5 ms·

Personal opinion - the governor themself should be the one to push the drugs/button/trigger that kills the death row inmate. S/he should be the one to follow t

Personal opinion - the governor themself should be the one to push the drugs/button/trigger that kills the death row inmate. S/he should be the one to follow through on the state mandated and sanctioned death of one of its people. They are the head of the state after all, with the power to stay the execution.

onychomys 5y ago
At the very least, they should have to be in the room to give the executioner a final yes/no decision. Not really sure how we'd make all the states do something like that, but I think it'd really help.
- ceejayoz 5y ago
  The article indicates something along those lines is in place. > The governor is always listening through a phone when people condemned to die in South Carolina take their last breath. During 13 of the state’s recent executions, the Commander was on the line with the governor.
  - onychomys 5y ago
    Sitting on a phone hundreds of miles away talking to a guy in the room isn't really the same thing as being there yourself. Yes, you could stop the execution either way, but you're not seeing the consequences of your decision.
  - Loughla 5y ago
    That is actually the line where I stopped to make that comment. Sitting in your office hundreds of miles away is nowhere near the same as being in the room, looking the condemned in the eyes.
- lisper 5y ago
  IMHO executions should be open to the public. The people ultimately responsible for these deaths are the people who voted for [politicians who support] the death penalty. They should be able to see what their votes have wrought.
  - kyleee 5y ago
    Would you be upset if people showed positive emotion at the execution (cheers, etc.; think murder victim's family) Executions have a long history of being a public event and fun/exciting/scratching a human morbid itch and satisfying cravings for justice (putting aside the innocence / false positive question for a moment) and I think a contemporary audience may exhibit some of the same historical reactions and behaviors
    - lisper 5y ago
      > Would you be upset if people showed positive emotion at the execution I would be disappointed. I would also be surprised. I think there's a reason executions aren't public any more, and I think it's because we have largely evolved beyond the point where most of us can take pleasure from watching another person die. I think this is the reason that the reality of industrial meat production is such a closely guarded secret. If people knew what happened behind those closed doors they'd eat a lot less meat.
ceejayoz 5y ago
I'm not sure some of them could hide their glee.
_jal 5y ago
Be careful what you wish for. I expect executions would become campaign propaganda events.
- revolvingocelot 5y ago
  And campaigns would select for those who had no compunction pressing the button.
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
    The political process already strongly favors sociopaths, I doubt it would make a significant difference.
rgrieselhuber 5y ago
I have a similar opinion about skin in the game for war, any politician who votes for or pushes for combat action has to go themselves into the most dangerous part of the action to help carry it out.
- Loughla 5y ago
  Yes. I 100% support the national vote for all aggressive 'war' actions, where a yes vote is also registration for selective service for that action. I understand that system becomes vulnerable to bad-faith actors who can use PR and other means to turn public opinion against US interference to then get away with whatever they want. But I also believe it is important.
  - rgrieselhuber 5y ago
    Sounds like we differ on the national vote point but in general, skin in the game should be a deciding factor in many scenarios.
ashtonkem 5y ago
I also think death penalty by lethal injection should be illegal. It is regularly botched, leaving the victim to suffocate or experience a fatal heart attack for minutes without pain killers while also paralyzed. Seems fairly cruel and unusual to paralyze someone and then suffocate them while leaving them conscious. There’s also something deeply unseemly about a method of execution that is quite painful but designed to make the executioners feel better about what they’re doing. If we’re going to execute people it should be via firing squad, which is honest about what is happening and much less painful for the condemned. If we’re not comfortable with that, well then maybe we shouldn’t be doing this at all then.
- danpalmer 5y ago
  I agree with the point you're making, but there are far more humane methods than firing squad. Firing squad causes trauma issues for those doing the firing, and could easily be botched as well. Asphyxiation by another gas such as helium is generally considered to be "better" as far as I understand – it creates a feeling of euphoria for the subject. This is not an endorsement of any method of execution, I'm strongly against the entire idea.
  - themitigating 5y ago
    Not everyone has live rounds in a firing squad to reduce the trauma
    - spicybright 5y ago
      For clarification, they'll load some of the guns with blanks then give you a random gun with you knowing that. Still wouldn't ease my conscious if I was holding the gun, personally.
      - ashtonkem 5y ago
        Right, but that's a feature and not a bug. You really don't want the state to be able to execute people without someone feeling morally culpable for it.

onychomys 5y ago

At the very least, they should have to be in the room to give the executioner a final yes/no decision. Not really sure how we'd make all the states do something like that, but I think it'd really help.

ceejayoz 5y ago
The article indicates something along those lines is in place. > The governor is always listening through a phone when people condemned to die in South Carolina take their last breath. During 13 of the state’s recent executions, the Commander was on the line with the governor.
- onychomys 5y ago
  Sitting on a phone hundreds of miles away talking to a guy in the room isn't really the same thing as being there yourself. Yes, you could stop the execution either way, but you're not seeing the consequences of your decision.
- Loughla 5y ago
  That is actually the line where I stopped to make that comment. Sitting in your office hundreds of miles away is nowhere near the same as being in the room, looking the condemned in the eyes.
lisper 5y ago
IMHO executions should be open to the public. The people ultimately responsible for these deaths are the people who voted for [politicians who support] the death penalty. They should be able to see what their votes have wrought.
- kyleee 5y ago
  Would you be upset if people showed positive emotion at the execution (cheers, etc.; think murder victim's family) Executions have a long history of being a public event and fun/exciting/scratching a human morbid itch and satisfying cravings for justice (putting aside the innocence / false positive question for a moment) and I think a contemporary audience may exhibit some of the same historical reactions and behaviors
  - lisper 5y ago
    > Would you be upset if people showed positive emotion at the execution I would be disappointed. I would also be surprised. I think there's a reason executions aren't public any more, and I think it's because we have largely evolved beyond the point where most of us can take pleasure from watching another person die. I think this is the reason that the reality of industrial meat production is such a closely guarded secret. If people knew what happened behind those closed doors they'd eat a lot less meat.

ceejayoz 5y ago

I'm not sure some of them could hide their glee.

_jal 5y ago

Be careful what you wish for. I expect executions would become campaign propaganda events.

revolvingocelot 5y ago
And campaigns would select for those who had no compunction pressing the button.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
  The political process already strongly favors sociopaths, I doubt it would make a significant difference.

rgrieselhuber 5y ago

I have a similar opinion about skin in the game for war, any politician who votes for or pushes for combat action has to go themselves into the most dangerous part of the action to help carry it out.

Loughla 5y ago
Yes. I 100% support the national vote for all aggressive 'war' actions, where a yes vote is also registration for selective service for that action. I understand that system becomes vulnerable to bad-faith actors who can use PR and other means to turn public opinion against US interference to then get away with whatever they want. But I also believe it is important.
- rgrieselhuber 5y ago
  Sounds like we differ on the national vote point but in general, skin in the game should be a deciding factor in many scenarios.

ashtonkem 5y ago

I also think death penalty by lethal injection should be illegal. It is regularly botched, leaving the victim to suffocate or experience a fatal heart attack for minutes without pain killers while also paralyzed. Seems fairly cruel and unusual to paralyze someone and then suffocate them while leaving them conscious. There’s also something deeply unseemly about a method of execution that is quite painful but designed to make the executioners feel better about what they’re doing. If we’re going to execute people it should be via firing squad, which is honest about what is happening and much less painful for the condemned. If we’re not comfortable with that, well then maybe we shouldn’t be doing this at all then.

danpalmer 5y ago
I agree with the point you're making, but there are far more humane methods than firing squad. Firing squad causes trauma issues for those doing the firing, and could easily be botched as well. Asphyxiation by another gas such as helium is generally considered to be "better" as far as I understand – it creates a feeling of euphoria for the subject. This is not an endorsement of any method of execution, I'm strongly against the entire idea.
- themitigating 5y ago
  Not everyone has live rounds in a firing squad to reduce the trauma
  - spicybright 5y ago
    For clarification, they'll load some of the guns with blanks then give you a random gun with you knowing that. Still wouldn't ease my conscious if I was holding the gun, personally.
    - ashtonkem 5y ago
      Right, but that's a feature and not a bug. You really don't want the state to be able to execute people without someone feeling morally culpable for it.