An executioner explains

[X-ray]

"...In another, much older thread, you said that the bullet through the head thing was often fatal due to the loss of blood pressure in the brain rather than the immediate damage to the brain tissue itself..."
---------------------------------------------------------

That wouldn't apply to a high velocity shot from a rifle. The quote sounds a bit off, too...do you know which thread it was?

Squish: ja, it's messy. Maybe they could have a plastic layer on each surface that can be peeled off and then the remains could be rolled up like a swiss roll and disposed of/buried according to the family's wishes.
If the head comes off, I don't know how much blood can come out of the carotid arteries, because the link between the vessel and the pump is gone. So it isn't going to spurt, if you see what I mean. I wonder if they have done any observations on severed heads to look for eye or mouth movement. That would be interesting.

Nah, I am sticking with the squish.

[Karlos]

It was a really old thread. You wrote something to that effect, complete with an example from some investiagtion involving a guys body being found some distance from where he was shot in the head having apparently walked there (or maybe somebody else gave that example), in response to a post quoting that a palestinian girl that was shot in the head by a sniper (according to the source) managed to say "allahu akbar" before dying...

-edit-

Must be old as hell, I remember Kenny was in it.

[X-ray]

Aaah yes I found it:

Kenny said: " the thing that makes people unconcious when they are capitated (hit in the brain) is loss of blood pressure "

And I said: "For the purposes of this thread (and without going into gory details) yes, let's call it loss of blood pressure. There are quite a few factors/variables involved, but they don't go against the gist of Kenny's or Karlos's arguments"

The links to the Allah Akbar article aren't valid anymore and I can't find it. What I suspect happened in that case was that the bullet was either tangential or did not have enough velocity to cause the typical rupture you get when a high velocity round goes through a head. In retrospect I over-simplified it, because we were talking tactics and forensics more than wound ballistics.

In a firing squad setup you have guaranteed shot placement, velocity and a perforation of the head. It will be game over, instantaneously.

[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. :-)

[metalman]

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.

The French will award him an honorary citizenship and naming a street in his honor soon ...

[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?

[metalman]

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 of execution.

[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?

[metalman]

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.[/quote]

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.

[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?

[metalman]

CannonFodder wrote:

But you still haven't answered the question.

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

Beheading may be accomplished, with an axe, sword, or knife, or by means of a guillotine.

The guillotine was considered (19th century) for use in the United States as a legal method of execution before introduction of the electric chair. Audiences to French guillotinings told numerous stories of blinking eyelids, moving eyes, movement of the mouth.

Historically execution by beheading uses a sword (or axe) was considered the "honourable" way to die for an aristocrat.  If the executioner was clumsy, multiple strokes might be required to sever the head.

Only Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Qatar now execute by beheading with the sword, but only Saudi Arabia is known to carry out the sentence: a curved, single-edged sword is used.

Long drop hanging occasionally resulted in unintentional decapitation, such as "Black Jack" Tom Ketchum in New Mexico in 1901. His head was sewn back onto his body for burial.

The french (considered by some the most civilized society) had beheadings by guillotine until 1981.

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

[CannonFodder]

metalman wrote:

CannonFodder wrote:

But you still haven't answered the question.

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

Beheading may be accomplished, with an axe, sword, or knife, or by means of a guillotine.

The guillotine was considered (19th century) for use in the United States as a legal method of execution before introduction of the electric chair. Audiences to French guillotinings told numerous stories of blinking eyelids, moving eyes, movement of the mouth.

Historically execution by beheading uses a sword (or axe) was considered the "honourable" way to die for an aristocrat.  If the executioner was clumsy, multiple strokes might be required to sever the head.

Only Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Qatar now execute by beheading with the sword, but only Saudi Arabia is known to carry out the sentence: a curved, single-edged sword is used.

Long drop hanging occasionally resulted in unintentional decapitation, such as "Black Jack" Tom Ketchum in New Mexico in 1901. His head was sewn back onto his body for burial.

The french (considered by some the most civilized society) had beheadings by guillotine until 1981.

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

CannonFodder wrote:

But you still haven't answered the question.

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

[metalman]

CannonFodder wrote:

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?

Each state determines what method it will use for capital punishment. The US Constitution only prohibits "Cruel and Unusual".

Lethal injection used to execute Angel Diaz is still legal in Florida. Gov Bush created a commission to review the state's lethal injection procedure to avoid missing anymore veins. (better technique).

A Judge in California imposed a moratorium on executions in California, declaring that California's method of lethal injection runs the risk of violating the constitutional ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

The guillotine is the French approved "civilised" way to remove heads.  The English used an axe or a sword to behead.

None of these methods are "Cruel and Unusual".

[CannonFodder]

metalman wrote:

CannonFodder wrote:

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?

Each state determines what method it will use for capital punishment. The US Constitution only prohibits "Cruel and Unusual".

Lethal injection used to execute Angel Diaz is still legal in Florida. Gov Bush created a commission to review the state's lethal injection procedure to avoid missing anymore veins. (better technique).

A Judge in California imposed a moratorium on executions in California, declaring that California's method of lethal injection runs the risk of violating the constitutional ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

The guillotine is the French approved "civilised" way to remove heads.  The English used an axe or a sword to behead.

None of these methods are "Cruel and Unusual".

That's as maybe, but "Would beheading murderers be civilized if it was performed in America?"

[Karlos]

CannonFodder wrote:
@Karlos

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

No, that's just the one prescribed by Saudi. There are worse ways, especially historically. I think stoning is the worst, it's in no way different from being beaten to death and was used as a serious deterrent for many crimes.

However, where the penalty for a crime is death, there is nothing of which I am aware that specifically insists one method or another must be used. For many years, death by firing squad was used in Saudi, beheadding was (re)introduced more recently. I am not aware of any fatwah that would preclude the use of more humane methods of execution*

*if you can regard execution as humane in the first place.

I'm not a pro-death penalty supporter per se, but I don't think the option should be totally forbidden either as there  are certain criminals (guilty on multiple counts of the most horrific types of crime) who are perhaps beyond rehabilitation and classes of crime (eg genocide etc) for which the example of zero tolerance applies**. I guess that's about as "on the fence" as you can get in a subject as polarised as this one...

**yes, I am well aware of the irony in this statement; after all, genocide -> state sanctioned murder of many; death penalty for those guilty of it -> state sanctioned murder of one.