopathic.

Take for example, you go out to eat with your significant other and get a little tipsy, neither should be driving, you leave the place any way hit some one and kill a whole family.

You were just celebrating a new raise or job or something nothing wrong at all.

If they had tougher laws in place to fit driving while under the influence you might have thought twice about going or drinking while you were out for that matter.
As it stands now most people see the punishment as a slap on the wrist and they go one their merry way and do it again.

[teasasue]

Just for the record I do understand what you are talking about when you say that if you come from a bad place then you are most likely to commit a crime, but that is not always the case.

and if the punishment fit the crime we may not have so many repeat offenders, they might actually streighten up and not do it again.

[Sock Puppet]

One, drunk driving laws are far more severe than they have been in the past, and in fact more egregious drunk driving killers are often charged with murder (often second degree, in some cases even first degree). Two, this was about the death penalty to begin with. Nobody is saying criminals shouldn't be punished. You're moving the goal posts.

[livius drusus]

Don't worry, teasasue. Lethal injection just looks easy. Studies suggest that in fact it's excruciatingly painful.

In most states three chemicals are used for lethal injection: Sodium thiopental, pancuronium bromide, and potassium chloride. The first of these is considered an ultra-short-acting bromide which is effective as an anesthesia for just a few minutes. The second, pancuronium bromide, marketed as Pavulon, paralyzes the skeletal muscles without affecting the nerves or brain. The individual injected with Pavulon is conscious without being able to move or speak, thus giving the impression of serenity or tranquility. In the state of Tennessee, it is a crime for veterinarians to use this drug in euthanizing pets. The final injection, potassium chloride, stops the heart while causing excruciating pain. The effect of this “cocktail,” according to testimony by Dr. Mark J.S. Heath who teaches anesthesiology at Columbia, is “that the sodium thiopental can be inadequate or wear off”…leaving “the prisoner conscious, paralyzed, suffocating and subject to extreme pain from the potassium chloride” (Liptak, NYT, 10/7/2003).

According to Judge Ellen Hobbs Lyle, “The subject gives all the appearances of a serene expiration when actually the subject is feeling and perceiving the excruciatingly painful ordeal of death by lethal injection…the Pavulon gives a false impression of serenity to viewers, making punishment by death more palatable and acceptable to society” (Liptak, NYT, 10/7/2003).

That should be enough to satisfy even your lust to inflict pain on people you assume have done wrong.

[teasasue]

not exactly, I just posted a link and then was asked if I disagreed with the the death penalty, and I made a commit about the punishments needing to fit the crime. So really its about all of it.

[zudo]

This was a fun time in my sociology class.

[California Tanker]

Nice thing about firing squad is it's about the only form of execution which allows organ donation afterwards. The guy asked for firing squad, so that's what it shall be.

NTM

[teasasue]

Originally Posted by California Tanker

Nice thing about firing squad is it's about the only form of execution which allows organ donation afterwards. The guy asked for firing squad, so that's what it shall be.

NTM

ok this may be a joke but I am going to ask any ways, how would that even be possible?

[Crumb]

Originally Posted by teasasue

Take for example, you go out to eat with your significant other and get a little tipsy, neither should be driving, you leave the place any way hit some one and kill a whole family.

You were just celebrating a new raise or job or something nothing wrong at all.

If they had tougher laws in place to fit driving while under the influence you might have thought twice about going or drinking while you were out for that matter.
As it stands now most people see the punishment as a slap on the wrist and they go one their merry way and do it again.

Wait are you saying that the driver should be put to death under those circumstances?

[Gonzo]

From my understanding people die from internal bleeding and loss of blood, not bullet holes in organs. The organs themselves should still be usuable as long as they are intact.

[teasasue]

Originally Posted by Crumb

Wait are you saying that the driver should be put to death under those circumstances?

no I am saying that if the punishment for that crime was more of a punishment the driver might have thought twice before drinking while out.