“Kenny just began to gasp for air repeatedly and the execution took about 25 minutes total.”

Pretty compassionate way to kill a person.

Once again, the Law in the south is brutal.

    • Neil@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      10 months ago

      I’ll admit it. I’m one of them.

      The report is in direct conflict with what I’ve seen and heard in the past about this method. It’s impossible to find right now on Google, but there was a documentary where someone subjects themselves to this method and it was the complete opposite of what’s being reported now.

      I’m against the death penalty, btw, but if it has to be done, I believed this method was the most humane. I have to ask if it was 100% nitrogen or did they do what the justice system always does and run it through hundreds of iterations to actually make it worse, like 50% air, 50% nitrogen or something like that.

    • dustyData@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      10 months ago

      We are here, learn to read. They did it wrong, just like they usually botch every single form of execution because cruelty is the point. Thus, stop all execution and remove the dead penalty.

    • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      The difference between a model and reality is often in the implementation. Clearly, this person had access to oxygen for 22 minutes after the execution started, which is a problem if you goal is to suffocate someone quickly. He was also suffering, which is possibly an indication that CO2 levels were too high, which would be another problem. It could also just be due to stress, which is unavoidable in an execution. Seizures near the time of death are also likely.

      Ultimately, inert gas asphyxiation, if done correctly, is still probably the most humane means of execution, except for a large caliber bullet to the brain, which is very messy.

      These issues are all secondary to the question of whether capital punishment should ever be used. I’ve stated my beliefs on that before. In short, it should never be done but if you’re going to do it, it should be as humane as possible.

      • evranch@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        Captive bolt would be just as lethal as a bullet, and less messy. They’re designed not to make a mess ever since BSE, you don’t want to get brains everywhere. Yes that sounds grisly but I run a ranch, it’s something we have to talk about.

        They could use a custom designed unit, but if the ones we use can drop a full grown bull, I suspect they would be adequate.

        A small and fast bullet like .22 Magnum is also extremely effective and leaves no mark except a tiny clean hole, at least on livestock. But they have different skulls from humans. I’m sure those ballistic gel guys could come up with the optimum bullet and load.

        • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          I don’t know all the details, but more than a few people have survived head shots with small caliber rounds. Captive bolt would certainly be as effective and pretty painless, which really should be the goal if you’re considering capital punishment.

          • evranch@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Definitely small calibers have terminal performance issues. They lose energy fast at long range, barrel length and weight are critical, quality control is just plain not as good on cheap rimfire ammo. We had a guy in to butcher a batch of lambs for us awhile ago and his .22 misfired over 5 times…

            That’s why .22 is banned for hunting in most places because while it can easily be deadly, it’s not reliably so.

            When we do it ourselves I use .22 Magnum even on small animals like lambs because it’s MUCH more deadly, it’s never failed me.

      • Rediphile@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        There are plenty of humane ways to kill when drugs/sedatives are involved.

        In my opinion, the real issue is people won’t be satisfied with someone feeling high or relaxed or whatever before dying (if their death was supposed to be a punishment). But those same people also don’t want suffering…? It’s very confusing to me.

        • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Yeah, it’s a tough call to determine if this is due to incompetence or malice. A lot of people seem to relish the suffering.