gazza Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 Less hassle? Guns are messy, noisy, plenty of potential to go wrong, and some poor sap has to spend his day blowing people's brains out. There's a handful of good reasons for you there. use a washable room, with a silancer, theres 2 problems gone. cant see any poential problems myself, please share, What is the diffrence of some poor sap having to blow there heads off to sicking a needle in them, your still killing them, so cant see that as a good reason, Any more good reasons you can find Are you kidding me? A solution to something making a horrible mess is to just do it in a washable room? What the fuck is a washable room anyway? You gonna cover the walls in cling film? Silencers lower muzzle velocity, by the way. You're telling me there's no difference in psychological impact between quietly injecting somebody with a drug which will quickly kill them, and blowing a hole in them? :/ now why would you want to use cling film, that would take hours , build a room, soundproof it when u build it, tile it and put drains in the floor, cant really see the problem, and if u wanted to be really picky, we could do away with say a gun that could make the mess, and use say a bolt gun they use on cattle, 9/10 times the bolt stays in the head, so less mess, its not as if we going crazy and using a 12 bore shotgun at point blank range, (now that is messy site to see) im sure slowing the gun down wont cuase to many problems at that range and bolt guns are not that loud if we go that way, well the gun will kill them quickly as well but yes i see your point, but then again, if your willing to kill the person, then really it should not matter how its done to the person, just think people apply for these jobs, they may enjoy it, but to save that problem, they could rig up some sort of holding device that the gun/bolt sits in, pointed at said person, and get the inmates that are on death row to fire it remotely, They wont have long to live so the psychological impact will be less, plus bo time off from stress so better that way and some of them may enjoy it, or U dont need to tell them, tell them they have a 50/50 chance of winning a prize if they press the right button on the remote device, hell both buttons set the gun off, so win win, really cant see the problem here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrighty Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 What I don't understand in all of this is why several US states have to purchase these drugs from what appears to be a backstreet chemistry lab. They're US states FFS! Can't they produce their own sodium thiopental? But, if they can't, I don't have a problem with a UK company supplying them. Aids the UK economy presuming this drug company pays its taxes etc, and since the practice of capital punishment is legal over there, where's the harm? It's certainly nowhere near as bad as the UK selling arms to the vile medieval theocracy that is Saudi Arabia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 I don't know about running comparisons with selling arms to other countries. It is maybe an interesting thing to look at, however, when it comes to double standards. It's part of nature of the British state to make a few bob out of what other nation states do in using violence against their own people or another country's. But the problem is supposed to be based on the fact that Britain is supposed to be taking the moral high ground in its abolition of capital punishment, yet we facilitate other countries dealing with their criminals in that matter by letting them buy the supplies they need. I don't really go for the 'each to their own' argument. The people on death row in America are still people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrighty Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 But the problem is supposed to be based on the fact that Britain is supposed to be taking the moral high ground in its abolition of capital punishment, yet we facilitate other countries dealing with their criminals in that matter by letting them buy the supplies they need. That argument would be valid if it were the UK government or the NHS supplying the drugs to the US, but if it's just a bloke in the back of a driving school, presumably trading with the relevant licenses etc. then I think it would be a little OTT for the UK government to get all shirty about it and shut him down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RamseyMike Posted January 29, 2011 Share Posted January 29, 2011 Firing Squad, Hanging, Gas chamber and Electrocution are offered by some states as an alternative to injection if so desired by the prisoner http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/methods-execution Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alias Posted January 29, 2011 Share Posted January 29, 2011 Less hassle? Guns are messy, noisy, plenty of potential to go wrong, and some poor sap has to spend his day blowing people's brains out. There's a handful of good reasons for you there. use a washable room, with a silancer, theres 2 problems gone. cant see any poential problems myself, please share, What is the diffrence of some poor sap having to blow there heads off to sicking a needle in them, your still killing them, so cant see that as a good reason, Any more good reasons you can find Are you kidding me? A solution to something making a horrible mess is to just do it in a washable room? What the fuck is a washable room anyway? You gonna cover the walls in cling film? Silencers lower muzzle velocity, by the way. You're telling me there's no difference in psychological impact between quietly injecting somebody with a drug which will quickly kill them, and blowing a hole in them? :/ now why would you want to use cling film, that would take hours , build a room, soundproof it when u build it, tile it and put drains in the floor, cant really see the problem, and if u wanted to be really picky, we could do away with say a gun that could make the mess, and use say a bolt gun they use on cattle, 9/10 times the bolt stays in the head, so less mess, its not as if we going crazy and using a 12 bore shotgun at point blank range, (now that is messy site to see) im sure slowing the gun down wont cuase to many problems at that range and bolt guns are not that loud if we go that way, well the gun will kill them quickly as well but yes i see your point, but then again, if your willing to kill the person, then really it should not matter how its done to the person, just think people apply for these jobs, they may enjoy it, but to save that problem, they could rig up some sort of holding device that the gun/bolt sits in, pointed at said person, and get the inmates that are on death row to fire it remotely, They wont have long to live so the psychological impact will be less, plus bo time off from stress so better that way and some of them may enjoy it, or U dont need to tell them, tell them they have a 50/50 chance of winning a prize if they press the right button on the remote device, hell both buttons set the gun off, so win win, really cant see the problem here Gabrielle Giffords? A shot through the brain can be non-lethal, instead just causing primary brain damage and mental incapacity in some area. There are some areas of the brain which would guarantee fatality, but you can't guarantee this for a gun without serious (and IMO wrong) configuration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazza Posted January 29, 2011 Share Posted January 29, 2011 Gabrielle Giffords? A shot through the brain can be non-lethal, instead just causing primary brain damage and mental incapacity in some area. There are some areas of the brain which would guarantee fatality, but you can't guarantee this for a gun without serious (and IMO wrong) configuration. thats why im sure if you use 3 shots there be no problem, just to make sure the jobs donme Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballaughbiker Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Isn't the Indy fabulous? Execution MAY have gone wrong....... Well did it or didn't it and where is this evidence that can be scrutinised by people who know what they're talking about and not just journos making a living from any old story especially one so emotive. Sodium thiopentone is a very powerful anaesthetic agent that was used for 30 years as an intravenous induction agent. I believe it went out of favour as it was too long lasting and it's shorter acting cousin methohexitone took over in the 60s. Overdose by sodium thiopentone can produce death due to respiratory depression on its own given an adequate dose. This story wants to make you think that just because it's supplied from the same premises as a taxi firm, it might be home made. Do we know that? Does the Indy have any evidence of that? If previous administrations were a problem, its failure is completely down to the person administrating the drug, not the supplier. It's not very difficult to determine if surgical anaesthesia has been attained and if it hasn't then the procedure should not continue. If it does, any consequence of it's failure is not the fault of the supplier. Even the most sadistic killer has the right to a painless execution if that's what society decides to do in response to their crime.However, if the executor is incompetent then a perfect drug regime will fail. It then matters not one jot where it came from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 That argument would be valid if it were the UK government or the NHS supplying the drugs to the US, but if it's just a bloke in the back of a driving school, presumably trading with the relevant licenses etc. then I think it would be a little OTT for the UK government to get all shirty about it and shut him down. I think I would agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RU4Real Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Isn't the Indy fabulous? Execution MAY have gone wrong....... Well did it or didn't it and where is this evidence that can be scrutinised by people who know what they're talking about and not just journos making a living from any old story especially one so emotive. Sodium thiopentone is a very powerful anaesthetic agent that was used for 30 years as an intravenous induction agent. I believe it went out of favour as it was too long lasting and it's shorter acting cousin methohexitone took over in the 60s. Overdose by sodium thiopentone can produce death due to respiratory depression on its own given an adequate dose. This story wants to make you think that just because it's supplied from the same premises as a taxi firm, it might be home made. Do we know that? Does the Indy have any evidence of that? If previous administrations were a problem, its failure is completely down to the person administrating the drug, not the supplier. It's not very difficult to determine if surgical anaesthesia has been attained and if it hasn't then the procedure should not continue. If it does, any consequence of it's failure is not the fault of the supplier. Even the most sadistic killer has the right to a painless execution if that's what society decides to do in response to their crime.However, if the executor is incompetent then a perfect drug regime will fail. It then matters not one jot where it came from. I can't think of the name of him, but he was an MP who got put into jail for fraud i think and after selling a book, he made some programs and one of these was what was the best way to kill someone. it worked out that it was some type of laughing gas which made them happy as they died. depends on offence i suppose, but two for one. they're happy, we're happy, how good is that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.