Which form of capital punishment in current usage is considered the most humane? Why?
211309
I still think that a firing squad is the most humane.  It's quick, almost instantaneous, and none of the men on the squad knows who shot a real bullet or who shot a blank.  In lethal injection, the condemned convulse (just like in electrocution).  Beheading might be more accurate (the firing squad could all miss) but seems to be more of a show for the public (see French Revolution or Saudia Arabia) as a deterent.  Hanging is even less accurate (see Thrice Hung John of English lore).  I must admit though, I'm against capital punishment because of economic reasons.  The extra costs of court appeals, lethal injections (or electrocutions) upon taxpayers is much more than most people realize.
471218
Might be helpful to include the country next time , this is all US information..... Here is some research with links " Get to work and stop reading questions" LOL\n\n\n1) Check out their "History of the Death Penalty "section\n2) United States Courts on the death penalty\n3)Victims and the death penalty\n4)Capital Punishment, legal infliction of death as a penalty for violating criminal law. Throughout history people have been put to death for various forms of wrongdoing. Methods of execution have included such practices as crucifixion, stoning, drowning, burning at the stake, impaling, and beheading. Today capital punishment is typically accomplished by lethal gas or injection, electrocution, hanging, or shooting.\n5)History of the death penalty ---Plus a chart chronicles the United State's use of the death penalty over the past four centuries.
405782
Normally a crime would have to be heinous enough and the individual remorseless enough that rehabilitatoin is more than unlikely for the death penalty to be applied in sentencing.    If a person behaves in a manner so severly to the detriment of society, sometimes it is necessary to snuff those fockers out.   it maintains an equilibrium.    severe, even life extinguishing, punishment assures a proper balance in conduct of the entire herd.    \ncases have to qualify for the death penalty, and I think those that qualify must warrant such a punishment.   its logical, even reasonable.
87400
The death penalty.\n\nPro or con?\n\nWhy?
30834
These are the facts supporting the death penalty.  1)Just punishment for heinous crimes 2)prevents prison overcrowding 3)80% public support 4)prevents the possibility of escape 4)Detterent. \n\n   But, I, personally am against the death penatly on the grounds that it eliminates the possibility of being proven innocent, it costs a lot, it is against both the bible and the 8th ammendment (cruel and unusual punishment), the prisoners are executed in the name of the state aka us, and, as oppose to the popular belief of "no pain" I have pages and pages of stories of how specific prisoners were victim to a prolonged electorcution/lethal ingection due to a malfunction in equipment. I mean, would YOU want to be subject to deadly poison coursing through your system for 5-15 minutes? I don't think so. \n\n   I would not feed comfortable pulling the electrocution lever because then I would be justifiably guilty of the crime of murder. And, voting for capital punishment is the same as pulling the lever because, by voting for the death penalty, you are granting someone else the liscence to kill.
464442
The death penalty is NOT civilized. America is not as civilized as you think.  Most Americans are not very well educated. Our civilization has much magical-thinking and simple-thinking in it. But, many wiser people here with more long-term vision are not vengeful and can see that there are proven, better ways to run a society for the good of all.  The death penalty in any society is also proof of a people's failed faith.
44883
I know you don't actually want an answer - you seem more interested in pontificating.  Be that as it may, it is perfectly easy to justify a belief in the legality of abortion vs. the legality of the death penalty.  For me, capital punishment is a governmental rights issue - that is, I do not believe the government has the right to deprive its citizens of life under any circumstances.  It's simply something the government should not be allowed to do, because allowing it for some people (odious though they may be) makes it easier to apply it for lesser crimes - a slippery slope argument, essentially.\n\nAbortion is a different issue, because (1) it is not the government depriving someone of life; (2) there's no scientific reason to argue that life begins at conception; and (3) if we assume life begins at conception, then all laws regarding children would apply to zygotes/fetuses, which would be unworkable in any society.
506284
The death penalty was stopped in this country in the 1960's,as a lot of truly innocent people were executed.\nOkay we only had hangings,but i think it should be brought back now,as we've advanced so much.\nWhat with d.n.a testing and other ways of gaining evidence,i don't think we would have a problem apart from people crying out about their `human rights`
501392
Absouletly. In UK we have to many liberals keen to protect the rights of criminals but the victim is sadly lost in the process. If rehabilitation can be acheived in the criminal justice system that's great but it is primarily but punishment and the punishment should reflect the crime. I am not a fan of habging but we should use lethal injection in cases like this.
238334
America has had a debate over both issues for many years now.Sentencing persons to death for their crimes has been around for centuries.So has the practice of abortion dating back 5000 years or more.The whole debate is based on ones own morale beliefs.There lies the debate the struggle between the beliefs of individuals.It is a very hard decision to enforce the moral beliefs of one on another individual. If society as a whole can come to a consensus that no form of death of human life is acceptable or a that terminating a life is acceptable in abortion or in capital punishment.I wont insert my beliefs here but I do agree that there is a contradiction between the two.One human life needs to be viewed equally to another.
563129
All of those forms have some draw backs.\n\nPerhaps the guys on the firing squad were up late the night before on a drinking binge, and their aim and general demeanor is not what it should be when they aim for the heart...and miss.  Oops.\n\nSitting in a chair being flash fried can't be all that humane and there have been several instances in which inmates were not instantly killed, but had to be subjected to multiple electric shocks.\n\n"Hanged by the neck until dead."  Well, what happens if the neck in question doesn't snap immediately?  The person just dangles and jerks around as they slowly asphyxiate.  \n\nAnd lethal injection?  Well, out of the four you mention, that's probably the most humane...a little pin prick and two intravenous catheters are inserted in the arms and the chemicals are magical injected and the person dies within 7 minutes.  (hopefully)\n\nIs there a humane way to put someone to death?  Probably not.  But then again what's humane about the death penalty?
238658
well, i don't like to think that we have the right to take a human life.....on the other hand, my cousin was murdered and her assassin got 7 years.  He should have died.  After all he took her life.  Our prison system does not rehabilitate nor can it simply because the people inside are sociopaths.  so yeah, I'm for the death penalty and lethal injection is probably the least messy choice.
21936
For the worst crimes, I am for the death penalty.  Main reason?  I feel that someone that willingly takes the life of another person should not receive a lifetime of getting all of their needs, and even a lot of luxuries, for free.  Prisoners get free clothing, free food, free cable TV, free weight rooms, free college courses (through correspondence)free health care, the list goes on and on.  I have seen sickening websites like "Pampered Prisoners" dedicated to "making their time easier"  WTF?????  What about the VICTIMS of the crimes?  They get nothing for free, assuming they survive the attack of the criminal, they have to pay their own health care.  If they cannot afford the health care, they are left to suffer by the doctors, yet the prisoners that inflict the injuries get health care for free!!!  \n\nWhat do you do with a vicious animal, who only attacks and harms, and cannot be trained to behave the right way?  You put him down.  Same should go for a vicious human, put him down.\n\nFor me, the only alternative to the death penalty (and I am talking severe crimes like murder, or those that have proven themselves to be just vicious and untrainable) would be to use the predators for testing instead of the innocent animals, who have done nothing to deserve the torture inflicted on them.
383000
Ethical issue means how you feel or what you were brought up to believe, is it right to kill another person for what wrongs they have done, where is the cut off point for a death sentance or life imprisonment, does society stoop to the level of a murderer for instance by giving a death sentance or should we try to rehabilitate the offender.  Forgiveness or judgement.
170128
well obviously I'd like to avoid all of them, but beheading is by far the quickest...impalement guarantees 15-20  minutes to live in pain while your stomach acids seep into your chest cavity, and stoning would take forever with a lot of broken bones first, unless someone has really good aim....ya beheading....
225864
I'm prolife and I do not support the death penalty.  As you said, it's a form of murder.  No matter what someone has done, death should not be wished/forced upon them--it's very sad how meaningless LIFE (the greatest gift ever) has become.
183444
Capital Punishment: (N) Legal Killing, or Execution. There's no better definition than this.