Nitrogen Asphyxiation as a Humane Form of Execution.

I know the politics of capital punishment has come into the spotlight as of late, because of the controversies surrounding lethal injection. To this debate I offer two words: nitrogen asphyxiation.

It's humane, it's effective, it's dirt cheap. And it leaves no poisonous gases behind.

You just lock the perp in an air-tight room (surely any old gas chamber would suffice). Then you slowly replace the air with nitrogen. Unconsciousness happens immediately, and death soon follows.

I actually support it myself, though I am mostly very liberal on the issues. But to me, it is just another form of euthanasia. Think about it: life imprisonment. The poor perp can be abused for years in there, esp. if he is guilty of certain crimes (like against children). Death by contrast is quick and neat.

I know some people say, What if he is innocent? That is one possible hazard of the method. But think about it, so is imprisonment. People can be locked up for literally decades, even if they're innocent. So no method is totally fool-proof in that regard.

I am serious that I want this method to be made widely known. I am surprised more people haven't heard of it. And it's not even my idea. I heard about it on the History Channel. This guy had a book. The book's name was Killing With Kindness, or something like that. And the author's name was "Creaque", or something like that. (If anyone knows his and his book's name, please share it. I did a Google search of both, to no prevail.)

And thank you all for your time and indulgence:love:.

:love::love:

 

its also a good way to suicide

 

"We kill people to show people that killing people is wrong"

logic fail

 

Unconsciousnss would not happen immediately as described in your scenario because the oxygen would be slowly purged from the room which would result in a slow death. For near instant death, the gas chamber oxygen would need to be quickly purged (replaced with nitrogen).

 

The courts are set up to administer justice, not to "show people" anything. Letting known killers free to kill again would be wrong imo.

 

guillotine is cheaper..

 

Bit messy though.

 

Overdose is humane to a desperate and forlorn addict. Something long and pleasant please. You want his correction not his blood, you really don't think it a popular item in the beverage isle at the grocery store. I think it all should be considered deep at home with ourselves as to what we want to come upon humane treatment.

 

I'm conflicted on the death penalty myself.

Part of me says that it shouldn't be within the state's power to determine who lives and who dies. Maybe that's part of the reason Obama can do selective killing through his drone program without conviction.

But on the other hand, some people are such deranged psychopaths who inflict harm upon others for personal satisfaction and gain. You can spend thousands upon thousands of dollars on trying to cure a serial killer, and there's no guarantee it's gonna happen. Lifetime in prison isn't gonna be much better for them. They either wind up dying in there, or they get out on good behavior and start their process over again (because jail fucked them up even more, rather than giving them "time out" for being naughty)

 

It is a just punishment for the type of crimes that carry this sentence.

Logic revived

 

i think life in prison without possibility of parole is a far worse punishment than death. at least to someone like me it would be, killing me would make things easier. but some people are not "normal", and they can thrive in that environment so put them on death row and they have to spend many years in prison waiting to die so this is worse...for some.

i don't think the state should have the power to kill tho, many people imprisoned are later "proved innocent" by new evidence that has been presented that was not available before or was not admitted for whatever reason.