An executioner explains

[CannonFodder]

X-ray wrote:
http://www.memritv.org/search.asp?ACT=S9&P1=1322#

Quite interesting, he is totally detached from it, emotionally. I would have thought he would have had serious issues with this, having seen his father execute someone when he was only a lad. He says also that he has executed people he knows. I don't know if I could execute someone, but I definitely wouldn't be able to execute someone I know  :-o

Horrific! On more than one level too. :-o

[CannonFodder]

Maybe I am sick, but I had to laugh when he was talking about "Diff'rent Strokes" (For diff'rent folks?)


"What you talkin'bout Willis?" ;-)

ps That bird in the pink headdress is rather tasty I reckon!

[CannonFodder]

JaXanim wrote:
I found the whole thing utterly barbaric. That this was televised is revolting enough, but the questions asked by the interviewers were equally sick and voyeuristic. That this so-called 'man' could surround himself with children and utter such words over them left me numbed. I know nothing, nor do I wish to learn anything of that culture, but what I witnessed was not, in my opinion, anything related to civilisation.

JaX

Is the custom of beheading murderers anyless "civilised" than electrocuting them to death via the cranuim?

[CannonFodder]

metalman wrote:

CannonFodder wrote:

Is the custom of beheading murderers anyless "civilised" than electrocuting them to death via the cranuim?

The legal system and the equality, fairness and justice it renders are what make a system civilised.

I am confused. Beheading murderers would be civilized if it was performed in America?

[CannonFodder]

JaXanim wrote:

CannonFodder wrote:
Is the custom of beheading murderers anyless "civilised" than electrocuting them to death via the cranuim?

No. But you seem to have missed my point entirely.

Which is?

[CannonFodder]

JaXanim wrote:

CannonFodder wrote:
Which is?

That the interview was considered worthy television. That the producers considered any audience would wish to experience it. That the executioner should display the tools of his trade with such pride. That the interviewers, for whatever purpose and with seeming relish, ensured every detail was elicited. That children, for whatever reason, should form part of it. I found the experience inconscionable of civilised society. It was disquieting that I wasn't watching a grusome blood-letting movie but a story of someone's actual daily life. There's surely an argument that any section of humanity which kills its criminals, by whatever procedure, for the purpose of extracting revenge can never be truly 'civilised'.

JaX

So I didn't miss your point then as I agree with it.

I still think electrocution to death via the cranium is a far more horrific way to die than having ones head chopped off.

[CannonFodder]

Karlos wrote:
I'd rather not do either ;-)

Glad to hear it, but which one would you prefer to have done to you? ;-)

[CannonFodder]

metalman wrote:

CannonFodder wrote:

I am confused. Beheading murderers would be civilized if it was performed in America?

Long drop hanging would be the traditional American method. Receint innovations were the electric chair and lethal injection.

Beheading is a French and Islamic traditional method.

The British method of hanging, drawing and quartering for High Treason is what is being refered to as "cruel and unusual punishment" in the US Constitution:

“That you be drawn on a hurdle to the place of execution where you shall be hanged by the neck and being alive cut down, your privy members shall be cut off and your bowels taken out and burned before you, your head severed from your body and your body divided into four quarters to be disposed of at the King’s pleasure.”

...

Mary Blandy's uttered the famous words, "for the sake of decency, gentlemen, don't hang me high". (April the 6th, 1752)

That is an horrific way to die too.

But you still haven't answered the question.

Would beheading murderers be civilized if it was performed in America?

[CannonFodder]

Long drop hanging would be the traditional American method. Receint innovations were the electric chair and lethal injection.

An *illegal* cruel and unusual punishment

[CannonFodder]

Wilse wrote:
I believe killing people, for whatever reason and regardless of method, (apart from self defence) is uncivilised.

Good job you changed your mind and didn't sign up for the Army eh?

[CannonFodder]

Maybe we should just concentrate on the methods of execution. I just saw on the news that a dude who underwent lethal injection did not die according to plan, so the question is:

1) What do you regard as a humane way to kill somebody?
2) Of all the methods that are humane, which is the most reliable?

My opinion is that a rifle round to the head is probably the best. I'm not a fan of beheading (whether by guillotine or sword) or hanging. I have to assume that there is still some sensory input above the level of spinal cord disruption in these cases and that is not so cool in my book.
I suppose one way that would be 100% effective would be to have a hydraulic press that could bring two huge metal plates together at high speed. Yeah it sounds like a Wile E Coyote scenario but I reckon a high-speed squish would be painless and certain.

Would a heroin overdose be a less horrific/messy way to do it?

It's the best pain killer known to man after all. :-)

[CannonFodder]

@Karlos

Mr resident Muslim sir, is death by sword the only allowed way to execute a criminal according to the Quran/Hadith?

[CannonFodder]

metalman wrote:

CannonFodder wrote:

Long drop hanging would be the traditional American method. Receint innovations were the electric chair and lethal injection.

An *illegal* cruel and unusual punishment

Angel Nieves Diaz was sentenced to death in 1986 for the murder during a robbery of bar manager Joseph Nagy in Miami on December 22nd, 1979. Angel Nieves Diaz, while robbing The Velvet Swing topless club with two accomplices, shot manager Joseph Nagy with a silencer-equipped gun.  Diaz had a long criminal history including a murder conviction and an escape from prison in his native Puerto Rico and another prison escape in Connecticut.

This cut'n'paste is relevant to the question, how exactly?

[CannonFodder]

metalman wrote:

CannonFodder wrote:

metalman wrote:

CannonFodder wrote:

I am confused. Beheading murderers would be civilized if it was performed in America?

Long drop hanging would be the traditional American method. Receint innovations were the electric chair and lethal injection.

Beheading is a French and Islamic traditional method.

The British method of hanging, drawing and quartering for High Treason is what is being refered to as "cruel and unusual punishment" in the US Constitution:

“That you be drawn on a hurdle to the place of execution where you shall be hanged by the neck and being alive cut down, your privy members shall be cut off and your bowels taken out and burned before you, your head severed from your body and your body divided into four quarters to be disposed of at the King’s pleasure.”

...

Mary Blandy's uttered the famous words, "for the sake of decency, gentlemen, don't hang me high". (April the 6th, 1752)

That is an horrific way to die too.

But you still haven't answered the question.

Would beheading murderers be civilized if it was performed in America?

The fairness of the legal system is the what determines "civilized", not the method.

As you have just repeated yourself, I shall reciprocate. Again.

But you still haven't answered the question.

Would beheading murderers be civilized if it was performed in America?

[CannonFodder]

metalman wrote:

CannonFodder wrote:

An *illegal* cruel and unusual punishment

Angel Nieves Diaz was sentenced to death in 1986 for the murder during a robbery of bar manager Joseph Nagy in Miami on December 22nd, 1979. Angel Nieves Diaz, while robbing The Velvet Swing topless club with two accomplices, shot manager Joseph Nagy with a silencer-equipped gun.  Diaz had a long criminal history including a murder conviction and an escape from prison in his native Puerto Rico and another prison escape in Connecticut.

This cut'n'paste is relevant to the question, how exactly?[/quote]

consider his crime(s). he wasn't worried about cruel and unusual when he committed his crimes.
[/quote]

What he has done is not the issue here.  The issue is that your legal system says that the method used to execute him is illegal.

Would it be civilised to chop his head off with a sword?