Can We as Engineers Find a More Humane Way to Execute People?

This is a philosophical issue. As individuals, we have to decide if we are comfortable with giving any other person the right to take a human life. I wont go into all the arguments for and against, we have all heard them before. I'll just say this, if anyone thought they would be caught, would they commit the crime?

Should we, as engineers, be involved? I'm sure some people would, as this sort of thing appeals to the dark side of human nature that we all have. Look at the cost of defense R & D. This has the same fundamental purpose.

Whatever the method, there has to be a person who takes the final decision, who signs the death warrant, if you will. Ultimately, this responsibility rests with politicians. Are we comfortable with that? I don't hear many CR4 members saying positive things about politicians, yet we seem willing to let them have the ultimate authority!

I would contend that there is no possible reason to take a life. We are living in the 21st century, I feel we should act like it. Lets not execute people at all.

It is as you say...

If we avoid the ethical issues..it is trivially easy.
It's the beurocrats, lawyers etc who make it difficult (and finding someone who will do the job).

We put pets to sleep kill sick animals with no problem, cuddle 'em and give 'em one injection. We don't keep e'm hanging about on death row for years then make a song and dance about the whole thing for a day and then find someone bottles out at the last minute.

Or just give 'em semtex pyjamas one night.... mind you'll have a hell of a job finding a cleaner to clear up afterwards.

Maybe they should be harnessed to BIG treadmills to generate 'green' electricity . Or they could power big ships 'pleasure craft'? (I think the Romans had a perfectly sound system for this). Send 'em to the moon, Iraq, Australia, a small island off the coast of Scotland? Or just elect 'em as President/Prime Minister?

(I'll leave you to sort the jokes from the serious yourselves...don't shoot ...I didn't ask the question)

Del

I do think its most inhumane to keep someone on 'death row' for so many years waiting for a pardon which rarely comes...

I also think a death sentence shouldn't be needed in a modern society, but there will always be someone who demands it as a form of retribution...

I, as I'm sure we all have, have read several articles on the inhumane ways the death sentence is carried out, even when the prisoner is decapitated, there are many stories of how the head continues to focus eyes and listen to noise for several minutes after removal...

To be honest, I don't think there is a humane way to kill someone... Unless it was without telling them and giving them a lethal injection maybe?

John.

Hi Electroman

I'm strongly opposed to the death penalty, but I don't see humane execution as a technical problem. I had a minor op a few years back. The guy put a needle in my vein, and I expected to see him inject the drug and then to feel myself drift off. In fact the next thing I knew I was waking up, it was all over. Obviously they could have cut my head off and I'd have known nothing about it, if they'd been inclined! I'm sure plenty of others have had a similar experience.

Cheers....Codey

IMHO, Killing people is best left to doctors.

I'm all for the death penalty for people who have a total disregard for other human life! I also think they should be made to suffer! I know that there have been mistakes in the past with innocent people, but in these times of child killers and mass murderers, we put them in a comfy cell with a TV, lots of free leisure time and then let them out 2 years later only to find they go and rape a girl, kill her baby, then go down to the pub for a few beers as if nothing had happened! You tell me, what can you do with these peop animals? I say purge them from society, Bring back the gallows! They get what they deserve.

I'm a gentle type of guy who is very level headed (except when I start thinking about strange contraptions), I hate to see anything suffer be it man or beast so for me to say the above shows how strong I feel about it. Sorry if I don't share everybody's view on this.

I've said my peace.

The way I would use to kill someone who has killed another human being is to use the same method they used to kill.

Something like "An Eye for an Eye and a Tooth for a Tooth" situation.

but in these times of child killers and mass murderers.

I think you are making the classic mistake of believing things are worse now.

I don't think this is so...I think that it is just rammed down our throats by mass media. It is probably much lower now on a per-capita basis

All this media feeding frenzy about paedophiles is over-reaction. It has always gone on... back in the medeival times the age of consent was 12!
(Don't get get me wrong...this stuff is awfull and abhorrent...it just ain't new)
Del

PS I vove the 'Rant switch' smiley... I need on of those

I agree,

One other point to make is that whenever the death penalty is raised, there are some that say it is not proven that the death penalty reduces violent crime and murders, etc. YET, the politicians (in the US anyway) make 1st degree murder a felony that rarely if ever has a death penalty, BUT if you kill a policeman, court officer or high ranking politician the death penalty is required. A double standard?

My 2 cents worth.

Another double standard is a person in a position of public trust (policemen, officers of the court etc.) are supposed to be held accountable with twice the standard punishment for a crime but this is rarely so. Usually just a slap on the hand to what they, by law, were suppose to get.

Brad

The death penalty has been done away with. Government do not even consider more humane ways off paying for the keep of culprits.

Check out Texas! They have put in an express lane!

And besides execution is supposed to be as ghastly as possible. That is how it is supposed to deter those who would commit a capital crime.

What we as engineers could do is to make as sure as humanly possible that we have the right person. (new forensic tests etc.)

See ya, Blue

To me I would think the wait and the show that goes on is worst part of being executed. I do not think that there is any thing humane about it. Just a necessary means to insure law and order. In no way does the death of the convicted atone them for the death of the victim. So I say one day on the convicts daily walk the the exercise yard he is terminated.

The victim never recieved a lavish last meal. To have confession. To say good bye to family and friends.

Leads cheap.

Isn't that an Oxymoron. A Humane execution.

If you want the satisfaction of executing someone, do it yourself. i.e. strangle with hands.

If you want a machine to do it. Where is your Humanity? Are they just meat? Are we then "better than they are"?

Give them a gaol (jail) cell with a supplied rope. Let them do the walking.

Not everyone is Guilty. How many times have executed people been later found innocent. I saw a 60minutes program in the early 90's and they said there were 5% of executed criminals later found Not Guilty.

How about a jar of honey a pair of hand-cuffs and a hole deep enough to cover there sholders may be a rat or two like some indians useto do not that I like to see sufering but put them in poblic view and we mite cure the previos entery on work force as well oh thro a ceo in if his greed is such that his great great grandchildren coudnt spend all the money he has there should be a cap and the exses spent on pore folk that are to lazy-crazy or uneducated to suport them selfs

"I have to say for me this is not a question I tackle with any enthusiasm."

Why execute a criminal? He/she has taken a human life and is no longer suited to be a member of society. In most cultures around the world a murderer is considered to have forfeited his right to live in society.

Any method that is very quick, and relatively painless should be acceptable. Lethal injection or Dr. Guillotine's fast acting machine do the job quickly and are essentially pain free. The anticipation may be somewhat fearful but that would be the case with any method. Its the bleading heart liberals and the squeamish who complain about execution as being cruel and unusual punishment! One of the cruelest was a Roman crucifixion!

I can't see how keeping someone caged like an animal for years is humane.

I can't see how making the tax payers foot the bill for it is humane.

I can't see how letting them loose to do whatever it is they did before is humane.

The people themselves were not humane when they committed their crimes.

Where did I read about someone, I think it was in France, took a guy's head after he got the guillotine, and yelled at him really loud and the guy (the head) opened his eyes. So who's to say that we are being all that humane with all those controls and methods. It's not like we can ask the guy if it hurt.

I like the Russian method. A bullet in the head. Fast, cheap, final. It's more humane for the people who are humane. No twenty years of court wrangling at the tax payer's expense while costing a great deal to hold them.

We have better evidence collection and testing now with the DNA matches and such. So I am not too worried about killing the wrong guy. Of course, what's good for the duck.....

My last post may sound Liberal, but it's just we all know how distorted the legal systems are in most countries(actually all counties) and I'd hate to be the bloke in the wrong place at the wrong time and get blamed for a murder i didn't commit. It does happen. That is why we have the appeal process but even with half a dozen appeals and waiting 15 years, the innocent still get fried.

THIS does not mean that i don't think that people like Mass Murders deserve to live. I hate the thought of them breathing while innocents that they killed were dead.

But who are we to decide someones life. That is what they did. They decided to cut short someone 's life threads.

Really, what is the difference between a murderer killing someone and a panel of 12 people doing it. Most of our money that goes not keeping Murderers alive but looking after Drug users, and people that haven't paid there parking fine.

Hello Brad: latest numbers 1 in 10 people are incarcerated in the United States. Obviously something is broken. Unfortunately it is beyond the purview of even the most competent engineer or mechanic to fix.

The question killing the guilty ones is complex. Guilty of what. Heresy, or murder have both elicited the same penalty. Certainly there are some human beings that cannot be allowed to roam free. Obviously I share your concern ,you literally have to say I'm sorry with flowers when you kill an innocent man.

Unfortunately some have lost all perspective. Notably the departed Supreme Court Justice Rehnquist, if there is any justice, rest in the seventh layer of hell. Anyone who can make the statement "the matter of guilt or innocence has nothing to do with an order for execution" (denying new DNA evidence) is not only guilty of murder, but also crimes against humanity.

According to some authorities it costs more to execute someone, running through the mandatory appeals than it does to imprison them for life. At least if you make a mistake imprisoning someone for life and later finding they were not guilty you could say I'm sorry with money, better than flowers they will never see.

Arguably the death penalty is the worst form of punishment. Unless something changes we all have that sentence awaiting us, however we at least have the pleasure of freedom and human comfort and companionship, something super max prisons completely deny.

UV, your comment;

My problem is the innocent ones. When DNA was finally approved 25% of the FBI's cases got overturned. Most States are worse.

heres something to think about to ease your conscious

Steven Avery (born July 9, 1962), after serving 18 years on a rape conviction in which DNA analysis later linked the crime to another man, was, after his exoneration and release from prison, convicted of the murder of Teresa Halbach.

I don't believe Teresa's family does not see it that way.

Read on.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Avery

phoenix911

There was a guy we called tarantula (long story) in Arizona who claimed he was innocent of a rape case that sent him down for 25 years. Fought his case for years just to get the DNA tests that finally exonerated him of the rape but found him guilty of murder in another case.

I don't have a problem with the use of science to find and convict criminals, I do have a problem with bad science, lies , and dishonest Congressional tribunals (colorful judicial courts) to convict the person they believe is a criminal.

As much as it would save people the trauma of the crime if you could arrest the criminal before the crime, to be guilty of a crime you must commit it first.

I also take issue with the States housing the mentally ill in prison instead of where they need to be. The defence of insanity only works for those affluent enough to afford private treatment in most states. To punish for illness is considered humane by the same courts.

So my question was Steven Avery a murderer before he went to our fine penal hate schools or after. I learned to hate there with prejudice and if not for my Mom asking a simple question I would still hate. Yes I am bias, the "courts" and their "officers" broke more laws in my case than I ever thought of breaking in my life. My case is still active because the district court is sandbagging after I've won. So far the prosecution has blatantly lied about the law and the courts ignored evidence of any wrong doing. I've given them every chance to correct their errors and have met with obstruction of justice. So I guess I will have to use the last resort and send them to where they belong, prison.

A little tip: Never hire a lawyer for you to become a client, only as your agent or co-counsel. Otherwise you have very little recourse and standing with the system.

Brad

U V

Avery murderd Teresa, after he was released,

As far as what you stated about attorney's and the judicial system, I agree with you whole heartedly, innocent people do get consumed within it's system, with the system being a brotherhood/sisterhood between attorney's that are on both sides.

phoenix911

G'day folks,

As I live in Australia it's really not that fair for me to comment on the US legal system. However, from the sort of reports one comes across in the various media it would seem that the US legal system is highly biased to the word rather than spirit of the law and seems to always try and blame somebody else of the idiotic actions of a handful of amoeba brained idiots.

Here's an example.

On the 2^nd October 1996 an AeroPeru Boeing 757-23A crashed into the Pacific Ocean off Lima killing all 70 people on board. Shortly after the aircraft became airborne the pilots reported that they were getting nonsensical information from the flight instrumentation. Their air speed and altitude seem to be nothing like reality and they were suddenly hit with a barrage of simultaneous contradictory warnings like Mach over-speed and stall warning, altitude of 9,000 feet and the ground proximity warning system indicating they were too low, vertical speed indicators that said they were climbing and descending at the same time and so on.

The pilots had no idea what was going on and asked that Air Traffic Control use their Secondary Surveillance Radar SSR system to give the pilots information like airspeed, altitude etcetera so they could return to the airport and land. Unfortunately both pilots and the ATC operators didn't understand how the SSR worked and that the information displayed on the ATC operators screen came from the computers on the aircraft that were generating the erroneous and contradictory information. The end result was the pilots flying the aircraft on a shallow descent into the ocean and killing all on board.

The investigation found that the static vents were covered by a silver coloured tape that prevented the instrumentation from getting a true reading of the static air pressure. If you don't have an accurate measurement of the static air pressure then you can't calculate the speed, Mach number, altitude and a host of other things.

Why would somebody cover all the static vents with tape?

Apparently the aircraft had been washed immediately prior to the fatal last flight and in order to prevent water from damaging the sensors the ground personnel had covered the static vents with pieces of silver coloured adhesive tape. Due to a plethora of circumstances and lack of familiarity with the systems by the ground crew, pilots and ATC personnel was never removed. This was then compounded by at least three people that were responsible for checking the aircraft prior to flight missing the tape that was covering the static vents. Keep in mind that there are several static vents and you only need to have one working so it wasn't three people making the same mistake but doing it several times in succession.

The manuals as supplied by Boeing clearly state that clear or metallic coloured tape should never be used to cover the static vents as it could be difficult to detect and potentially missed. It also recommenced an appropriate high visibility tape and emphasized that it was essential that the tape be removed prior to flight and that there should be at least three people, normally the washing crew supervisor, shift supervisor and copilot that were responsible for ensuring that the tape was removed and the static and pitot vents were not blocked or obstructed in any way.

Despite all the warning, bad operating practices and training of the airline's ground and flight personnel the lawyers went after Boeing and blamed them for the accident. In itself that was bad enough but Boeing's lawyers told Boeing to settle the matter out of court so they ended up forking over a fortune to the relatives of all those on board.

To me it just doesn't make sense. How the hell can you protect yourself from amoeba brained idiots that despite multiple and repeated warning to not just one but at least three separate individuals doing exactly what you told them not to do.

The loss of life is certainly tragic but bloody hell all this garbage thrown about by the lawyers usually only benefits the lawyers by making them rich and the rest of the population to pay the bills.

The legal system is supposed to treat all parties as innocent until proven guilty. Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to apply to situations like this and it can cost an aircraft manufacturer billions of dollars to show that a crash wasn't due to something they did wrong. In other words they are assumed to be guilty and it's up to them to prove otherwise.

I haven't been able to confirm this but on several occasions and from separate sources I have heard that about one third of the total cost of a new aircraft goes to lawyers, insurance etcetera to defend aircraft manufacturers and show that accidents were not due to negligence on their part.

Of course it's always the mugs at the end of the chain that end up paying for all this legal consternation or should that be legal constipation.

Recently archeologists found a almost pristine example of Insi-Doe-Caputdimex as shown in the image to the right. This has led paleontologists to the conclusion that unlike homo-sapiens that evolved from homo-erectus current lawyers, insurance executives, politicians and a few smaller groups are actually descended from Insi-Doe-Caputdime.

A thumbs up vote will be awarded to anybody that can show how the name was derived.

Its not against the law in this country being an idiot or incompetent, but it is against the law to try to cover it up.

Along the way of answering the question you will discover that execution isn't humane at all.

Where did the execution angle originate? No it isn't biblical. So what's up with it?

In this age we could be employing the great 'take away'; take away health care insurance eligibility and or government assistance. Take away citizenship; deportation, there are areas of the world where that sort of behavior is acceptable. Take away electric service, telephone etc., create an actual incentive to deter the unacceptable actions.

Some criminals don't have anything to 'take away' that's why they turn to crime.
(OK I know for many it's supporting a drug habit...but you get my drift?).
That's why deterents don't work in some cases.
Prison with 3 square meals a day is like a holiday for some.

It might work for some of the others...the white collar criminals..but they probably get off lightly on an 'open prison' anyway.
Or get released because the have Alzheimers...and then prompty recover (Ernest Saunders I believe...I may get back to you on that particular slimy bast**d)

Del

You are accurate and I believe public hanging no hood is the most humane; death is final and a person should be cognitive up to that instant.

I think the manner of one's death is a personal choice. If one wanted to die, say, in a spectacular way, then jumping out of an airplane with a backpack full of dynamite, instead of a parachute seems like a dramatic statement, without recourse.. a kind of skypainting. As to humane, first you must gently put the person into REM sleep, and then have them just slip away, never wake up. There can be just, or unjust. we see that often enough in the movies. As to efficient.. ask the Nazis.. or the cattle industry.

A humane execution is a contradiction of terms.

I think the manner of one's death is a personal choice.

Yes it is if you support the social compact.

"Where did the execution angle originate? No it isn't biblical."

It isn't Biblical?

Numbers 35:17 And if he smite him with throwing a stone, wherewith he may die, and he die, he is a murderer: the murderer shall surely be put to death.

Leviticus 24:16 And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name of the LORD, shall be put to death.

John 8:4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. 5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?

Acts 7:57 Then they cried out with a loud voice, and stopped their ears, and ran upon him with one accord,58 And cast him out of the city, and stoned him:

Execution was practiced in Biblical times, "stoneing to death" being the prescribed method. Anyone witnessing such would avoid being in a condition where he would be subject to it. Since executions have been 'sanitized' they do not now serve as a deterrent as they once did, gruesome and macabre as they might have been.

Okay but the examples given don't equate to execution; this is of persons disobeying God's law and the punishment was God's law.

Stoning would be acceptable, sometimes the stoney survived though disfigured and incapacitated no doubt.

United States Constitution prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, fortunately your proposed punishment is cruel, however it is not unusual. The Supreme Court has ruled in your favor, the punishment must be both cruel and unusual to rise to a constitutional issue.

Prolonged imprisonment is worse than death. Think about the class of people you are dealing with continuously. Murderers, drug dealers, bank robbers, are all forced to associate with civil servants, lawyers, and judges. The odds are significantly better of locating a drug dealer that can tell the truth, then a lawyer.

As Benjamin Franklin said "Behold a miracle a lawyer and an honest man" considering the way the courts interpret the Constitution perhaps we are executing the wrong people.

At least the riddle is answered. What do you call an attorney with an IQ of 50..... Your Honor.

Okay on the serious side there's no need as engineers to be involved in devising ways to more humanely execute criminals. Most industrialized countries that still have a death penalties execute prisoners humanely.

We need only become involved as human beings. Some prisoners are sentenced to life in underground facilities with no human contact, to me a fate far worse than death.

Medical science is on the verge of being able to virtually erase a person's life memories. Leaving the body and mind intact and killing the person. Is this any different than executing the body?.

Just one of many questions that needs to be answered, however there are far more inhumane punishments than death currently employed.

A recently departed supreme court justice in ruling against the introduction of new exculpatory DNA evidence (not available at the time of the trial) upheld a state law.

Saying the matter of guilt or innocence has nothing to do with an order for execution.

I think we need to decide not necessarily what is humane, but what a civilized. And we certainly need to change the rules, legal and illegal, needs to be overruled by right and wrong

Hi folks & YWROADRUNNER,

• Most industrialized countries that still have a death penalties execute prisoners humanely.

I may very well be wrong, but I was under the impression that of all the western democratic or first world nations the only one that still has the death penalty is the USA.

I don't remember where this came from and havn't seen anything to confirm or dispel it so if anybody knows one way or other please feel free to rip into it and if you have any information one way or the other I would greatly appreciate it.

OK, forgetting about all the moral issues about capital punishment being acceptable or not to me the most humane form of execution has to be lethal injection, but this may not be the same as the current method in use.

Basically, if you give somebody a General Anesthetic you can not only block any pain but render the victim unconscious prior to whatever method that is used to stop the heart and ultimately brain death. Anybody that has had a GA will tell you that the only part that is painful is the insertion of the Jelcos that are used to inject the medications used to render the patient unconscious and free of pain. Once a person is fully out with a GA then you can do pretty much what you want and they will not feel, hear, see or comprehend anything.

Another point that I believe is worth looking at is the effect that taking a persons life in such a calculated way has on executioners mental health. There have been numerous examples where the executioners have later found what they did regrettable and developed severe depression. One way to get round this is the use of drugs that have the ability to block the passage of memories from short to long term memory. They don't have too much of an effect or ability of the recipient but within 10 to 30 minutes the executioner would have absolutely no recollection of their actions or the events that took place. No only do they forget but because the memories never reached the long term storage they are lost forever and can never be retrieved by using hypnosis or the use of other mind altering drugs.

• I think we need to decide not necessarily what is humane, but what a civilized. And we certainly need to change the rules, legal and illegal, needs to be overruled by right and wrong

These are definitely the words of a great orator and I take my hat off to you!

Hello masu: thank you for overlooking my typos. Sometimes I get a little wound up. Possibly a case could be made for execution. I'm not sure it belongs in a civilized society, however when the legal system only looks at procedure and not necessarily at the matter of guilt or innocence there can never be a case for execution.

You've made an interesting point about the executioner. We no longer employ several rifles with one blank. A person with a conscience would have to wrestle with killing someone, and a person that could say he was just following orders probably should be the next in line for execution.

We are slipping deep into the philosophical arena but before any adjustments can be made to our systems we as a species need decide what type adjudicated penalty we want violent criminals, psychopaths to experience; death or punishment.

or correction and rehabilitation.

to the degree that we are separated from the Divine, we are all 'sinners', and forgiveness is one of the biggest lessons we are here to learn.

"to the degree that we are separated from the Divine, we are all 'sinners', and forgiveness is one of the biggest lessons we are here to learn."

Among other things the sinner must first admit the sin to be forgiven. One he is forgiven he must take up his own cross and follow Jesus all the way...

Among other things the sinner must first admit the sin to be forgiven. One he is forgiven he must take up his own cross and follow Jesus all the way...

The truth is in what you say...

Hi Masu

Just read your post about GA, and in mine a few minutes back I was pretty much repeating what you had said.

But to comment on your first 2 paras - unless things have changed, in the UK there's no death penalty for murder, but I believe it's still available for treason and arson in naval dockyards. Not that it gets used too often!

Cheers......Codey

To kill a brain before its time I suggest drugging the person till they are asleep and then dropping a very large weight on their heads so as to squash their head flat.

Actually I am against capital punishment and the state taking of a life, but I think if you are going to do it, it ought to be effective and ugly.

Any subject or endeavor in which intelligent people apply resources, focus and questioning, seeking answers, will have them answered. The length of time before answers are produced is a function of the resources and minds applied to the quest. It depends on what level of answer you seek, for we live in a world of infinities, and there will be no ultimate answers found, and there never has been. That is the purpose of the universe in the first place: to eternally seek what heaven already knows.

"Seek and ye shall find". There are a few truisms in the Bible that have stood the test of time, and this is one.

I believe that there is one thing given by heaven to each person, and that it their "power of choice", which is indistinguishable from the spark of life. This is our absolute dominion.. the power to choose. Within this dominion is all the power of Heaven, and the power over our own life or death, whichever we choose. I believe we give up too easily, when we allow death to occur to ourselves, when we have not acheived the levels of belief in our powers.. or at least most of us haven't, me included.

As souls, our powers are governed by Belief. Our own belief circumscribes the limits to our lives. All else belongs to the beliefs of Heaven, or of others. We tend to give up our power to others. Does anyone ever ask if we as individuals should have better ways to execute the State? No? why not...

Surely there is more need for that!

I believe that there is one thing given by heaven to each person, and that it their "power of choice", which is indistinguishable from the spark of life. This is our absolute dominion.. the power to choose.

I believe we were willed into existence, meaning we are part of someone else's dream. We are willed into existence with a "freedom" of choice but their is only one choice to make and it does pertain to power over death but that power rests with the dreamer.

My cousin had a good point on wrongful execution- Let it be on the prosecutor's head if a executed prisoner is later found to be innocent. Was it not premeditated murder in the first degree by abuse of power.

Of course I would want them represented by a public defender but that would hardly be cricket. Unless the deceased was public pretender represented.

Quick kick out my soap box

Brad

I've been reading a little about the Navajo concept of justice and they have a sort of interesting (to me) twist. They seem to focus on two issues:

(1) The miscreant has to stop his undesirable actions and "repent".

(2) He has to make restitution.

So, they tend to be against executions. The emphasis seems to be more on the victim(s) than on punishment.

Returning to the questioners context could the brain be wiped eliminating the need of execution altogether?

Maybe after a proven guilty and a failed appeal we should follow the old Biblical method and allow the offended community to stone them to death, do you think this would give the community closure on the crime? I know its not an engineered method in the sense of the word but, it is a way of engineering.

It is and end...

It has often occurred to me that the whole concept of "crime and punishment" has been distorted over the years by the trend of modern people (especially in the US) to try to become benevolent. Forgiveness, as some have stated in earlier discussions, requires that the perpetrator confess to his crime and be truly repennant. I have always wondered why, in this quest for benevolence, people have even gone so far as to change the terminology of the system. The idea that criminals must be punished has been the practice for thousands of years. Hence, the terms "penitentiary" or "penal institutions" and the system was the "penal system". These all are derivatives of the root word meaning or implying "punishment". Now, the benevolents are calling the system "departments of corrections" and the housings, "correctional institutions" implying that these beasts can be rehabilitated. Hence, the long institutionalization of criminals awaiting capital punishment. The idea of "punishment" being "swift and just" is still the best way to accomplishment the death penalty. The actual method would not be of much concern in that case since, as has been said by others, the actual "inhumane" part of the execution is the many years of waiting. One does not have the opportunity to ask someone if their execution was humane. Pain has been used for many years as a form of punishment. Some people spank their children. We have now outlawed most forms of corporal punishment because of the pain inflicted. The short duration of pain that may be experirnced by one being executed can be referred to as reduced pain when compared to some of the earlier forms of punishment. Aside from the eccumenical questions about the morality of capital punishment, I feel that it has its place in the system and should remain as a deterrent and a cost saving factor. After all, does anyone really believe that Charles Manson can be rehabilitated? Get on with it.

Yes the current system has removed any real incentives from the exercise to a great extent.

And today is no different than at any other age though many of this age refuse to see through the trees.

We have a great multitude of criminally minded individuals and they don't want to be rehabilitated though will play the system to gain release. After release from custody the percentage whom revert to their former intrigues is astoundingly high especially those whom prefer sexual agression. Ha! remarkable (ridiculuos) is the societal difference in the mind set towards retention of sexual molesters compared to sentiments conferred upon the death penalty for high crimes.

Perspective is lost on many individuals whom are too busy taking care of #1 to effectively perform their civic duty if they even recognize a responsibility to it.

I'm all for building a device which causes instant vaporization. Maybe a big arc chamber. Certainly the cost of electricity needed to run this thing would be far less then keeping these criminals on death row for 10+ years. Heck, maybe you could even throw multiple inmates in the chamber at once. No screams of pain, no botched IV's for the lethal injection, no question of "are they properly knocked out" or concerns that the brain is still functioning - just hot steamy death. Maybe you dont even have to vaporize the whole body - just the head will suffice. It could look like an MRI machine, where the inmate is strapped to a table, gets wheeled inside and the executioner "hits the lights". I wonder how much energy it would take to vaporize a human head instantly....

Avery Montembeault

Sunlight would be enough with a concave or inverted globe reflecting and focusing the light energy... I've melted rocks easily enough.

Use and inverted mirror lined globe or several set up in intense sunlight. I think we could reduce the cost of execution significantly and it may shed light upon the issue of humane concern. I think an entire subject could be incinerated swiftly and since the human body can not distinguish between extreme heat or cold the effect would be personal.

Gee, and once space travel becomes economical, we can just put them in small coffin sized life support units, and fire them at the sun.. that would give them time to think about their crimes before being vapourized in the sun.

IN the paper yesterday, a recent study was mentioned in which they found, it was cheaper for the state to incarcerate the prisoner for life than to give out the death penaly; I guess the ongoing lawyer fees that go on forever.

OK that out of the way..........my personal feeling is that the individuals who do the killing should have to experience that same kind of death; by bludeoning, dismemberment, poisoning, or whatever. The ultimate eye for an eye thing. Now we are too freaking civilized to ever allow that to happen so my thinking is...........medicinal experimentation. Yeah, that's the ticket, but how do we pull that one off without the civil liberty union having a stroke? I for one am flat against using animals for testing, where it be drug, cosmetic, or whatever. We have animals around that are more suited and much more similar to our physiology; animals on death row. A typical senario would go like this. The criminal is brought into the death chamber where a new "humane" vaporization technique is to be used, and is strapped into a chair. The witnesses all peer though the glass and see this is so; the clock counts down to the prescribed time for the execution, and just before the second hand strikes 12, the curtain is closed; then quickly, the chair is rotated 180 degrees..... into the testing lab (like in the Three Stooges and the rotating fireplace). In the death chamber, an empty chair stands, the witnesses see this is so. Now the SOBs in the lab can feel free to spray that crap in the subject's eyes, or try out that new medication to see if he grows a third eye while making his prostrate shrink. Yeah I know, I'm one sick puppy but for the most part, you're all thinking the same thing. Leave the four-legged critters alone.

Oh BTW, this humane method is to be used only on those found guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt (to appease the whiners). VBG.

Well, if we are going to speculate and invent new and novel ways to execute people, how about this one.

The condemned is placed with his head in a Guillotine. In front of him are six pathways , much like the rolling ball game at the county fair. People would place bets on which of the "shoots" the head would fall. This would provide entertainment as well as revenue as the loosers' bets would become the property of the government. Has merit, don't you think?

Hi Kyoto,

medicinal experimentation was done by Arizona on prisoners without their consent or knowledge (not just death penalty and lifers). Of course Arizona did it illegally or outside the law. The medical in Arizona's prisons is a joke, any data compiled would have to be de-corrupted. Most of the medical personnel were there because they could not make it in private practice.

To illustrate my point I had a brilliant diagnosis of the cause of my seizures, but I forgot the name the doctor gave to my condition. A week later I had the chance to see him again and he did not remember me, my symptoms, the diagnosis, an could not give me the name even with my medical chart in front of him. Yet to this day I'm seizure free do to his moment of lucidity. If he never does anything else I will think of him as brilliant even if it was only for a moment.

The individuals in the FDA suffer from the same problem as the rest of our public servants- Greed of money and greed for power over others.

As for the experimentation, pay them for it. It would be far cheaper than testing on the street. The contractual nexus would keep both sides above board.

Brad

The individuals in the FDA suffer from the same problem as the rest of our public servants

The FDA isn't staffed with public servants, The FDA isn't a government agency it is the food and drug industries dog and pony show with one public servant in an honorary position as the head of it.

And this is any different than the IRS, Article 4 courts, To many chiefs Post office, Congressional lobbyist buying and selling our rights and taxes, And our "Public Servants" who retire better than most of the upper middle class?

Tried to work for the government a few times. Some of the responses I received were: slow down your making us look bad; The problem with you is you are to honest; If you don't stop and take a break I will have to report you. (99% done and would have to start all over after break); You don't talk to him, he is the bosses boss. (he asked my opinion, turned out I was right); Damn it son, I didn't send you out there to win. (war games, improbable odds).

No in government jobs initiative is weeded out, just follow orders, don't ask don't tell.

Nothing against you, just not a lot of respect for the directions I see our fearless leaders leading the country in.

Well time for bed

Brad

just put a stone around their ankles, and drop them naked in the ocean.. they can think about their guilt on the way down. and they will be recycled as fish food.

I think we might be drifting off topic! In a modern world environment, how would we, as engineers design and make a machine to execute a know criminal? Who would we have press the button? I would offer the victim or victims family the opportunity to choose from a selection of methods to 'kill' the criminal! I would also offer them the option of pressing the button!

possible methods.

• electrocution
• hanging
• beheading
• lethal injection

or the option of forced labour until the day they die.

If they opt to leave the decision up to the judge, then the judge will decide the fate and if so, press the button. Let the judges take responsibility for their actions too!

Forced labor could be productive indeed.

Example, I have a friend whom is a pool contractor, he has had holes dug for pools all over SoCal for twenty years and never used equipment other than picks an shovels. Twenty five men with implements of destruction can dig a hole in a hurry.

Maybe we could get water to the inland sea bed?

Guest, I think you have outstayed your welcome with an uneducated remark like your last sentence...

Kindly shut the door behind you.

There have numerous concepts and posts that have looked at whether the penal system is a punishment, redemption retraining system or deterrent.

That's a tree with no mane. Confinement is punishment.

The map shows the per capital murder rate on the various countries around the world. The real eye popping thing it clearly demonstrates that the use of capital punishment as a deterrent not only doesn't work but had the exact opposite effect.

Why would this be the case?

I don't know, but one possibility is that the use of capital punishment lowers the value placed on a human life across the whole of society thus increasing the use of murder as a means to an end.

Regardless of why it clearly shows that it doesn't work as a deterrent and that means that it can only be a form of punishment. Please, lets drop the deterrent concept, capital punishment doesn't work as a deterrent, it never has and never will. That only leaves the following question:

Is capital punishment a legitimate punishment?

That's a complex question and needs to be dealt with as a personal view.

Not if you take it in context, in many areas capital punishment was and it decreed for petty issues due unreasonable religious beliefs or totalitarian style governments.

It is difficult to quantify the effectual impression that capital punishment may have as a deterrent but it is definitely a deterrent for me.

Sorry that's my opinion and you have the right to have a different opinion, but please, please, please drop the deterrent concept, it's rubbish and doesn't work.

Is that a personal comment?

Sorry, Masu, but your data does not support your case.

I stared at the map and I can not draw the correlation you draw from it that the death penalty does not work as a deterrent. The only thing it shows is the murder rate per some number of people.

If you look at the actual facts in a scientific way, that data shows a mixed results. On a state by state basis some US states have shown that it has worked and some have shown it does not.

A close friend and I discussed and researched this subject pretty intensely for a scholarly paper on the subject, so I have a somewhat informed opinion on the matter.

As far as my opinion goes, I find the following repugnant (in ascending order):

1. Murdering an innocent victim.

2. Executing an innocent man.

3. Exonerating the guilty.

4. Nurturing social decay.

5. Endless frivolous appeals.

For the most part I don't like capitol punishment, but it is not a black and white issue. It is much too complex to distill down to a easy answer. The process is too weak to prevent the innocent from paying for someone else's crime. It is too expensive for the guilty.

In some cases the crime is so horrible and the perpetrator so impossible to redeem that it seems that it is the best thing we can do as a society.

In the end the best thing we can do is examine and repair the problem before it gets to a point where there becomes a victim in the first place.

G'day Anonymous Hero,

I apologies for the lack of clarity in the map but the CR4 editor resizes images which inevitably dramatically reduces the resolution. The map is from Wikipedia article on Murder and represents the number of murders per year per 100,000 people in 2004. I only used the map as it isn't copyrighted and I have not used any other information from the Wikipedia article.

Grey, which covers much of Africa indicates that the numbers of murders is unknown while the shades of blue indicate an increasing number as the colour becomes darker. The map shows that in 2004 in Australia, New Zealand, Canada, United Kingdom and some western European nations where the death penalty was abolished some time ago the murder rate is 1-2 murders per 100,000. However in the USA where capital punishment is used in some states the rate is around 5 to 10 per 100,000. That's a 5 fold or 500% increase which is definitely not an insignificant difference. It gets even worse when you include countries like the old Soviet Union, South America and to a lesser extent Asian nations like China, India, Indonesia etceter where capital punishment is still used the rate is well above that of the countries that have abolished it

It's is definitely true that it is far more complex than simply the per-capita rate but it does seem to shows that where capital punishment is still used the murder rates are greater than the countries where it has been abolished.

I must admit that as capital punishment was abolished in Australia when I was very young I have never really had the impetus to think about it in any detail and my interpretation could be totally incorrect. I would greatly appreciate your thoughts on the matter and what if anything you believe can be drawn from the map.

I have also drawn a new key as shown on the right that is hopefully a little more legible than the original one in the image above.

Excellent reply Masu which is why I have already given you a GA for your first post...

I agree that the deterrent value of a death penalty is not evident, as shown by your map...

I'm of the opinion that a deterrent is not realistic for such an emotive issue such as murder, I think many murders are the result of 'knee jerk' reactions which have not been thought out properly and therefore a deterrent doesn't work.

John.

Thanks for the clarification.

However, correlation does not equal causation.

What I mean is that your analogy is much too simplistic and does not take into account the many, many differences in culture and social settings. That is why it is a fallacy as an argument. A much more comprehensive before and after studies have been performed on a state-by-state basis where capital punishment was either enacted or banned. Those studies looked at much more than murder rates per 100,000 individuals to try to understand what impact capital punishment had on murder rates. The results varied from state to state where in some case it improved and others got worse. Those findings reinforce the notion that there are many more variables in play than simply numbers of murders per year.

Nevertheless, I agree with your general conclusions, but I differ with you on how you get there and why.

In places where capital punishment is legal for murder, a nice method would be to have a lottery amongst the inmates on death row (for murder) who would then be given the opportunity to employ their favourite method on the designated criminal. Alternatively, it could be like american idol, where the inmates on death row (for murder) will describe their methods of killing, and a panel of judges (politicians) will be able to choose the 'best' method, and select a winner. the execution could be nationally televised, in the with other reality tv shows.

This may not be a deterrent to murder, but will potentially eliminate more murderers in our society. or at least provide those people who enjoy reality tv something new to watch.

Hey Folks, Here's a thought: if you don't think capital punishment (read execution) is a deterrent then come up with something better that always works. Say mind wipes, organ donor-ship (involuntary) etc.

I mean we are intelligent people.

The problem as I see it is not the method of execution but the fact of it's uncertainty. If someone commits a premeditated capital crime the odds of execution are roughly 25% depending on the state. Where is the deterrent? People take longer odds at casinos and ruin their lives daily.

You want to make capital punishment a deterrent, make it a certainty for those convicted.

My two cents, Blue