SuzukiSavage.com /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1606371708 Message started by eau de sauvage on 11/25/20 at 22:21:48

Title: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by eau de sauvage on 11/25/20 at 22:21:48 New Rule Would Allow U.S. to Use More Methods for Executions https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/25/us/politics/executions-death-penalty-rules.html Isn't this against the 'cruel and unusual punishment' part of the Constitution, especially when there is a fast, painless, and certain method that is perfect for countries that insist on murdering criminals. I hear some States have been looking at death by nitrogen gas, but they can't work out if it's safe or effective. Er.. I think seeing as everyone already lives their whole lives bathed in 80% nitrogen gas 24/7 that it is demonstrably  safe. And not having any oxygen is guaranteed 100% effective after only a few minutes. It's cheap, readily available and easy to procure. It appears that the only purpose of introducing these new barbaric methods is simply to make the execution more cruel. And this comes from the same Party that claims to be 'pro life'.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by Eegore on 11/26/20 at 07:40:33 Isn't this against the 'cruel and unusual punishment' part of the Constitution, especially when there is a fast, painless, and certain method that is perfect for countries that insist on murdering criminals.  According to the document: "or by any other manner prescribed by the law of the state in which the sentence was imposed or which has been designated by a court in accordance with"  So only if the State has approved unconstitutional methods would it be considered against the Constitution.  So far no method has been deemed unconstitutional, and in most cases alternatives to lethal injection are the inmate's choice.    Now is it an ethics question?  Sure I think it is, and it would be up to the people of each State to speak their part, mobilize and either stop executions, or attempt to mandate specific methods.  The people have to do this though. "It appears that the only purpose of introducing these new barbaric methods is simply to make the execution more cruel."  My understanding is this keeps executions from stalling indefinitely as Defense teams could claim that the US Government has not authorized means other than lethal injection.  Like nitrogen. "When it filed an initial version of the rule published in August, the Justice Department noted that a state might one day require executions to be conducted by a means other than lethal injection. The proposed rule said it would forestall potential challenges by prisoners to their executions because federal regulations did not expressly authorize execution by means other than lethal injection."  18 U.S.C. 3596 lays it all out.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by Serowbot on 11/26/20 at 07:58:07 From a moral standpoint, I'm against the death penalty. We have been proven to make too many mistakes in judgement. ...but, if it's going to happen,... why don't they use what vet's use on dogs? Whatever that is, works in about 5 seconds, appears painless, is inexpensive, and readily available. I don't see how this is difficult from a practical view. Trump is once again pandering to his base with firing squads. The appeal is baffling.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by Eegore on 11/26/20 at 09:04:44  Vets typically use pentobarbital which is discussed in the articles already provided.  I am only against the death penalty due to economic viability.  I do however think some humans should be exterminated.  For instance one of the briefings I mentioned here in the past was a man who sexually assaulted and brutalized a young child.  He played the "Happy Birthday to You" song each time he raped her so that she would be traumatized emotionally every year at her birthday.  "She will remember what I did to her for the rest of her life." as he said.  He was identified through DNA and dental records as he left bite marks around her genitals.  He bit hard enough to elevate her body, from her genital region, by his mouth alone.  I don't think killing this abuser through judicial ruling will deter any other abuser.  I just think it will assist in the future emotional well-being of the victim and her family.  A small price for this guy to pay in comparison, in my opinion.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by NHLycan on 11/26/20 at 09:57:22 This may be an unusual opinion. I feel like we're being lazy and foolish in incarcerating people for life or executing them. If the goal is simply punishment, I respectfully disagree. If the goal is harm reduction, it seems like there are ways to make an un-rehabilitatable individual unable to hurt others without resort to either of those extremes. Hobbling, blinding, joint pinning, etc have the added benefit of being reversible in case of error. It might also serve as an object lesson to folks on the edge of commiting a crime.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by Matchless G11 on 11/26/20 at 13:29:25 What is more barbaric, executing some one who is a danger to society. a person like a mob boss, who can call out hits on people from solidarity confinement. Or grind up a innocent life that only crime is his or her appearance inside a woman.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by MnSpring on 11/26/20 at 13:53:07 4A5C4B564E5B564D390 wrote: From a moral standpoint, I'm against the death penalty. ... How does that work, when you and a whole bunch of tt clone types, are in favor of: 3E2729297F7F3C2B3A2B2D257D7A7B4E0 wrote: ...  grind up a innocent life,  that only crime is,   his or her appearance inside a woman.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by eau de sauvage on 11/26/20 at 14:41:36 This has sort of gone the way of an oil thread. I didn't mean this to become a debate on the merits or otherwise of the death penalty. The reason for this is er... oil thread, but more realistically, the death penalty is a done deal. Not in all States but overall in the US it happens and it's as impossible to see that it will cease as it would be to see every State vote turn blue, or every State turn red. I was hoping to have a discussion that those who propose the death penalty, either persons or entities, avoid. There is an element of deliberate cruelty in the death penalty as it is currently meted out, and certainly in the reintroduction of firing squad, or electrocutions. There is definitely an element of the bizarre. However even before advance molecular chemistry was a thing, the French had the Guillotine, which seemed to have many advantages over the firing squad. However again, it's the bizarreness of a head rolling into a basket that makes it weird. Thusly lethal injected was invented, ostensibly to be 'more humane'. However no one just got OD'd with heroin because it was deemed to be too pleasant and those administering the punishment wanted the victim to be fully conscious as their life ebbed away. So then we had the macabre spectacles of people taking an inordinately long time to fry, or veins not being found, or the horror of strapping someone to a gurney. Then there were the ethical problems with chemical companies not wanted to supply the drugs necessary, and on and on an apparently, on. I'm sure we've all heard all the arguments regarding methods of execution and my point is that the elephant in the room that 'answers' all the practical objections regarding method of execution, is death by inert gas. And the point of that point, is that it forces those who really want to see the execution be cruel and vindictive and macabre and cause maximum suffering while pretending to be humane, are forced to admit this. To be fair, some people do admit it, they are happy to say they want to see the summbitch die an agonising death, but the State is not allowed to admit that because it doesn't reflect well on how we want to see ourselves. So forgetting the moral arguments about the death penalty and accepting that it's going to happen, if no one can come up with a valid or even plausible reason why execution by removal of oxygen via nitrogen, is not used, then we are forced to admit that the purpose of the methods mentioned in the post title are simply meant to be bizarre and cruel. I suspect that most people when they hear about death by nitrogen gas would automatically relate to the suffocation reflex as being just as bizarre and cruel but of course that is the conclusion that everyone comes to automatically but as some people know, it's not true. I've seen some State reject it because 'not enough studies have been done on it'. But that is ludicrously disingenuous because it's not some strange new chemical. Lack of oxygen does no have different effects on different people, there is nothing complicated or unknown. It would be as simple as just constructing a small chamber with an inlet and outlet where the atmosphere of the room can have it's air replaced with nitrogen in a second or two. It would require no doctors or specialist except to certify death. So I'm saying that to reintroduce these new methods of execution are a tacit admission that the only purpose of execution is to be cruel and bizarre but no one wants to admit it.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by Eegore on 11/26/20 at 16:34:12  I disagree that the "reintrodiction" is exclusively for the cruel and bizarre.  First I'd like to address that certain execution methods predate the containment of gas in pressurized containers or sedation chemicals and as such should not be considered by design to be implemented, historically, for amusement or pain since the alternatives presented here simply did not exist at the time.  I'd like to see evidence of the following: "However no one just got OD'd with heroin because it was deemed to be too pleasant and those administering the punishment wanted the victim to be fully conscious as their life ebbed away."  To claim that the lack of heroin utilized by the State in executions is exclusively due to the desire that the inmate be fully conscious and not due to any other reasons is something I'd like to see evidence of.  How do we know heroin is not used for any other reason and what body "deemed" it to be "too pleasant"?  As far as I am concerned the information provided in the article here is actually opening the door for things like nitrogen to be used.    Again: "the Justice Department noted that a state might one day require executions to be conducted by a means other than lethal injection. The proposed rule said it would forestall potential challenges by prisoners to their executions because federal regulations did not expressly authorize execution by means other than lethal injection."  If you want nitrogen, the change that is being questioned actually helps that process be utilized more efficiently.  Changes to capital punishment in the US us not a quick and easy process.  It's too easy to just lay blame on barbaric human emotions and not on the legal structure itself.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by eau de sauvage on 11/26/20 at 16:47:41 Regarding your first point, what other purposes would there be to reintroduce firing squad, when there is a better alternative in every way. What is this intransigence about. There's no question about the effectiveness of inert gas to do the job without even drugging the victim so they do remain fully aware until just before passing out. Regarding your second point, I'm not arguing about history, my point is that right here right now is a method that addresses ALL the concerns, and problems regarding every other method currently used. What possible reason could you for example come up with to use any other method. Nitrogen does not have any of the many problems of other methods, like not being certain, or being painful or cruel, or contain hard to obtain chemicals, or specialised training etc. See if you can come up with a reason, any reason for not using nitrogen other than any other method, IF the purpose is to simply punish the victim by ending their life only. If nitrogen is not used once the benefits are made clear, which they surely would be to the authorities who investigate these things, then the only conclusion to come to is that they prefer not to use nitrogen which begs the question why? You see people can agitate for electrocution by pointing out the problems with chemical injection, and vice versa, because every method has it's shortcomings, *except* for inert gas hypoxia. The only reasons I've seen given are demonstrably disingenuous.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by Eegore on 11/26/20 at 16:53:44 "What is more barbaric, executing some one who is a danger to society. a person like a mob boss, who can call out hits on people from solidarity confinement. Or grind up a innocent life that only crime is his or her appearance inside a woman."  I'd say both of those are not barbaric by definition but if I were forced to quantify the barbarism of each act I would say executing a live human procedurally is more barbaric by definition than grinding up a fetus inside a woman.    Execution of live humans is typically, to me, less sophisticated than medical procedures.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by Eegore on 11/26/20 at 17:02:28 You see people can agitate for electrocution by pointing out the problems with chemical injection, and vice versa, because every method has it's shortcomings, *except* for inert gas hypoxia. The only reasons I've seen given are demonstrably disingenuous."  Do you have an example of someone arguing against Nitrogen for the purpose of utilizing another method?  All of my information is arguing against Nitrogen for the purpose of not commuting an execution at all.  The information you provide allows for States to more easily implement Nitrogen, or other methods and also get through the massive Appeals process of US law to actually get the execution done.  I don't see any information saying the new structure is for the purpose of reintroducing older methods, but to keep Defense team from using a legal loophole claiming there is no Federal mandate authorizing alternative methods.  The issue is that the Federal Government executes inmates, and so do States.  This is legal structuring to keep a loophole from getting in the way of due legal process at the State level. "the Justice Department noted that a state might one day require executions to be conducted by a means other than lethal injection. The proposed rule said it would forestall potential challenges by prisoners to their executions because federal regulations did not expressly authorize execution by means other than lethal injection."

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by eau de sauvage on 11/27/20 at 00:14:39 Do you have an example of someone arguing against Nitrogen for the purpose of utilizing another method? Not for the "purposes of using another method" because that no one is going to admit to wanting a grotesque and horrific spectacle. I think any argument against it that I have seen is fallacious and there for it is implicit that it is to use already established methods. For example a quick search found this at the top of the list https://oklahomawatch.org/2018/07/17/puzzle-of-nitrogen-execution-could-present-issues-for-state/ and these are the 'arguments' against it... The prisoner may then have a mask or a plastic hood or bag strapped to his face. that is unnecessarily strange. Either an entire small room just large enough to hold the gurney that is able to be evacuated of air quickly. Or if the victim is strapped to the gurney then a perpsex dome could be lowered over the gurney. Something like that. But more to the point look at this nonsense ...how it will force inmates to inhale it, what will happen should they hold their breath or resist, and how to ensure guards and visitors are safe from its toxic fumes, all of which could open up legal, practical and public-perception challenges. How to force inmates to inhale, is exactly the same question as 'what if they hold their breath'. Er that is not possible, there is hundreds of millions of years of evolution that stops this. This is why we don't see anyone committing suicide by holding their breath. it's not possible. So that is one example of an obviously idiotic and fallacious "problem", it's idiotic because you don't need me to tell you that you cannot just hold your breath till you die everyone knows this. But not only that, it's obviously not the nitrogen that is killing the person, so not breathing it ain't gonna help. State officials insist that executions using nitrogen hypoxia will be humane, although details have been scarce about how the first nitrogen execution would look. There is no point "insisting" that it is 'humane', we already know it is. In fact the reason that hypoxia from G forces or high altitude is so dangerous is precisely because it's painless and in fact pleasant from what I hear. Details need not be scarce because there's nothing complicated about it. Then they go on and on about a 'protocol'. Obviously the pre and post protocols are the same, except that there would be less trauma for the people administering it due to the obviously painless death with no suffering. But there's no need to complex execution protocols, what's to think about. The victim is in an airtight enclosure and air is evacuated and replaced with nitrogen. I'm sure an engineer can come up with a design pretty quickly. That could delay the state’s next execution by months as attorneys take the matter to court, reminding judges that Oklahoma botched one execution in 2014 and used the wrong drug in another one in 2015. Why? What's the point on reminding the judge of problems that only exist in older methods that are utterly irrelevant ? This doesn't make sense at all. If there are complications in using nitrogen, they will likely arise at crucial steps in the protocol, which will be written to avoid violating the Eighth Amendment’s ban against cruel and unusual punishment or creating a spectacle that the public and elected leaders would not accept. The entire nation – much of the world, in fact – will be watching. Again irrelevant. There's nothing that can go wrong assuming that obvious steps have been taken, the whole world can watch, they won't see anything other than someone peacefully going to sleep. There only thing cruel about it is the fact of the execution itself. Maybe a victim might be screaming but they won't be in pain. What is all this talk about "protocol" as if there's something complex about it. But a key question is whether offenders would need a sedative to reduce the chances that they thrash about and disrupt the process. A sedative would no be necessary because you don't have to try and put stents into their arms. They only need to be fixed to the gurney which already happens, and even that is not necessary. They could just be in a completely empty small chamber with padded walls. Conducting an execution is neither simple nor easy, particularly with a new method that has no track record, say capital punishment attorneys and others who track death penalty issues. Again the above is disingenuous. To say 'no track record' is irrelevant hypoxia is well understood, everyone know exactly what is going to happen they are not going to suddenly discover by surprise that someone is immune to oxygen starvation. “Are you going to force the person’s head into the helmet? How is that going to look?” Again, unnecessary, just use something like a hyperbaric chamber not a mask or a helmet. ferchrissakes. People commit suicide with masks because they don't have access to a proper chamber, not because that's the best way to do it. I think we can assume that the State has the resources to do this properly. “How do you ensure that the nitrogen won’t leak out or that oxygen won’t leak in?” Again, use a proper hyperbaric style chamber. The flow of nitrogen also would have to be controlled so that it can’t escape and endanger prison personnel and observers should the inmate refuse to breathe. That's just silly. All solved with a sealed chamber. Even a bit of nitrogen leaking out is not dangerous. After 5 minutes, the nitrogen doesn't even need to be evacuated, all that needs to be done is pip some oxygen into the room.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by Matchless G11 on 11/27/20 at 06:57:26 0E2E2C24392E4B0 wrote: "What is more barbaric, executing some one who is a danger to society. a person like a mob boss, who can call out hits on people from solidarity confinement. Or grind up a innocent life that only crime is his or her appearance inside a woman."  I'd say both of those are not barbaric by definition but if I were forced to quantify the barbarism of each act I would say executing a live human procedurally is more barbaric by definition than grinding up a fetus inside a woman.    Execution of live humans is typically, to me, less sophisticated than medical procedures. So how do you define life? Heart beat and brain waves is not alive to you? Have you ever watched a abortion under sonogram? If a woman feels a kick inside her  is someone not alive?

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by Eegore on 11/27/20 at 07:31:15  So Eau you break down an article written by by Ben Botkin who in my opinion has zero credibility in how executions or execution law in the US work.  I would debate his nonsense too, but I would not say it is for the purpose of creating more cruel punishments.  He is not imagining bad nitrogen events so we can go shoot or hang the inmate instead.   Arguments against nitrogen are not arguments FOR firing squads.  They are arguments against any form of capital punishment, or they are pro-lethal injection over nitrogen.    I have not seen any information that indicates the order changes are for the purpose of "reintroducing" any execution methods.  I have not seen any evidence that the order changes in any way suggest nitrogen is not an acceptable method.  It is re-worded to allow methods other than lethal injection to be used at the State level.  Not "older" methods, but "other" methods.  You literally are referencing an order designed to free up the use of nitrogen to claim it is for reintroducing more cruel methods.  If anything it is pro-nitrogen.  I think if Biden made this change the argument wouldn't even come up.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by Eegore on 11/27/20 at 07:38:19 "So how do you define life? Heart beat and brain waves is not alive to you? Have you ever watched a abortion under sonogram? If a woman feels a kick inside her  is someone not alive?"  I've seen several abortions under sonogram.  I've also seen a coat-hangar abortion, a boot abortion, poison, and a woman shot in the stomach.  I was answering your question about barbarism.  I do not feel that an abortion is more barbaric, by definition, than the State sanctioned execution of an adult human.  Let me restructure the statement to better clarify: Execution of born humans is typically, to me, less sophisticated than medical procedures executing unborn humans.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by eau de sauvage on 11/27/20 at 13:28:08 Eegore, You just asked for examples I'm not saying that the writer of that article was a qualified Brain of Britain, it was just top of a google list that contained typical objections. The point I was making is that any objection you can find for the use of N are of the same order of merit, i.e. they have none. I have not seen any information that indicates the order changes are for the purpose of "reintroducing" any execution methods. Yes you already said that, and I already answered it. But I'll answer again, I am saying that because the use of N answers every practical objection to the use of all other methods of carrying out the death penalty, other than (moral related objections because that's not my topic) and that there is an implicit statement that other methods are preferred. Why? Because once it has been legally established that the States have the authority to execute, then the only avenue available to those to protest the action is to use technical issues like the obvious failures that we've already seen, including cruelty. Yet in spite of this even States that have in principle accepted execution by N they are slow walking it using old excuses that don't make any sense, because there are no practical excuses. Why would this be, why would it be that States that are anxious to execute are nevertheless making it more difficult for themselves by opening themselves up to lawsuits that challenge their means on reasonable grounds. I'm sure that hanging and firing squad can also be challenged, in the same way as lethal injection. After all there's no guarantee that a hanging or a frying or a firing cannot go wrong, then it's back to court. What other plausible reason is there for these States that are fighting to execute not simply getting the N setup done. See? I'm saying that it is implicit that there must be a desire to use the other obviously frightening and barbaric methods. And 'barbaric' is temporally relevant. For example pulling a tooth out without anaesthetic as a normal procedure was not barbaric at one time in the past, but it would be today if it was done for no reason.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by Eegore on 11/27/20 at 14:32:31 "What other plausible reason is there for these States that are fighting to execute not simply getting the N setup done. See? I'm saying that it is implicit that there must be a desire to use the other obviously frightening and barbaric methods."  I don't agree.  I think a State can say that since executions are being done by method A, and we have arguments against both method A, and the unused Method B, we have a better chance of sustaining a verdict in our favor if the already legally proven method A is used.  I don't think that arguments from a State, if they exist, against nitrogen exist exclusively because the State wants to use firing squads or similar.  I also think the change you referenced are to open the field to alternate methods, including nitrogen, and not to revert execution actions to hangings, firing squads an electric chairs.  No Federal action ever removed firing squads, so how can they "reintroduce" them?

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by eau de sauvage on 11/27/20 at 15:46:39 But that's my point, there are no arguments against 'method b', i.e. N hypoxia, that are not demonstrably false. So let's play the devil's advocate then, try and come up with a plausible reason not for any State that sanctions death by any other method to not immediately begin using the N word. N hypoxia has been known for a long time, long enough that it is deliberately eschewed, by pretending that it's just another method, or by simply ignoring it. There is obviously a conscious or even subconscious pull away from it. It's like it doesn't want to be faced because it somehow shows something we don't want to know. What I find extra strange is that even in countries that have Euthanasia end of life centres, they don't use it. Preferring instead to use lethal injection albeit not one as horrific as that used for execution. I'm just pointing out facts that are puzzling or lead one in different thought directions. I'm guessing that authorities do not want to draw people attention to how easy and painless and even pleasant it can be to off yourself. Notwithstanding of course that the thought process that leads one in this direction is indicative of a a disturbed mind. It's like we'd rather that N executions just went away.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by Eegore on 11/27/20 at 21:10:09  I don't think the lack of "immediate" action in the US judicial system for capital punishment is due to a desire to cause undue terror.  I think the US Judicial system is typically not fast.  You mention "authorities" and I find it difficult to imagine that all 50 States managed to get like-minded people on board regarding Nitrogen in executions and incidentally every one of them wants to direct the public away from knowledge on the issue.  I don't expect anything to change overnight but I do know some States are ok with nitrogen as an option.    I do not think the order you initially presented reintroduced anything.  Especially since some states are actually ok with it an are in the research/development process.  Just because anyone can build a box and put gas in it doesn't mean the bureaucracy will be any more efficient.  I think once one State finally gets it done it will move quickly to others.  Then of course there's issues like this: https://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/story/news/2019/02/22/death-nitrogen-oklahomas-struggle-purchase-equipment-possible-problem-alabama/2937563002/

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by eau de sauvage on 11/27/20 at 22:12:46 From your link.. They said the change was necessary because finding lethal injection drugs had become increasingly difficult. See that's another example of the disingenuousness of the objections. As if it's only about the availability of the lethal injection drugs, that implies that were there no  problem with other methods that they'd wouldn't use N. Also your link keeps saying they cannot procure a 'delivery device', they do not say what this device actually is. When in fact no special device is necessary the state can commission the construction of a chamber and they can commission the necessary air evacuation plumbing, there will definitely be a small engineering company that would build it. Unlike obtaining lethal chemical that require to be manufactured by large name brand pharma companies. As to obtaining N I've been able to obtain that easily for using gas agitation in easily oxidised chemical solutions. Well not any longer but I used to. Similarly being able to procure N is easy because it has so many industrial uses and it's a non toxic non flammable gas. Think about this, you already have someone strapped into a gurney. Well how difficult is it to get a local perspex manufacture to make a dome that fits over the gurney, they just need to suck the air out while feeding nitrogen in. There's nothing more complex than that. Easy to test on animals. Not only that but there nothing that can go wrong, even if the gas gets in there too slowly, the effect is the same, the euphoria would last a bit longer, there'd be no one writhing around in agony. But your link proves my point again how the arguments they present do not stand up to scrutiny. As for it needing time, death by hypoxia has been known for a century. Or more, think about the experiments of Joseph Priestly with 'dephlogisticated air' hundreds of years ago! It's obvious that the States that have introduced the death penalty are eager to use it otherwise why introduce it. Yet as eager as they are there doesn't seem to be any rush to use the one method that survives all objections. I'm just taking these facts and drawing the inevitable conclusion.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by Eegore on 11/27/20 at 22:43:13  I don't think intent to commit more suffering than necessary is the inevitable conclusion.  I also don't think, having worked with the US Government for years, that any contract to build a device, even if that device is a chamber, and then a method to execute someone is as easy as you make it sound.  It's not hard to do the building, it's just a long drawn out process to do it for the purpose of killing people by using US tax dollars.  I also find it improbable that every state managed to get like-minded people to think and act the same way in regards to nitrogen and agree to downplay it equally to the general population.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by eau de sauvage on 11/27/20 at 23:44:28 It doesn't have to be a stated conspiracy, and the arguments you make regarding the difficult of construction and testing would be relevant to the three methods suggested in the thread title, but as I've said before are definitely no relevant. Sure everything has to be done by the book, but it's not a very complex book. And we've just seen a 5 year virus plan finished in 18 months, and that is right at the limit of complexity. There are government engineers who design and build complex engineering projects. With the simple specification needed for an inert gas chamber it would be a relatively easy design and build. The only requirement are to be able to evacuate a seal chamber, it's not working with poison gas, people jerry rig this up in their own homes with a plastic bag. As I said, try and come up with a plausible reason why States that want to execute prisoners, don't get this fast tracked rather than continue with other methods that have myriad inherent problems Come up with a plausible reason, I've asked you three times and you just twist it around to say that you don't think people are all agreeing together. The very fact that you cannot come up with a plausible reason proves my point, there is none. Ergo we have to hypothesise why not? The clichéd reasons you've given apply to the current methods. And as I've said, this is not new technology, it's been known for hundreds of years. There must be a particular attraction to persisting with the methods in the thread title.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by WebsterMark on 11/28/20 at 05:26:34 I am against the death penalty. I don’t believe The State can take someone’s life. That’s not an easy position given some crimes. We had a 5 year old boy, blind and who wore braces to walk, beaten to death by his mother’s boyfriend while she was at hospital giving birth. I had to alter my position on the death penalty to be consistent with my pro-life beliefs. That doesn’t mean self-defense, that doesn’t mean police action, wars etc... It means The State shouldn’t be able to take a life for a crime after a trial. No execution 5 years after the fact is any type of deterrent. You think if they were to execute that stupid little Boston kid who put a bomb next to a child and his mother that some other nut is gonna change his mind? Hardly.  I realize that brings a host of other problems into the mix with prisons etc, but that’s part of the gig. Now, I’m all in favor of some poor soul surrounded and attacked by leftist scum antifa pulling out an AR and leaving brains scatter across the street. If the 1 in a 100 odds come through and a recount gives Trump what we all know really happened (he won) and leftist scum start tearing up cities, I’m fine with live ammo. Waste a few pretend militants in the front lines and those upper middle class freaks will run back to parents basement and perhaps start re-evaluating life choices. Immediate consequences tends to have results to in actions.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by MnSpring on 11/28/20 at 07:19:34 655750414657407F534059320 wrote: ... No execution 5 years after the fact is any type of deterrent. ... Used to be when Criminals were put to death, it was a deterrent. Because everyone was reminded, You stole a horse, (etc), you were hung. It was a public display. It was a deterrent. Now the ‘PC’ correct UL, FDS’s, Have HIDDEN it away !

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by MnSpring on 11/28/20 at 07:39:24 0F3D3A2B2C3D2A15392A33580 wrote: I am against the death penalty. ... As many people who are HONEST. Yet the tt clones and UL FDS Socialists, all say, 'No Death Penalty', YET They are All for KILLING, a unborn Human !!!!!!! And making those who's Religious Doctrine  say's aborting (KILLING a Human for Pleasure) is a MURDER,   PAY For It !

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by Eegore on 11/28/20 at 09:14:05  The construction is not difficult, the implementation in law is inefficient.  Maybe if millions of murderers were waiting to be executed at the cost of millions more lives and crippling impacts on the economy then sure I can see them fast-tracking this like an international virus.  US law is slow.  My reason for States not fast tracking nitrogen is one: Very few people need it in comparison to other things in US State legislature.  Two: They are trying to use it, but no matter how simple something is, like putting in a section of sidewalk, it can take years to get approved because of the bureaucracy.  A car wash needed a curbing drop off in my town and it took 3 years to get the permits and approval and about an hour to get the curb dropped.  Again I see no reason to believe that the order you provided is for the purpose of "reintroducing" any method, but to allow for future methods to be implemented with less legal barriers.  I also do not think any "authorities" are trying to keep the general population from knowing what nitrogen is and how it could work in executions.  If anything I would think that State legislators would prefer to have a more socially accepted method, that's low cost and in ample supply just so they can get it over with.  Making a few people feel pain for a few seconds every decade is most likely not that important by my assessment.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by WebsterMark on 11/29/20 at 04:56:13 The whole topic is not particularly important yet I heard it a few times yesterday on what passes as news. What I did not hear is the Thanksgiving Day vandalism by Uncle Joe’s antifa friends. Nor did I see anything about the wild and violent protest in Paris yesterday. The media is still covering for their boy Joe. They don’t want the public to see what Biden’s about to face knowing full well he’s an aging dementia patient and some unknown, behind the scenes member of the circle who know how far gone he is will make the decisions. Plus, it might increase the calls to stop this illegitimate election from continuing. It’s like we’re all saying “That’s a beautiful baby” to the new parents but we know it’s the ugliest baby ever but no one wants to say it. WTF people. The media conspired with The Democrats to steal a Presidential election and everyone’s going along with it.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by MnSpring on 11/29/20 at 06:48:37 083A3D2C2B3A2D123E2D345F0 wrote: ... the Thanksgiving Day vandalism by Uncle Joe’s antifa friends. ... The media is still covering for their boy Joe. ... Na, just that the TV sets all broke, and they needed new ones. And and the BLM (Belt Loops Mater) crowd, just lent a hand. No big deal, It's not news to be shared, cause YOU, don't need to hear it.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by Eegore on 11/29/20 at 16:47:47  I don't know what "news" you guys are using but the Thanksgiving Day damage was the very first thing I saw.  Paris was on our local news.   "WTF people. The media conspired with The Democrats to steal a Presidential election and everyone’s going along with it."  Still waiting for all that proof that claimed that they have on this.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by WebsterMark on 11/30/20 at 05:04:52 Sometimes Eegore, the bad guys get away with the diamonds. Odds are, it will probably happen here. As was said once in a great movie, “It’s not what you know, it’s what you can prove.” There’s too much smoke not to be a fire. Biden is the ultimate illegitimate President. The “press” protected him, never pressed him (and won’t until they make the calculation it’s time for Harris to take over), the mail-in-votes and absentee ballot fraud carried the day. It might not be provable but it happened. Not Biden is asking for me to “come together.” FU Uncle Joe. Will never happen.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by Eegore on 11/30/20 at 05:56:53  I think if the stats were reversed Trump would be celebrated as the only person capable of doing it.  Since Biden won it's all fraud.  Why was it ok to have these under-voting ballots when Trump won, but now they are "all proof" of fraud?  Why was there "stop the count" in areas where Trump was winning, but "keep counting" where he was losing?  Which is it?  Count the absentee ballots or don't?  Convenient that it's "Trump was robbed", and also "wait and see what's presented", and now it's "Trump was robbed still".  Why even have this talk of waiting for investigations if the unfavorable outcome will just be dismissed?

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by WebsterMark on 11/30/20 at 07:04:26 1B3B39312C3B5E0 wrote:  I think if the stats were reversed Trump would be celebrated as the only person capable of doing it.  Since Biden won it's all fraud.  Why was it ok to have these under-voting ballots when Trump won, but now they are "all proof" of fraud?  Why was there "stop the count" in areas where Trump was winning, but "keep counting" where he was losing?  Which is it?  Count the absentee ballots or don't?  Convenient that it's "Trump was robbed", and also "wait and see what's presented", and now it's "Trump was robbed still".  Why even have this talk of waiting for investigations if the unfavorable outcome will just be dismissed?   Wouldn’t you be a joy to have on a jury.....! There was nothing of this magnitude in 2016. Nothing. It’s not even remotely close and it’s disingenuous to even suggest that it was. If you want to play that game, look at the past three years of ridiculous overreaction’s to a few Facebook ads made by some Russian operatives which everybody knows made zero impact on the election. Don’t even pretend otherwise. Stop permanently playing the role of Switzerland. Sooner or later you’ve got a $hit or get off the pot.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by WebsterMark on 11/30/20 at 08:19:10 I mean, you know how Biden hers ankle right? He tripped over a box of Trump ballots in his basement!

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by MnSpring on 11/30/20 at 10:06:01 0E3C3B2A2D3C2B14382B32590 wrote: “It’s not what you know, it’s what you can prove.” ... Biden is the ultimate illegitimate President ... The Catholic Church survived a Female Pope. The USA can survive, Ultra Liberal, Fairy Dust Sprinkling, Socialists. For the tt clones. Resist, is NOT the same as, Stealing, Starting Fires, Destroying, wearing full face masks, shouting obscenities, Sucker punching old ladies, And standing in the street CRYING !!!!!!!!!!

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by Eegore on 11/30/20 at 12:25:29 "Wouldn’t you be a joy to have on a jury.....!  Only if you want the jury to use evidence and not opinions from the internet from people that already had their mind made up. There was nothing of this magnitude in 2016. Nothing. It’s not even remotely close and it’s disingenuous to even suggest that it was.  Except I pointed out the circumstances where it was and instead of addressing that, its deflect to other issues.  I understand things need to be investigated but we can't look at one disproven section and say, no ignore that one now, look at this one over here instead.  Why are the undervotes only an issue where Trump lost?  Why aren't they an issue in the locations where he won?  If this is for the election security of the nation why cherry-pick the locations?   If you want to play that game, look at the past three years of ridiculous overreaction’s to a few Facebook ads made by some Russian operatives which everybody knows made zero impact on the election. Don’t even pretend otherwise.  I agree and have all along.  The issue was people here said they ere not "bots" and I contest that as no human can move fast enough to send 100,000 posts in under 2 minutes.  That was automated, it was from Russia.   Stop permanently playing the role of Switzerland. Sooner or later you’ve got a $hit or get off the pot.  Given the conditions I live in I think I am doing just fine using evidence over self-fulfilling internet articles.  Instead of complaining that Trump's election was stolen I am trying to sit down with COVID test ransomware mitigation teams and getting their take on how this type of software works, seeing it in person, and testing it in what capacity I can.  Or I guess I can just use Google and then complain about how terrible resources are these days.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by eau de sauvage on 11/30/20 at 14:39:49 Just published today, worth a read answers many of the question that have come up. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/11/trump-approves-hanging-firing-squads-executions.html

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by WebsterMark on 11/30/20 at 14:48:18 Why are the undervotes only an issue where Trump lost?  Why aren't they an issue in the locations where he won?  If this is for the election security of the nation why cherry-pick the locations? Would a thief go back to the store he stole the diamonds from and say, “Look, I stole RP the rubies too?”

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by Eegore on 11/30/20 at 14:57:32 "Would a thief go back to the store he stole the diamonds from and say, “Look, I stole RP the rubies too?”"  No.  But that's also not what I am asking.  I'm asking if stolen diamonds are an issue, why are stolen diamonds only an issue in areas where your diamonds were, and not all missing diamonds?   Only investigate missing diamonds at stores I lost them, not any other store.  Does that sound like a thorough investigation to you?  Why are undervotes only to be investigated if those votes are in areas where Biden won, and not in other areas?  Especially when that exact thing happened in 2016, but in Trump's favor.    If undervotes are an issue that needs to be investigated, why are they not an issue everywhere?  If this is for the election security of the Nation, why is it not a National concern?

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by WebsterMark on 12/01/20 at 05:14:52 Why are undervotes only to be investigated if those votes are in areas where Biden won, and not in other areas?  Especially when that exact thing happened in 2016, but in Trump's favor.   Biden won. Democrats are the diamond thieves in this scenario so they aren’t going to investigate the crime scene. That should be obvious. And the “exact same thing” didn’t happen with Trump. Stop saying that. There weren’t millions of mail in ballots and absentee ballots in 2016 ripe for exploiting. The left fabricated a Russian hoax, don’t you think they would have looked at an issue like this had it occurred in 2016? In fact, they tried a little. Look it up. There was a few CNN stories how voting machines were rigged to switch votes to Trump, but it went nowhere mostly because citizens didn’t stand up and object like they are now. They didn’t because there wasn’t anything to object to. If undervotes are an issue that needs to be investigated, why are they not an issue everywhere?  If this is for the election security of the Nation, why is it not a National concern? It is a national concern. It’s a huge concern. I saw part of the hearing in Arizona going on at the same time the Governor certified the results.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by WebsterMark on 12/01/20 at 05:39:00 Part of an article from:Patrick Basham is director of the Democracy Institute. You can’t wave this off and say same thing happened in 2016 because it didn’t. You have to explain this. Look at it this way; imagine you’re a astronomer and see an apparent paradox going on in the sky. You can’t actually observe it directly so all you can do is analyze what you can observe and determine the likely cause. For example, in the early days of astronomy, observed phenomenon did not match accepted belief i.e. the phases of Venus, moons around Jupiter etc. argued against the earth centered belief  of the time. Those astronomical pioneers persisted and eventually won the day. That’s all I’m saying. Explain how Trump over performed with African-Americans in virtually every major city with the exception of three large metropolitan areas in three key swing states. You have to explain that. First, consider some facts. President Trump received more votes than any previous incumbent seeking reelection. He got 11 million more votes than in 2016, the third largest rise in support ever for an incumbent. By way of comparison, President Obama was comfortably reelected in 2012 with 3.5 million fewer votes than he received in 2008. Trump’s vote increased so much because, according to exit polls, he performed far better with many key demographic groups. Ninety-five percent of Republicans voted for him. He did extraordinarily well with rural male working-class whites. He earned the highest share of all minority votes for a Republican since 1960. Trump grew his support among black voters by 50 percent over 2016. Nationally, Joe Biden’s black support fell well below 90 percent, the level below which Democratic presidential candidates usually lose. Trump increased his share of the national Hispanic vote to 35 percent. With 60 percent or less of the national Hispanic vote, it is arithmetically impossible for a Democratic presidential candidate to win Florida, Arizona, Nevada, and New Mexico. Bellwether states swung further in Trump’s direction than in 2016. Florida, Ohio and Iowa each defied America’s media polls with huge wins for Trump. Since 1852, only Richard Nixon has lost the Electoral College after winning this trio, and that 1960 defeat to John F. Kennedy is still the subject of great suspicion. Midwestern states Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin always swing in the same direction as Ohio and Iowa, their regional peers. Ohio likewise swings with Florida. Current tallies show that, outside of a few cities, the Rust Belt swung in Trump’s direction. Yet, Biden leads in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin because of an apparent avalanche of black votes in Detroit, Philadelphia, and Milwaukee. Biden’s ‘winning’ margin was derived almost entirely from such voters in these cities, as coincidentally his black vote spiked only in exactly the locations necessary to secure victory. He did not receive comparable levels of support among comparable demographic groups in comparable states, which is highly unusual for the presidential victor. We are told that Biden won more votes nationally than any presidential candidate in history. But he won a record low of 17 percent of counties; he only won 524 counties, as opposed to the 873 counties Obama won in 2008. Yet, Biden somehow outdid Obama in total votes. Victorious presidential candidates, especially challengers, usually have down-ballot coattails; Biden did not. The Republicans held the Senate and enjoyed a ‘red wave’ in the House, where they gained a large number of seats while winning all 27 toss-up contests. Trump’s party did not lose a single state legislature and actually made gains at the state level. Another anomaly is found in the comparison between the polls and non-polling metrics. The latter include: party registrations trends; the candidates’ respective primary votes; candidate enthusiasm; social media followings; broadcast and digital media ratings; online searches; the number of (especially small) donors; and the number of individuals betting on each candidate. Despite poor recent performances, media and academic polls have an impressive 80 percent record predicting the winner during the modern era. But, when the polls err, non-polling metrics do not; the latter have a 100 percent record. Every non-polling metric forecast Trump’s reelection. For Trump to lose this election, the mainstream polls needed to be correct, which they were not. Furthermore, for Trump to lose, not only did one or more of these metrics have to be wrong for the first time ever, but every single one had to be wrong, and at the very same time; not an impossible outcome, but extremely unlikely nonetheless. Atypical voting patterns married with misses by polling and non-polling metrics should give observers pause for thought. Adding to the mystery is a cascade of information about the bizarre manner in which so many ballots were accumulated and counted. The following peculiarities also lack compelling explanations: 1. Late on election night, with Trump comfortably ahead, many swing states stopped counting ballots. In most cases, observers were removed from the counting facilities. Counting generally continued without the observers 2. Statistically abnormal vote counts were the new normal when counting resumed. They were unusually large in size (hundreds of thousands) and had an unusually high (90 percent and above) Biden-to-Trump ratio 3. Late arriving ballots were counted. In Pennsylvania, 23,000 absentee ballots have impossible postal return dates and another 86,000 have such extraordinary return dates they raise serious questions 4. The failure to match signatures on mail-in ballots. The destruction of mail-in ballot envelopes, which must contain signatures 5. Historically low absentee ballot rejection rates despite the massive expansion of mail voting. Such is Biden’s narrow margin that, as political analyst Robert Barnes observes, ‘If the states simply imposed the same absentee ballot rejection rate as recent cycles, then Trump wins the election’ 6. Missing votes. In Delaware County, Pennsylvania, 50,000 votes held on 47 USB cards are missing 7. Non-resident voters. Matt Braynard’s Voter Integrity Project estimates that 20,312 people who no longer met residency requirements cast ballots in Georgia. Biden’s margin is 12,670 votes *** Get a digital subscription to The Spectator. Try a month free, then just $3.99 a month *** 8. Serious ‘chain of custody’ breakdowns. Invalid residential addresses. Record numbers of dead people voting. Ballots in pristine condition without creases, that is, they had not been mailed in envelopes as required by law 9. Statistical anomalies. In Georgia, Biden overtook Trump with 89 percent of the votes counted. For the next 53 batches of votes counted, Biden led Trump by the same exact 50.05 to 49.95 percent margin in every single batch. It is particularly perplexing that all statistical anomalies and tabulation abnormalities were in Biden’s favor. Whether the cause was simple human error or nefarious activity, or a combination, clearly something peculiar happened. If you think that only weirdos have legitimate concerns about these findings and claims, maybe the weirdness lies in you.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by Serowbot on 12/01/20 at 07:08:27 Hugo Chavez did it.  ::) Many of these disputed states are governed by Republican, Trump supporting governors,... with Republican legislators and Republicans in charge of elections. That "hearing" Rudy held in Arizona was held in a hotel lobby, a circus show for the press... and while Republican Gov. Douchey was certifying the results he got a call from Trump... ...he didn't answer it  ;D 30 failed lawsuits, most deemed totally frivolous. Ridiculous conspiracy theories with no evidence. Pedophiles and baby eaters,.. dead S. American leaders, and videos of sample ballots presented as evidence. Trump has said out loud that he would claim victory early, before the mail-in votes came in, knowing he'd have an in-person vote advantage.  We all knew that. Now he keeps saying all he has to do is get one lawsuit to the SCOTUS so they can overthrow the will of the people. Trump lost. Trump can't show any fraud. Trump can't convince electors to vote against the will of the people. Now he hopes SCOTUS will hand him the election. Hugo Chavez would be so proud.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by WebsterMark on 12/01/20 at 09:31:41 You said nothing of value. What did you think about some of the information given in Arizona? Oh wait, you don’t care what they said.....

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by Serowbot on 12/01/20 at 09:58:51 You cut n' paste from a Right Wing, pro-tobacco site and say I said nothing of value?... You're right, I don't care what they say. Try some real news,.... real facts. Quote: The Democracy Institute is a think tank based in Washington, DC and London. It was founded in 2006. According to the University of Bath's Tobacco Tactics project the Institute has taken part in pro-tobacco activities and has previously received funding from the tobacco industry.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by justin_o_guy2 on 12/01/20 at 11:24:43 Quote: The Democracy Institute is a think tank based in Washington, DC and London. It was founded in 2006. According to the University of Bath's Tobacco Tactics project the Institute has taken part in pro- activities and has previously received funding from the tobacco industry. Which means every fact they point out suddenly not factual. Rather than dismiss what was said Because of the source, how about addressing the statements? Ohhh, wait, indisputable claims require indignation...

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by Serowbot on 12/01/20 at 12:02:12 From Trump's own boy... Barr: No evidence of fraud that’d change election outcome “To date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have affected a different outcome in the election,” Barr told the AP.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by justin_o_guy2 on 12/01/20 at 12:08:56 Ohhh, pretend some more. Barr is swamp from the marrow out. He is as much Trump's boy as McCain was. Barr / Ruby Ridge.. I'm tired of typing it out.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by eau de sauvage on 12/01/20 at 14:37:19 Barr is now the enemy? Lol, he's not only Trump's most loyal defender but he's the one who abused his power, and trashed his credibility to lie continuously to defend Trump. That you now brand him as discredited is a testament to your batshit crazy reality bubble. This forum need to be put in a straight jacket, lead weighted and sent to a watery grave.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by Eegore on 12/01/20 at 14:41:16  The issue with The Democracy Institute is they, along with a lot of these articles, provide zero reference.  So these "polls and polling metrics" I guess I just take this guy's word because he won't disclose what polls, or what metrics were used.  As for undervoting, yes the exact same thing happened.  It was literally the exact same thing: People who vote only for President.  There is no other factor than a ballot that is only indicating a mark for a President and no other entry is made.  That happened in Trump's favor, but now when it's Biden's it is "proof" of fraud.  Why is undervoting not "proof" of fraud in areas where Trump has majority undervotes?  If undervoting is what the "proof" is then all undervoting is an issue.  If in context the undervoting is skewed at a large margin then fine, but conveniently the other side of the coin is left out of the challenge.  All one has to do is go read articles from 2016 addressing this same issue, the exact same issue.  Or look at basic numbers such as what can be found on the consistently audited Congressional Votes Database: 2000: Republicans received 3.46 fewer votes in House races than they did for President. Democrats received 4.41 million fewer votes. 2004: Republicans received 6.08 million fewer votes in House races than they did for President. Democrats received 6.05 million fewer votes. 2008: Republicans received 7.69 million fewer votes for House than they did for President. Democrats received 4.26 fewer votes. 2012: Republicans received 2.70 million fewer votes for House than they did for President. Democrats received 6.27 million fewer votes. 2016: Republicans received 188,987 MORE votes for House than they did for President. Democrats received 4.07 million fewer votes. https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by WebsterMark on 12/01/20 at 16:03:05 Eegore, there’s never been a situation with this scale of mail in votes and absentee ballots. People can laugh at the ad hoc hearings being held but there are just far too many situations to be flutes. These are citizens coming forward. I know it’s popular just to take the easy way out and say well the people in charge have said everything is on the up and up, there’s no chance for disaster. Let’s remember that’s exactly what they said about the Titanic. I do not think Trump will ultimately prevail. And most of this is trumps fault. He’s alienated so many that many political leaders like in Arizona and Georgia have no desire to fight for him. Remember, Trump was essentially a third-party candidate that dragged Republicans to his side when they realize the ground support for Trump was too large to fight against. They had to work with him. Look at Lindsey Graham, look at Ted Cruz, look at rand Paul, look at Marco Rubio. But the  news media hated him with a burning passion and they actively campaigned and worked against him. You cannot deny that. Any more than you can deny he basically challenge them to do it and they did. Biden and Harris faced very few serious questions very few. It’s a joke. Now we’re going to have six months of Joe Biden and 3 1/2 years of Kamala Harris.   And I know Trump is talking about 2024, but I think that’ll fade out. I wouldn’t want to have to support him again. He’s fulfill the role he needed to fill. Somebody else will have to step up and try to save this country from the leftist socialist scum that populate the democratic party.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by WebsterMark on 12/01/20 at 16:36:29 And how, why,  did Trump gain in black votes yet lose huge black votes in key cities in key swing states?

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by justin_o_guy2 on 12/01/20 at 16:48:07 70627675626466030 wrote: Barr is now the enemy? Lol, he's not only Trump's most loyal defender but he's the one who abused his power, and trashed his credibility to lie continuously to defend Trump. That you now brand him as discredited is a testament to your batshit crazy reality bubble. This forum need to be put in a straight jacket, lead weighted and sent to a watery grave. Now? I've been throwing rocks at that pos from day one.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by NHLycan on 12/02/20 at 04:17:05 "For how could you establish even the most obvious fact when there existed no record outside your own memory? He tried to remember in what year he had first heard mention of Big Brother. He thought it must have been at some time in the sixties, but it was impossible to be certain. In the Party histories, of course, Big Brother figured as the leader and guardian of the Revolution since its very earliest days. His exploits had been gradually pushed backwards in time until already they extended into the fabulous world of the forties and the thirties, when the capitalists in their strange cylindrical hats still rode through the streets of London in great gleaming motor-cars or horse carriages with glass sides. There was no knowing how much of this legend was true and how much invented. Winston could not even remember at what date the Party itself had come into existence. (1.3.22) Without physical records outside of his own memory, Winston experiences great trouble in trying to remember the commencement of the Party's rule. Winston could not definitely remember a time when his country had not been at war, but it was evident that there had been a fairly long interval of peace during his childhood, because one of his early memories was of an air raid which appeared to take everyone by surprise. Perhaps it was the time when the atomic bomb had fallen on Colchester. He did not remember the raid itself [...]. (1.3.12) No matter how hard he scrutinizes his memory, Winston is uncertain whether a time existed when Oceania was not at war with someone. And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed - if all records told the same tale - then the lie passed into history and became truth. "Who controls the past," ran the Party slogan, "controls the future: who controls the present controls the past." And yet the past, though of its nature alterable, never had been altered. Whatever was true now was true from everlasting to everlasting. It was quite simple. All that was needed was an unending series of victories over your own memory. "Reality control," they called it: in Newspeak, "doublethink."

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by WebsterMark on 12/02/20 at 05:10:59 Each of us sees the other playing the role of Big Brother or Winston. I would refer you to the article in my Separation may or may not lead to divorce thread.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by eau de sauvage on 12/11/20 at 18:00:45 Let the execution orgy begin! The return of federal executions demonstrates an unprecedented and grim picture of Trump’s legacy in contrast to previous administrations. The Washington Post’s editorial board described it as a “sickening spree of executions.” To put it in perspective, only three people had been executed by the federal government in the past 50 years. Meanwhile, in less than five months, eight people have already been put to death by Trump’s Justice Department, with five more executions scheduled to happen before Trump leaves office. “The Trump administration’s policy regarding a death penalty is just historically abhorrent,” said Robert Dunham, executive director of Death Penalty Information Center, a bipartisan organization that does not take a position for or against the death penalty, but rather is critical of the way capital punishment is administered. If the remaining executions in December are carried out — making a total of 10 for 2020 — it will mark more civilian executions in a single calendar year than any other presidency in the 20th and 21st centuries. “No one has conducted this number of federal civilian executions in this short period of time in American history,” Dunham added. https://www.vox.com/21736993/trump-federal-execution-december

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by MnSpring on 12/11/20 at 19:17:49 594B5F5C4B4D4F2A0 wrote: Let the execution orgy begin! . . . Very interesting that someone is so against putting a very dangerous person, in most cases a KILLER, to death. Yet, Is in FAVOR of, KILLING, a human Being, a Baby, who has done NO crime !

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by Eegore on 12/11/20 at 22:31:06  Nobody thinks Eau is in favor of killing non-criminal babies.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by eau de sauvage on 12/12/20 at 00:41:58 Tea cosies are also dangerous. https://www.scotsman.com/news/beware-tea-cosy-it-could-put-you-hospital-2461334 The prosecutor doesn't seem to think Brandon was dangerous, she wrote... Angela Moore, the federal prosecutor who helped put Bernard on death row, wrote an op-ed in the Indianapolis Star making a case for why the federal government should let him live. “I always took pride in representing the United States as a federal prosecutor, and I think executing Brandon would be a terrible stain on the nation’s honor,” Moore wrote. During his time in prison, Bernard has been a model prisoner, mentoring at-risk youth. “Having learned so much since 2000 about the maturation of the human brain and having seen Brandon grow into a humble, remorseful adult fully capable of living peacefully in prison, how can we say he is among that tiny group of offenders who must be put to death?” Moore wrote. Remember Trump took out full page ads calling for the execution of the central park five, even after they were found to be innocent. Think about that. This just appears to be a strange and vengeful pointless killing lust. Doesn't sound very 'pro life' to me.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by MnSpring on 12/12/20 at 12:13:08 0F2F2D25382F4A0 wrote:  Nobody thinks Eau is in favor of killing non-criminal babies.  Then you must be saying; ...  Nobody Somebody thinks Eau is in favor of killing non-criminal babies ... Oh, what would be a, 'criminal', baby ?

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by eau de sauvage on 12/16/20 at 04:27:03 Donald Trump has added a morbid new distinction to his presidency – for the first time in US history, the federal government has in one year executed more American civilians than all the states combined. Great report in the Guardian... https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/dec/15/trump-administration-us-death-penalty-executions What a legacy this orange fcukwit is going to leave behind. Ironically it's in the same year as  record numbers of Americans have died on his watch, and a decent wedge of that number would be due to his incompetence.

Title: Arizona Zyklon B, plan. Post by eau de sauvage on 06/02/21 at 17:25:45 Once again Nazis and the GOP are back in the news. This time it's Arizona's newly refurbished gas chamber. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/02/us/arizona-zyklon-b-gas-chamber.html This article shows that the reasoning against using inert gas is basically bullsh!te. As you can see from the article Arizona is going to considerably more effort to get their gas chamber functional, than they'd need to do with inert gas. If it's possible to fill a chamber with poison gas and then evacuate the chamber safely all the while someone is strapped into a chair, then it's obviously less difficult to do with inert gas. Nowhere in the article is inert gas mentioned as a viable alternative. Which goes to reinforce my hypothesis, that the real reason that inert gas is not used is that the GOP are spiteful vindictive and cruel at heart, and that bottom line is that inert gas is not a bad way to exit. So it's not the death per se that is sought, but rather it's the terror that they want to inflict. Which makes proponents of death by bizarre means no better than those they accuse.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by Eegore on 06/02/21 at 21:15:18 "Nowhere in the article is inert gas mentioned as a viable alternative. Which goes to reinforce my hypothesis, that the real reason that inert gas is not used is that the GOP are spiteful vindictive and cruel at heart, and that bottom line is that inert gas is not a bad way to exit."  I'd say this is a presumption that is based on fragile evidence.  Does the lack of information in this article mean that alternatives weren't examined, or that they chose to not put it in the article?  We don't know if inert gas was discussed, we don't know if it was researched, the cost, or if there are any other reasons why it isn't being looked into further.  I give it a 50/50 since the US Government system is not exactly known for it's extreme level of efficiency.  Maybe they don't give a sh!t about child killers, or maybe they are just too lazy to look at alternate gas, maybe they got a really good deal on that Cyanide.  Who knows.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by verslagen1 on 06/02/21 at 21:45:06 My daughter is a vet tech and was employed by city of hope one summer to take care of their lab animals. The standard procedure to terminate their lab rats was to asphyxiate them with co2.  They do not go quietly.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by Eegore on 06/03/21 at 08:15:10 My daughter is a vet tech and was employed by city of hope one summer to take care of their lab animals. The standard procedure to terminate their lab rats was to asphyxiate them with co2.  They do not go quietly.  I had this discussion back when this thread started with some various veterinarians and they indicate the same thing.  The "peaceful sleep" happens but not all the time, I can't remember the estimated percentages but it was around %30 sleep while the rest tend to thrash around.

Title: Re: Electrocution, Firing Squad, Lethal Injection? Post by WebsterMark on 06/03/21 at 13:56:20 CO2 in a underground Ferris wheel type configuration is one method for large scale pork production.

SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved.