I don't think it is the easiest or the most sensible. the vast majority of Americans want the death penalty, even in California, hands down the most liberal state in the country it was overwhelmingly supported in a recent referendum.
the real issue is people are allowed to file decades of bogus appeals that have no legal basis and have them heard. you should get one appeal, and every appeal after that should not stay the execution date. if the courts can't resolve whether or not the state is violating your religious rights by hanging you for murdering two women and an 8 year old girl (I **** you not that was an actual appeal a court entertained for 10 years ) in time that should be tough stuff.
Should be easy, though. Yeah, it might be a little slow but just slowly draw out the level of oxygen in the room until it's over. The person will passout and should be harmless. I mean, if people can stick a hose in their car window from their exhaust to do it themselves, I think we can actually design something pretty efficiently.
Once more tanks of nitrogen seems both a dirt cheap way and a very humane way of killing someone.
Following a three-month investigation, a NASA board of inquiry concluded that a last-minute change in testing procedures, coupled with a breakdown in communications at the space center, caused the accident.
Actually when you breathe in 100% nitrogen you almost instantly lose consciousness as the air in the brain is displaced. Its EXTREMLY dangerous in refineries and kills many people before they even knew what was going on. They are walking along in some tunnel or inside a silo, get a little bit dizzy for a few seconds. Then fall over unconscious.
Personally, I'd prefer a very stern lecture. Perhaps accompanied by a "this practice must cease forthwith" memo.
That's it...you're going to get a death by PowerPoint execution.
YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!
Oh, the inhumanity.... not the PowerPoint!
How about death by Snu-Snu instead? :lamo
So just because people want it we should be sentencing people to death? It should be abolished, the government should not be in the business of killing potentially innocent people. It is something people want until they actually get it.
This case contributed a lot towards the abolition of the death penalty in the UK. I am against the death penalty because of mistakes like this. I wonder if people who support the death penalty would be so supportive if they were the victim of a miscarriage of justice.
BBC Blogs - Wales - The execution of Timothy Evans
That's cruel.
well in a representative republic with democratic institutions it's certainly not a minor reason.
every time the death penalty has been either it's own issue (not one time has a death penalty law been repealed referendum) or a major one in US elections (such as the election of Governor Pataki in NY) It has won.
so there is no political will to abolish it, the states without a death penalty either never had it in the first place (Alaska, Wisconsin, and Minnesota) or repealed it only when it was viewed as poltiically safe, in states with no mechanism for a referendum. the people who oppose DP in this country are a vocal minority, whereas supporters are a broad bipartisan group.
What does "potentially innocent" mean in a legal context? if you go to trial there is no option for a jury to decide "potentially innocent" either you're guilty or not guilty. That's the way the system has to work. after all why lock up potentially innocent people in prison? If you have an appeal based on reasonable error or reversible error by the trial court that is one thing. but trying to claim you're "potentially innocent" when the state proved beyond reasonable doubt one was guilty is another. And no one can point to someone who can be proven to be innocent who was executed since the 1970s. at most there's a handful of cases that involve technical arguments or people choosing to believe defense theories that trial and appeal courts rejected.
There's another side to this, and this is a serious question, have you been to your province's parliament building? are you aware of what occured there in the 1980s? look that up, and that will be another argument for why we need the death penalty....
I was just finishing a true crime book. The assailant is found guilty and condemned to die, and the judge gives him the option to die by either lethal injection or firing squad. He picked firing squad.
At that point, I thought I started wondering which option I would pick. I think I would rather get a firing squad than a lethal injection. A firing squad seems quicker and actually more humane. With a lethal injection, you will get a IV in the arm and wait to die while the drugs take effect.
Public opinion seems to be that a firing squad is less humane, but if you put yourself in the condemned person's shoes do you see it differently?
What are your thoughts?
No you cannot always release someone from prison, people occassionally die in prison.You only have to be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, not any doubt. There is still a chance of innocence, not much, but it still exists and you can always release someone form prison,
I know exactly what happened and the man responsible went to prison and was released later, he now lives a normal life with his family in rural Quebec hurting no one. I would say that is much desirable outcome.
Horrible situation.
Many people are going to suffer thousands of years, but as a Jew I believe less then on in thousand people will suffer eternally.
There something odd here as over my lifespan I been in a room at my vet with a beloved pet a dozen or more time when it came time to end his or her life.
One time the vet even came to my home to take care of the deed and my cat was on my lap when he was given his shots.
At no time did any of them seem to suffer in any manner so why is this so must harder to do when it come to humans and why do we need special and hard to get drugs when drugs that can do the deed can be found in lock boxes at any vet?
The whole thing seem odds.
Hanging
No you cannot always release someone from prison, people occassionally die in prison.
And I only wish one could say the same for his victims, that's not what I consider a desirable outcome. In fact it's an outcome that basically says we value the lives of people who commit murder above yours. Your life is not worth near as much as the man who took it, is the message relayed by the outcome. and maybe in Canada that flies, but plenty of places in the US there would be vigilantes waiting for that guy, and that's definitely NOT a desirable outcome.
And the reason to use Lortie's case is because, in a society with a death penalty, he would've pled guilty to avoid execution, and take life in prison without parole, in a society with no death penalty, not only does he not even get a life sentence, for a mass shooting with a machine gun (and I guess another success of gun control while we're at it) he paroles out in twelve years! That is not Justice, that is a mockery of the process of justice.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?