Execution by gass in the US today
I remember some evil humans doing the same in the last World War
Talking about sinking to a new low
Execution by gass in the US today
I meant: "The United States of Germany" sorry
🇳🇱
Is your objection to execution by gas, or execution at all?
I agree that the death penalty is wrong. But if you are going to have the death penalty gas is probably the most humane way to do it.
Well we certainly agree that execution is bad,..
But how is gas worse simply for being a "nazi thing"... wouldnt using another method where people suffer more but its not a "nazi thing" be far worse? Like are we really prioritizing morality by association over actual morality based on suffering?
@freemo Nicee!
Well, it's about the method in general
I'm sure a toxic cocktail or pills or whatever must be a much humane method but not gass
When a government executes prisoners it's not a developed country
> I'm sure a toxic cocktail or pills or whatever must be a much humane method but not gass
What? No, thats a horrible way to die. It takes hours, you get sick, you throw up, you have time to feel the effects... god that sounds like torture.
Nothing personal but this is why toxic identity politics is so bad... caring more about associations and how something looks to the point of torturing people to kill them rather than the humane way to do it simply cause "the nazis did it that way" is just, self destructive way to reason about the world.
No no no, please, dont use that logic ever again im begging you.
@stux You have to see the harm.. you just suggested a method of effectively torturing people to death instead of using gas simply because gas is associated with nazis, you completely abandoned suffering as a top concern because you followed the logic of "Hitler liked birthday cake so birthday cake is bad" (just the more emotional variant of that argument).
@freemo
You argue based on false premises.
"Veterinarians in the US and across Europe have ruled out nitrogen as a euthanasia method for most animals other than pigs. Laboratory studies have shown it can cause distress in many species and scientists largely recommend against it on ethical grounds."
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/jan/24/supreme-court-nitrogen-gas-execution-case
Humans should not kill. It's called civilization.
@stux
They arent criminals, since its legal. But I think what you mean is immoral or perhaps a murderer, If that is what you meant then we agree, yes, an executioner is a immoral murderer.
The court system has to find guilt or innocence. It gets it right most of the time. When it does not, most of those people are pretty bad news as well.
I have more faith in our forensics-based courts than those which rely on witness statements, which seem to be the cause of false convictions almost entirely.
A friend of mine commited suicide on nitrogen gas. I can say, with remorse, I have witnessed a man die on it once. It was evident to me this was one of the most peaceful ways to die.
If you want to argue that nitrogen is a stressful way to die, please post the study, news articles are not valid sources of scientific opinion (in fact they are quite bad)
Thats exactly my point, as someone highly trained in breathing in nitrogen rich environments and someone who watched someone die from it, I can tell you it is clearly one of the most humane ways to go.
Thats why this guys post about it being inhumane is highly questionable, especially the blurb about "many scientists" without an actual study to back it up.
@stux @freemo
You realize that they used to perform lethal injections, but they were no longer able to get the pharmaceuticals to do that. This is because providers worldwide decided not to cooperate.
They claim this is a humane way, because people apparently simply pass out by inhaling the nitrogen gas.
It's still stupid, but it's not *entirely* their fault that they had to resort to this method.
No thats not the issue, many states are still doing lethal injections and have had no trouble with supply. The issue is that we have had many lethal injections that didnt work either because a vein couldnt be found or other issues, often resulting in undue suffering. They are moving over to nitrogen gas to reduce suffering such as those unfortunate incidents.
@freemo
You're right. I forget which state this was, but they screwed up several times, with this SAME guy!😲
But the availability of the drugs does play a role. Some states stocked up before suppliers stopped delivering.
This is the biggest irony to me: they look to big pharma companies to supply the drugs which are made with the best quality control, because they are not allowed to ask a local redneck chemist to make some of the same drug. That would be "unsafe" 🥴😵💫
@stux
> You're right. I forget which state this was, but they screwed up several times, with this SAME guy!😲
Indeed, and with other people in different states in a similar way. Thus the main reason for moving to gas, to prevent these sort of fuck ups and reduce the suffering of people we kill. While I cant approve of the death penalty if we are going to have the death penalty this is the correct and more humane way to do it.
> But the availability of the drugs does play a role. Some states stocked up before suppliers stopped delivering.
Yes and no, there have been drug shortages in the past, but nothing that is related to whats going on here, and was very trivially resolved. You are thinking of the fact that sodium pentathal used to be used as the sedative component of lethal injection which had supply issues in the past, largely because it isnt used for much of anything. All they did was switch drugs to pentobarbital which has no real supply issues.
There are plenty of lethal injection options, most of which are trivial to obtain.
> This is the biggest irony to me: they look to big pharma companies to supply the drugs which are made with the best quality control, because they are not allowed to ask a local redneck chemist to make some of the same drug. That would be "unsafe" 🥴😵💫
There is some irony there indeed :)
@freemo @stux
Thanks for the clarification.
I'm pretty sure that at the time, whatever article I read explained it that way.
Imho, trying to off someone with N2 is just as prone to f*ckups as having a machine administer an injection, but hey.
We'll see how this pans out. Let's just hope the US will realize that harsh punishment doesn't deter people, especially if they are desperate.
Sadly the news is almost always wrong in 80% of the content in any article. Reading hte news these days is the best way to be uninformed.
Chances are, as with all news articles, it made no effort to actual explain to you the facts. Instead it likely had some agenda it was trying to sell you on and make that point. Likely either how much america sucks, or how offended we should be by the death penalty. So actually explaining it honestly wouldnt have served whatever the intended purpose is.
As for being prone to fuckups.. its hard for me to see how. All of the messups for lethal injectionsa re easily forseen by anyone who has given an injection. I honestly cant think of too many ways N2 could could fuck up.
@freemo
Meh. How is making a machine that administers a fluid intravenously complicated? I would not have guessed that that could go wrong. Doctors and nurses apply IVs literally millions of times each day. I had never heard of blocked veins before that, nor would I guess that such a machine stops working properly.
...
@freemo
Apparently this guy will have to breathe nitrogen through a mask fitted to his face.
If he starts to breathe heavily, he might suck in extra air from outside the mask. If he contorts his face, it might make an opening.
It beats me why they don't just sedate these people and simply chop off their head or so.
@stux
Gas flow will be very high so none of the examples you give will matter. Even if all that happens he will still have a lethal dose of N2.
Also N2 has sedative effects and there is no suffering when you have low but sufficient oxygene. So even in the worst case its sedative effects will slow breathing and result in the situation still killing him humanely.
> It beats me why they don't just sedate these people and simply chop off their head or so.
Because there is more risk of suffering. Sedation step might not work right. It also disfigured the body for a proper funeral and is messy. A single gas that has both sedative and lethal effects is the lowest risk and most humane of any options. Particularly when its biologically simple so has no potential for drug interactions or an immune system response.
> Meh. How is making a machine that administers a fluid intravenously complicated?
I take it you arent in the medical industry and have never had to give an IV based on this statement. As I said to those who are knowledgable on this the answer is many ways:
1) Finding a vein, this can be hard on many people. In the hospital it isnt uncommon that an expert wont be able to find a vein on either arm or even the hands.
2) Once a vein is found it may not work, for example it may be a collapsed vein and wont take the drug.
3) If there is damage to the vein it may leak into surrounding tissue causing a less than lethal dose, or cause the death to be prolonged
4) if you miss the vein you may accidentally inject into the muscle or fat, again causing a less than lethal dose or prolonged death
5) Since the lethal injection is a multi-stage dose you have multiple chances for error that can cause suffering. For example a sedative is administered first, then the lethal injections. If the first stage breaks and the second succeeds it can lead to suffering.
6) Because of the increased complexity drug interactions can prevent or effect the first stage and thus cause suffering int he second stage.
7) You can have something clog up the system or a motor break or something, since its an orcastra of events this can lead to all sorts of suffering or issues
All of the above more or less doesnt apply to N2.
@freemo
Still not entirely convinced that this somehow makes it too complicated.
Re 1 and 2. I get that, but people are literally covered in veins. They can find one, and test it before the go ahead.
Re 3, leaking could happen, but it would have to be a whole lot of leakage before it becomes non-lethal. Afaik, overkill is the way they go.
Re 4. See 1. They need a skilled person, that's all.
1/2
@freemo
Re 5 just use one line one needle. How hard can it be?
Re 6 yes. But they should know what an inmate is taking, right? Sure, some drugs could counteract e.g. the sedative, but seems to me that that would be deliberate sabotage by the inmate.
Re 7. They could simply do exactly the same on both arms. Also prevents users like 1,2 and 4.
2/2
I am notoriously difficult to find a vein on. I have been in emergency situations where they needed to get an IV in me and they couldnt do it even after 3 different people tried.
But what are you even trying to accomplish here by finding ways to force a lethal injection to work? We have a far more effective way that just works as-is with absolutely none of these risks and is more humane... why are you trying to wrangle a way to keep injections alive at all?
@freemo
Yeah, understood.
I'm not trying to keep it alive. Far from it, I'm just ranting against the stupidity of it all.
Basically they are switching to another so far untested method. I get your stance of "what could go wrong?" I just see the bears on the road.
I think the real issue is that these procedures are a fixed set of steps, for obvious reasons, but changing any of those steps is apparently too complicated to do, so they go with a radically different method and hope that works.
@MennoWolff fair then, i mean look the real solution is not to murder people for murdering people...
@freemo
Yup. See my earlier comment, deterrents don't work when people are desperate.
And is easy to become desperate in the US.
@MennoWolff We have better welfare than you might think. Honestly the lower middle class in some weird ways have it worse than the poor.
(not a vampire)
The thing is its the association with killing people that is the important part here... making the gas the important part and not the killing is really just a bad take.
Killing people like the nazis is bad... making people breath a gas (without killing them) is not bad, despite the fact that the nazis made people breath gases. However making people breath gases that kill them is wrong, but because it kills them, not because they are breathing gases.
@zeitverschreib @freemo Or burn them alive, freeze them, string 'em up etc etc
About the same category 
@stux @zeitverschreib @freemo Nitrogen gas is much more humane than the lethal injected cocktail (which is speculated to merely paralyze the patient and put them through burning pain qs it spreads) and is well known to be humane when done right (hence the suicide pod proposal using it).
Killing people at all is the big issue here, but I'm not complaining that more people are drawn into the debate.
100% spot on.
I suspect what is happening here is Stux is actually a good person. Like any good person you hear about the death penalty and you are appalled. He has an emotional reaction (a very justified one). Then in that state he hears about gassing, and rightfully associates it with Nazis. He should be associating the murder with nazi's but the gas part is what stands out for some reason. So now he is offfended at the gas choice, in reality I think he is just offended by the murdering and the association with nazis is just too easy to make the association even though its not the part that matters.
Stux has the tendency to get a little emotional when literal nazi shit is going down, and well, can we even blame him?
@freemo @stux @zeitverschreib
>Stux is actually a good person
In other words, water is wet
Most AR-15 in the USA are used for small game, it isnt even powerful enough or suited for large game. Frankly, its just far too weak of a rife to be the best choice here, you'd want somethign more powerful to be humane.
@freemo @zeitverschreib Uhuh...
Is what every school shooter said
Huh? The majority of school shooters dont use AR-15, likely for this reaason. Moreover most school shooters have never owned a gun before (by virtue of the fact of being a kid) so they arent picking guns because they are the most effective at killing, they are picking them because they are the only one they can get their hands on (and small-game guns are the most common in the usa due to being the most affordable)
@freemo At all, it's super hypocrite
But gass makes it a lot worse..
That's a nazi thing