Cant understand it, seriously

**~~BlackPirate~~** · April 23, 2010, 04:08 PM

So a Utah death row immate chose death by firing squad.The story is here

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8641280.stm

Because this is an execution method that is not easily used in USA(in fact only two people were shot since 1976) some people object to this type of execution saying that it is inhumane to shoot someone.How shooting someone is considered inhumane while killing him with lethal injection is considered civilized?

**magickyleo101** · April 23, 2010, 05:03 PM

I don't really see how it's more barbaric than lethal injection from the inmate's perspective, but I do think that it's a less desireable mode of execution because it exposes more people (essentially everyone on the firing squad) to the psychological trauma of killing someone. The state spends lots of money treating people who carry out executions for psychological problems, and I don't see any reason to spread that kind of expense further.

My guess, though, is that most of the people objecting to the firing squad object generally to the death penalty anyways.

**Lance-Corporal Jones** · April 23, 2010, 06:43 PM

Originally Posted by magickyleo101

it exposes more people (essentially everyone on the firing squad) to the psychological trauma of killing someone.

Not if you give one of them a blank bullet; furthermore, a lethal injection is performed by a rather large team (20 to 40 men unless I'm mistaken)

**MaximiIian** · April 24, 2010, 07:00 AM

Originally Posted by magickyleo101

t exposes more people (essentially everyone on the firing squad) to the psychological trauma of killing someone.

Assuming that it'd be traumatic to them. Humans are natural-born killing machines.

**justicar5** · April 23, 2010, 05:08 PM

it is probably less painful than lethal injection, and certainly less likely to go wrong.

**Squiggle** · April 23, 2010, 05:11 PM

Gotta say I respect his choice, death by firing squad is pretty badass.

**Farnan** · April 23, 2010, 05:25 PM

Its part of his appeal. He is going to argue that death by firing squad is cruel and unusual and try to get his conviction over turned.

**Banana Jelly** · April 23, 2010, 06:14 PM

Originally Posted by Future Redleg Officer

Its part of his appeal. He is going to argue that death by firing squad is cruel and unusual and try to get his conviction over turned.

Can he even appeal this, when he voluntarily picked death by a firing squad?

**Farnan** · April 23, 2010, 06:19 PM

Originally Posted by Cool Story Brah

Can he even appeal this, when he voluntarily picked death by a firing squad?

Its been tried, didn't work, but may this time. Especially as they outlawed firing squads in Utah in 2004 for cases decided after 2004. And hey what can he lose?

**~~Exarch~~** · April 25, 2010, 12:25 AM

if firing squad is so inhumane why not have a
Jigsaw-esque contraption where the inmate kills himself?

**Heinz Guderian** · April 23, 2010, 05:32 PM

lol you still have firing squads for civillians your country sux lol

**Davius** · April 23, 2010, 05:43 PM

Originally Posted by Heinz Guderian

lol you still have firing squads for civillians your country sux lol

Is this a troll?

**Heinz Guderian** · April 23, 2010, 05:44 PM

Originally Posted by Davius

Is this a troll?

i meant everything i said about your country

**Davius** · April 23, 2010, 06:36 PM

Originally Posted by Heinz Guderian

i meant everything i said about your country

Fair enough. At least we're not caving in to Sharia law.

Bwahahahahahahahahahaaa

!!!

EDIT: oh, and I thought the UK and US were buddies

.

**Heinz Guderian** · April 23, 2010, 06:38 PM

Originally Posted by Davius

Fair enough. At least we're not caving in to Sharia law.

Bwahahahahahahahahahaaa

!!!

A cheesburger is more dangerous to you than shariah law

**Copperknickers II** · April 23, 2010, 05:59 PM

Originally Posted by Heinz Guderian

lol you still have firing squads for civillians your country sux lol

They still have the Death Penalty for murder. You'd think that some Harvard professor from the 'World Superpower' might have realised the hypocrist of this by now, but no, they just line their crims up against a wall and shoot them like so many Iraqi Kurds under Saddam.

**Kanaric** · April 24, 2010, 10:24 PM

Originally Posted by Copperknickers II

They still have the Death Penalty for murder. You'd think that some Harvard professor from the 'World Superpower' might have realised the hypocrist of this by now, but no, they just line their crims up against a wall and shoot them like so many Iraqi Kurds under Saddam.

You know that this was the mans choice right? They dont shoot you unless you ask to be shot.

I don't think the Kurds asked to be murdered, unless you are some kind of Saddam apologist?

**Søren** · April 24, 2010, 10:46 PM

Originally Posted by Copperknickers II

They still have the Death Penalty for murder. You'd think that some Harvard professor from the 'World Superpower' might have realised the hypocrist of this by now, but no, they just line their crims up against a wall and shoot them like so many Iraqi Kurds under Saddam.

Yes, shooting innocent Kurds is identical to shooting a double-murderer. Josef Fritzl locked his daughter in an underground cellar for 24 years. He'll probably be locked in jail for a similar period. Completely hypocritical.

I don't support the death-sentence either, mostly because of miscarriages of justice, but that's a terrible argument against it.

**Jom** · April 23, 2010, 05:36 PM

Personally I consider shooting much more humane than a rather hit-and-miss method of chemical execution that sometimes leaves the victim completely paralysed and unable to express his/her pain whilst fully conscious and slowly suffocating.