Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Still Waters

Oklahoma to use nitrogen gas for executions

60 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Still Waters

After trying unsuccessfully for months to obtain lethal injection drugs, Oklahomaofficials said on Wednesday they plan to use nitrogen gas to execute inmates once the state resumes using the death penalty, marking the first time a US state would use the gas to carry out capital punishment.

The state attorney general, Mike Hunter, and corrections department director, Joe Allbaugh, jointly announced the plan, saying the two agencies would work together to develop new protocols over the next several months.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/mar/14/oklahoma-death-penalty-nitrogen-gas-lethal-injection

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney

:blink: Why don't they just bring back firing squads....It would be less painful.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromdor
1 hour ago, Piney said:

:blink: Why don't they just bring back firing squads....It would be less painful.

The optics.  Have to do it in a way that appears humane.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
third_eye

I would have thought Nitrous oxide would have been cheaper ... maybe that's reserved for the Witnesses to the Execution ...

~

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dark_Grey
1 hour ago, Gromdor said:

The optics.  Have to do it in a way that appears humane.

That...does make sense. I never really thought about why they stopped using bullets

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why not
48 minutes ago, Dark_Grey said:

That...does make sense. I never really thought about why they stopped using bullets

The optics of a firing squad might be just what we need. The threat of death as punishment does not seem to be much of deterrent these days.  Just as public hangings back in the day must have really made people think twice about doing anything that would have gotten themselves swinging from the gallows pole at high noon.  I know that sounds pretty rough.

The concoction of expensive and hard to obtain drugs used to carry out the death penalty in most states has a history of problems and out right screw ups. I have said for years that the states should just use heroin and over dose the person. It's cheap and more powerful then ever these days. It would also be a very humane way of carrying out the sentence. The person basically loses consciousness and the body forgets to keep breathing.  Hell, it kills 10's of thousands of innocent people very fast each year. It would be very hard to botch an execution this way. 

 

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
4 minutes ago, Why not said:

The threat of death as punishment does not seem to be much of deterrent these days.

Statistically speaking it never has been in the US

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dark_Grey
22 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Statistically speaking it never has been in the US

Look at car accidents as an example. The threat of death never stopped anyone from doing 130 through a red light. The threat of killing someone else doesn't stop speeders, either. Taken on it's own, death is not a deterrent. You know what is? Cash and freedom. People will slow down when they see a Cop because they are afraid of jail and financial loss. What that says about priorities could fill a book.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aztek
Posted (edited)

threat of death as a punishment? lmao, not in the system that takes 30 years to execute, and not even in all states,  what does deter is a threat of immediate death, that deters better than anything,  except for those that want to die.

Edited by aztek
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
10 minutes ago, aztek said:

threat of death as a punishment? lmao, not in the system that takes 30 years to execute, and not even in all states,  what does deter is a threat of immediate death, that deters better than anything,  except for those that want to die.

Yes and we all want to live in a country where imminent death supplants due process. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aztek
Posted (edited)
Just now, Farmer77 said:

Yes and we all want to live in a country where imminent death supplants due process. 

"brake into my house and find out"

only in your liberal mind my post reads as immediate death in place of due process,i only said it is a better deterrent, and that is 100% the case.

but maybe there is a point here, i would love to see convicted murderers executed right after verdict

Edited by aztek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
2 minutes ago, aztek said:

"brake into my house and find out"

only in your liberal mind my post reads as immediate death in place of due process

We're talking about the law, not your house.

Only in your self centric worldview was this conversation about going all Bronson on folks. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aztek
Just now, Farmer77 said:

We're talking about the law, not your house.

Only in your self centric worldview was this conversation about going all Bronson on folks. 

no we are talking about death sentence  being effective deterrent,   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
1 minute ago, aztek said:

no we are talking about death sentence  being effective deterrent,   

The death sentence is law. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aztek

wow seriously it is a law?  that is news to me.,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
barada

the scumbags should be put to death the same way they murdered their victims.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setton
4 hours ago, Why not said:

The optics of a firing squad might be just what we need. The threat of death as punishment does not seem to be much of deterrent these days.  Just as public hangings back in the day must have really made people think twice about doing anything that would have gotten themselves swinging from the gallows pole at high noon.  I know that sounds pretty rough.

The concoction of expensive and hard to obtain drugs used to carry out the death penalty in most states has a history of problems and out right screw ups. I have said for years that the states should just use heroin and over dose the person. It's cheap and more powerful then ever these days. It would also be a very humane way of carrying out the sentence. The person basically loses consciousness and the body forgets to keep breathing.  Hell, it kills 10's of thousands of innocent people very fast each year. It would be very hard to botch an execution this way. 

Or, novel idea, just don't kill people. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why not
3 hours ago, aztek said:

"brake into my house and find out"

only in your liberal mind my post reads as immediate death in place of due process,i only said it is a better deterrent, and that is 100% the case.

but maybe there is a point here, i would love to see convicted murderers executed right after verdict

I don't know about "right after the verdict". I believe there should be a reasonable amount of time for an appeal, but not more then a couple years. 

The one thing I would agree with carrying out the sentence right after the verdict would be if there was irrefutable video evidence of first degree murder. Especially if it was agenst a child. I have zero compassion for anyone who hurts a child and would let the parents stone the SOB to death.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why not
17 minutes ago, Setton said:

Or, novel idea, just don't kill people. 

Yeah, it's a novel idea, but we are talking about the real world here.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
2 minutes ago, Why not said:

I have zero compassion for anyone who hurts a child and would let the parents stone the SOB to death.

They always lasted less than a day in the gang max GP as soon as we found out their street charge involved kids.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
Just now, Why not said:

Yeah, it's a novel idea, but we are talking about the real world here.

You talk like we don't have a choice. 

Since there's no evidence that the death penalty is a deterrent to crime and since there is an abundant amount of evidence that folks are wrongly convicted all the time wouldn't it just make sense to not kill?  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dark_Grey
8 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

You talk like we don't have a choice. 

Since there's no evidence that the death penalty is a deterrent to crime and since there is an abundant amount of evidence that folks are wrongly convicted all the time wouldn't it just make sense to not kill?  

Yes and no...prisoners are expensive and the cost of keeping someone alive indefinitely multiplied by how many people on death row at any given time? Few things are more tragic than killing an innocent man but some people deserve to die rather than be kept alive on tax payer dollars. This would be an easy choice if we had a fool proof way of convicting people

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
Just now, Dark_Grey said:

Yes and no...prisoners are expensive and the cost of keeping someone alive indefinitely multiplied by how many people on death row at any given time?

I'm not sure but I believe with appeals and all of that it may be cheaper to keep them alive. Which of course leads to a greater overall conversation about the courts.   

1 minute ago, Dark_Grey said:

This would be an easy choice if we had a fool proof way of convicting people

Agreed, I would have no problem with the death penalty if that were the case. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromdor

Met a fellow that was very pro-death penalty.  I asked him about people who were wrongly convicted.  He said that anyone that got into a situation to be wrongly convicted didn't have enough value to society to worry about anyways.  

You know, I would be fine with a socially Darwinistic society but we would have to come to terms with that as our desired level of morality.  Is that what we want?  It seems like we are sliding that way, especially in welfare, healthcare, and crime debates.  Likewise I would be fine in a more compassionate system as well.  This yoyo-ing back and forth is the most annoying aspect.  Either we feed the poor, weak and stupid to the wolves or we take care of them.  Which is it going to be?

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setton
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Why not said:

Yeah, it's a novel idea, but we are talking about the real world here.

Where the hell am I then, narnia? 

ETA: the real world has now been redefined to mean the US, Asia and some bits of Africa. 

https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/images/nations-dp-status.svg

Edited by Setton
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.