Judge Argues For Return Of Firing Squad Executions
Source: Associated Press
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- An influential federal appeals court judge said Thursday that the nation's third lethal injection execution to go awry in six months underscores his call to bring back firing squads.
In an interview with The Associated Press on Thursday, Chief Judge Alex Kozinski of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said lethal injection was a "dishonest" attempt to disguise the brutal nature of capital punishment.
Kozinski first wrote of his distaste for lethal injection in a decision Monday, even while arguing against delaying the execution of Joseph Rudolph Wood III in Phoenix. Wood gasped for breath for more than 90 minutes and took nearly two hours to die Wednesday after receiving a lethal injection for killing his estranged girlfriend and her father.
Kozinski said properly trained firing squads are a "foolproof" way to quickly execute an inmate and avoid complications surrounding lethal injection.
Read more: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_EXECUTION_FIRING_SQUAD?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2014-07-24-16-38-21
SummerSnow
(12,608 posts)TygrBright
(20,758 posts)You increase the potential for damaging non-fatal multiple shot debacles that way.
A single small-caliber bullet behind the ear seems kinder, if we must institutionally murder those who've committed murder.
ironically,
Bright
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)that no one shooter can know whether he fired the fatal shot. (And there's also the tradition in firing squad executions of one shooter getting a blank cartridge.) And "non-fatal multiple-shot debacles" aren't likely; a firing squad is five men with .308 Winchester or .30-06 Springfield rifles, at a distance of 20 feet, aiming for the chest (traditionally a paper target is pinned to the shirt of the condemned prisoner, with the X ring just above the heart). If the shooters are trained marksmen, it's instantaneous and as nearly foolproof as the guillotine (and less traumatic for the executioners than putting a gun to someone's head and pulling the trigger).
Personally I sort of suspect that the medicalisation and sanitisingof executions by way of lethal injection is part of the reason so many people still support capital punishment in the USA; if a more direct and brutal method were used (the firing squad, hanging, or the guillotine) capital punishment would've probably been abolished by now.
MillennialDem
(2,367 posts)There are often survivors.
That and fuck the executioners and fuck the witnesses and everyone else. If we're going to be a savage nation (pun not intended AT ALL) where we kill people we should get blood and see damn heads come off. Works in Saudi Arabia.
Or we could just not have the death penalty at all - which is absolutely what we should do.
Back to the executioners - everything we've done to make the death penalty more humane is to do so for the executioners and witnesses, not the condemned. First we had hanging, but sometimes the condemned struggled and it traumatized the executioner and witnesses. Then we decided to use the sword or axe - head cut off = not struggling. But then guillotine was so no one had to swing a sword or axe (and possibly miss or fail to behead). Then the firing squad because we didn't want to see someone's head come off. Then gas so no one was actually firing a gun. Then lethal injection to make it look medical/clinical. And on and on.
calimary
(81,220 posts)I'm not surprised to see a subject like this come up. Actually was kind of expecting it.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)But firing squads are honest? Then why is one gun in a firing squad always loaded with a blank, so everyone in the squad can go to sleep at night thinking they had the blank??
markpkessinger
(8,392 posts). . . and really, haven't we always been dishonest with ourselves when it comes to executing people? When they were carried out in public, executioners typically wore hoods. As I understand it, even in most lethal injection setups, the person who actually starts the flow of drugs typically cannot see the condemned prisoner. (I think it was like that with the electric chair as well).
CBGLuthier
(12,723 posts)Is it usually takes about six guys so they get volunteers so some of our bloodthirsty citizens will get a chance to kill someone legally.
Isn't that swell. I bet some of them are masturbating right now at the very thought of it.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)their bloodthirsty citizens can already kill someone legally.
Angleae
(4,482 posts)The state of Utah does just that and there is no lack of volunteers.
immoderate
(20,885 posts)Hear me out...
Planes go everywhere, and they fly miles up in the air, and someone ejected from one has no chance of survival. You don't even have to assemble your firing squad.
It saves money, kills people, and gives them a thrill to remember.
I know what you're thinking, but you're wrong. They ride with cargo. Ha!
--imm
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)davidpdx
(22,000 posts)A person jumped off the top of a building and hit someone walking out of the building. So that wouldn't be a very good idea.
Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)I assume that your concept is mostly in jest, but:
You would have to have someone load the person into the plane and make them leave the plane in one fashion or another. Also at least a pilot that knows what is going to happen. An execution plane (normal planes are not designed to cause a single person to part ways in flight) would cost a significant amount of money to obtain/maintain.
immoderate
(20,885 posts)I really have most of that stuff worked out -- without giving it much thought at all! Remember that the funding is already allocated somewhere.
The "subject" would ride restrained in the baggage compartment, which would have some trap door arrangement. Some of the flights might have a dummy instead of a real victim, kind of like the blank cartridge in the firing squad. Maybe a vacuum cleaner with a ball.
The people who have survived have been from sky diving altitudes. Cruising is a different story. Even so let's call it a nullification.
Remember, our purpose is to find the most civilized way to kill someone.
--imm
Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)I'm sure all the airlines would jump at the chance to have some trap door arrangement added to all their aircraft...
Degrees of civility of killing a person... That's a really gray area.
easychoice
(1,043 posts)ineffective as a deterrent.
But who needs facts when there's killin' to be done.
Massacure
(7,518 posts)It's not completely unknown for the execution to tie the rope to short and strangle the condemned or to tie it to long and decapitate them.
Robbins
(5,066 posts)by Firing squads.Maybe then some will start to question Death Penality.
The NRA and Texas would love televised executions by firing squad.Especilly the racists who could execute Blacks and other minoritys
by firing squad.
Hoppy
(3,595 posts)Brigid
(17,621 posts)bvf
(6,604 posts)"Your Sparkle Cavalcade of Death," but you win for the Carlin cite!
Still miss him...
Swede Atlanta
(3,596 posts)I have a novel idea....
Why don't we join the rest of the civilized countries of the world and abolish capital punishment?
I realize some could never agree to that since we believe in guns everywhere and we are the most violent "civilized" country on the planet.
But we know CP does not deter crime. We know we convict innocent people and most certainly have put some to death. We know it costs taxpayers more to execute someone than keep them incarcerated for life when you consider the costs of appeals, attorneys, etc.
I for one as am opposed to having my tax dollars be spent on war and capital punishment as any Bible thumper is about not wanting tax dollars to go for abortion. Why don't I get an out. I suggest those that like war contribute to a fund that will go do that. Those that want capital punishment can contribute to a fund that does that.
Actually no, I don't want needless war and I certainly don't want anyone killed or, as in this case, tortured in my name.
I suggest we water board Alex Koziniski and see if he calls it torture. He would pee and poo his pants.
fantase56
(443 posts)Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)How do we know CP does not deter crime? Sure it doesn't stop "crimes of passion" because nothing does. In terms of premeditated crime that comes under CP, what is the proof that CP is not a deterrent?
I'm not arguing for CP, just have never understood when people make that claim. I've yet to hear any one offer any rational reason. I recall (as a teenager) hearing a warden saying that he never had a prisoner that said CP stopped them, but my immediate thought was this man is an idiot. How could he have a prisoner that the presence of CP stopped from committing a crime?
To be clear, convictions of innocent people are enough for me to be against CP.
immoderate
(20,885 posts)And states that use it would have less crime. They don't, either.
To my mind, the most solemn function of the state should not be undifferentiable from its most heinous crime.
--imm
Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)Different cultures, different results. And one could argue that states with higher crime have decided to implement CP as a result of the inherent high crime rates. At best, one can correlate, causation is another matter. I guess wrong convictions will have to be enough.
bluedigger
(17,086 posts)Sure, capitol punishment isn't much of a deterrent, but a head on a stake? Now, that sends a message!
blackspade
(10,056 posts)How about we go the other way and get rid of capital punishment like a civilized country?
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Exultant Democracy
(6,594 posts)If the brutality of the death penalty wasn't disguised we would have already joined the civilized world in outlawing this barbaric practice.
Botany
(70,490 posts)Last edited Sat Jul 26, 2014, 03:25 PM - Edit history (1)
I think a machine could be made to put 2 .32 caliber soft nosed slugs into the
condemned person's medulla at the flip of a switch and then you wouldn't need a
firing squad. 2 shots in under a second and it would be lights out. We should not
try to hide what is going on and that is the killing of a person.
BTW I am against the D.P. because it costs way to much, it takes forever, the
victim's family and friends have to go through appeal after appeal, and it tends to
be given to poor people of color more often then not.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)immoderate
(20,885 posts)There must be a way to kill people nicely.
--imm
Liberal Veteran
(22,239 posts)It surely can't be that difficult.
Of course there are alternatives. Life in maximum security without possibility of parole has a pretty good success rate at keeping the very worst of people from being a danger to society. Eventually, Mother Nature takes care of the problem and the rest of us are left without the blood on our hands in the end.
That's the easiest solution. While I am sure some people prefer the dubious catharsis of execution, it seems to me that we can be better than to lower ourselves to the level of a killer. Plus life in prison without parole has the added benefit of being revoked should evidence come to light that exonerates the person convicted. Once an execution takes place, there is no undoing the act (and conveniently, there isn't really much motivation to retry the case of an executed person).
Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)And the "easiest solution" is to let it take 30,40,50,60 years?
I don't have a solution. But life without parole places just as much blood on our hands, it just not as noticeable because it happens so slowly.
Hell of a problem, especially before having any caffeine.
JackRiddler
(24,979 posts)Purveyor
(29,876 posts)Politicalboi
(15,189 posts)But I would like to be put to sleep first. No pain, my gain.
joshcryer
(62,269 posts)It's so funny it's a joke. Hell, give the person a book to read and let them have a nap.
Oh wait, it has to be a viewing experience and the murderer must repent.
Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)Nitrogen would just asphyxiate the person and you would have the whole gasping for breath thing going.
backscatter712
(26,355 posts)In workplaces where nitrogen is used, this is a serious danger, so there's a lot of big red warning signs, and employees are required to take precautions.
The gasping reflexes are triggered when there's elevated levels of CO2 in the blood stream.
If you breathe pure nitrogen, your O2 gets consumed, your CO2 gets removed from your blood by the lungs as normal, so you feel fine, right up to the point where you keel over.
Not that I'm a fan of the death penalty, but nitrogen gas would be one of the more humane ways to do it. Which is why the teabaggers looooove the current drug cocktails and their cockups - they like watching people suffer.
joshcryer
(62,269 posts)They literally pass out in pure nitrogen gas. Heart rate doesn't even increase. It's a very very dangerous industrial gas for that reason.
immoderate
(20,885 posts)That makes you dead.
--imm
KinMd
(966 posts)In a dissent to Monday's ruling that put Wood's execution on hold but was overturned by the Supreme Court, Kozinski wrote: "Using drugs meant for individuals with medical needs to carry out executions is a misguided effort to mask the brutality of executions by making them look serene and beautiful - like something any one of us might experience in our final moments. But executions are, in fact, brutal, savage events, and nothing the state tries to do can mask that reality. Nor should we. If we as a society want to carry out executions, we should be willing to face the fact that the state is committing a horrendous brutality on our behalf."
oldandhappy
(6,719 posts)I am anti death penalty. But if we are going to kill someone, let us be sure we kill them. These botched executions are terrorism -- absolutely.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)SpartanDem
(4,533 posts)whatever happens to Wood, the attacks will not stop and for a simple reason: The enterprise is flawed. Using drugs meant for individuals with medical needs to carry out executions is a misguided effort to mask the brutality of executions by making them look serene and peacefullike something any one of us might experience in our final moments
"But executions are, in fact, nothing like that. They are brutal, savage events, and nothing the state tries to do can mask that reality. Nor should it. If we as a society want to carry out executions, we should be willing to face the fact that the state is committing a horrendous brutality on our behalf
Prophet 451
(9,796 posts)Quick, painless, cheap and terminal.
Tom Rinaldo
(22,912 posts)"If we as a society want to carry out executions, we should be willing to face the fact that the state is committing a horrendous brutality on our behalf."
backscatter712
(26,355 posts)The man that passes the sentence must swing the sword.
The judges and jurors that issue death sentences should be required to do the deed themselves.