Judge suggests change to nitrogen execution to let inmate pray and say final words without gas mask
Judge suggests change to nitrogen execution to let inmate pray and say final words without gas mask
A federal judge who is weighing whether to allow the nation’s first execution by nitrogen hypoxia to go forward next month has urged Alabama to change procedures so the inmate can pray and say final words before the gas mask is placed on his face.
A federal judge who is weighing whether to allow the nation’s first execution by nitrogen hypoxia to go forward next month, urged Alabama on Thursday to change procedures so the inmate can pray and say his final words before the gas mask is placed on his face.
U.S. District Judge R. Austin Huffaker made the suggestion in a court order setting a Dec. 29 deadline to submit information before he rules on the inmate’s request to block the execution. The judge made similar comments the day prior at the conclusion of a court hearing.
Alabama is scheduled to execute Kenneth Eugene Smith on Jan. 25 in what would be the nation’s first execution using nitrogen gas. Nitrogen hypoxia is authorized as an execution method in Alabama, Mississippi and Oklahoma but has never been used to put an inmate to death.
The proposed execution method would use a gas mask, placed over Smith’s nose and mouth, to replace breathable air with nitrogen, causing Smith to die from lack of oxygen.
I think public executions where the prisoner is tortured to death are more progressive than supposed "humane" methods.
Not because I like cruelty or think they deserve it, but I want the State to do it's killing out in the open where citizens are exposed to what's happening in their name. Hiding the act behind closed doors and beneath a cloak of "humane" methods allows the State to exercise ultimate authority in secret from the people from whom that authority is derived. It's the State and the supporters of the death penalty that are being spared pain.
Yes, I got this from Foucault.
You highly overestimate the amount of compassion the average person has. If you torture people to death in public people will sell tickets for the best seats. The Romans built a whole damn arena for this purpose.
If anything, I think it would normalize killing (even more). But I guess I get where OP is coming from: Governments shouldn't get away with killing a human by claiming it's a humane act.
Yes! you're correct. It will be spectacle and celebration. We may revel in our cruelty, but we cannot feign mercy.
The question of capital punishment comes into focus. I don't trust in compassion; I'm advocating for honesty.
What Foucalt gets wrong here is that historically, civilians just enjoy it. They don't find it barbaric or inhumane.
Like there wouldn't be some national conversation about "what have we become" - it'll just be a fun thing people do.
So easy to build a sealed room. Why use a mask in the first place? Slowly exchange air for nitrogen and the prisoner dies saying his pointless prayer. Never even knows it happened. No suffering, no nothing. Just lights out. Then re exchange for air so the body can be safely collected. This is not rocket surgery.
That sounds like the plan they have already just with an entire room rather than just a small mask. It's the same thing except your plan requires more gas and a bigger dedicated gas chamber with more failure points.
Yep, more expensive.
Why use a mask: because it's cheaper, and helps secure the people nearby (in case of a room leaking, that's a lot of displaced air, while a mask or similar leaking is significantly less of risk in case of uncontrolled release). But I bet mostly because it's cheaper - and remember, it's never been done before (by them, for this purpose).
But like 15 states have gas chambers. They aren't used because all they ever tried was cyanide or carbon monoxide, both of which caused significant suffering. But the effects of nitrogen have been known since the birth of scuba. Cheaper has never mattered. Lethal injection is incredibly expensive, as is running the electric chair. If cost actually mattered hanging or firing squads would be the go to methods. I've personally never been able to grasp why it matters. Why shouldn't these people, who have caused untold amounts of suffering be made to suffer on their way out of existence? These are serial murderers and the like. Personally I think we should add serial rapists to the list of executable offenders. I simply do not understand why the worst of men should receive any kindness at all. They gave none to their victims. And so fucking what if they are remorseful. If you commit atrocities you should be handled in kind and definitely do not deserve to be kept alive like some pet of the state fed on the taxpayers' dime.
Because cruelty.
But it is brain science
no suffering
Person fucking dies that's like the ultimate suffering i can think of, holy fuck killing people can't be made humane no matter how many different methods are used
What if we stop executing people entirely?
No, that would be to moral. Unchristian even.
When was the country's most recent capital punishment before this one?
Oh wow, this sounds so humane.
I think it can be improved though. Just give him general anesthesia 5m before the nitrogen mask.
That should be the most peaceful way to go.
You know you fucked up somewhere as a society when killing people is considered humane.
I mean, some people really deserve it. There are some living monsters out there, and I don't believe in the sanctity of their life. I'd rather save a cow from a farm than save a serial murderer who raped the corpses of their victims. In my country these was this guy who raped, tortured and murdered like 60 children. He's no longer people to me.
The only argument for the death penalty was back before long term prisons were available and someone was too dangerous to be released in society. The death penalty should be obsolete.
Did he allow his victim to pray and say final words?
It doesn't matter. We don't do eye for an eye here.
Actually, yes. this is Kenneth Eugene Smith, who was convicted in a 1988 murder-for-hire slaying of a preacher's wife. Elizabeth Sennett, 45, was found dead on March 18, 1988, in her home in Alabama's Colbert County. She had been stabbed eight times in the chest and once on each side of neck.
In all actuality, there is no information saying that he did or did not allow this, but I did learn a lot about this case. Turns out two guys were hired to kill this pastors wife because the pastor had an affair (doesn't make sense but it is what happened). These two guys, one of them stole things to stage a burglary. He was put to death in 2010 and his last words were to her sons, "I'm sorry. I don't ever expect you to forgive me. I really am sorry."
The other, currently on death row, agreed to beat her, but apparently did not intend to kill her.
After the pastor became a suspect, he drove to the gathering, told his sons what part he had played (hiring a crew to kill his wife and himself having an affair), then got into his truck and shot himself.
It's a waste of life. Terrible decisions from three people that ultimately led to a severely somber outcome for everyone involved.
Probably not. But remember that ~4% of all death row inmates are innocent, so it may be that he didn't kill anyone.
Also, shouldn't the state be better than a murderer? Shouldn't the mere fact that we believe we, as a society, are civilized mandate allowing a death row inmate respect before they die?
I'm not religious, so I don't think praying and final words will do anything. But it won't harm anyone, and if it makes him more comfortable as he goes out, especially in light of the likelihood he didn't that to his victim, I'm not against it.
Should the state have the same low moral bar as criminals? (It's a rhetorical question that was answered when the state decided to murder someone that's not a threat anymore in cold blood)