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-prese... 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.
Pages: 1 
