Alabama suffocated a man to death in a gas chamber tonight after starving him so he wouldn't choke on his own vomit as they did it. And this was deemed perfectly legal by multiple courts in the vaunted American legal system.
That's what happens when you value institutions over people.
Bluntly, choking on your own vomit is probably a really terrible way to die. If I recall correctly he was put in a chamber where the majority of the air in the room was replaced with nitrous oxide, asphyxiating the subject. If he had choked on his vomit, it would have been closer to drowning than suffocating in the manner that was intended.
By asphyxiating him in this way, his suffering was effectively eliminated during the execution; but if he had vomited and choked on it.... Well, I don't know if you've ever found yourself short of air in a body of water, but it's a pretty unpleasant experience. It only gets worse as you get closer to death when drowning (from what I've heard/understood from people who have nearly drown).
The intention of not giving him food so he didn't vomit, was a humane decision, not intended for additional suffering and cruelty.
Twisting the intent like this is doing a disservice to the entire process. You can dislike capital punishment all you want, and I may even agree that it shouldn't be done, but the fact is, this statement is misleading at best. I'm all for a healthy discussion on it, but let's not conflate the issue with these misconceptions.
He took 22 minutes or so to die. Guards in the room said it was awful to watch. His suffering was INCREASED by using this untested method. But then that was surely the point...
The method wasn't untested, it's been done plenty before. The specific tools they used to do it were moronic and they didn't fully understand how to do it properly. Basically they just didn't do their homework.
There's also the difference between "painless" and "easy to watch". Lethal injection looks humane because they inject the person with a paralytic, so regardless of what happens it looks "peaceful".
One of the drugs sometimes used (succinylcholine chloride) is fucking terrifying, because it's a paralytic with no anesthetic effect. Given alone a person under its effects is aware of what's going on while paralyzed and unable to breath.
Medically it's generally used to intubate someone in an emergency if the patient is conscious, seizing, etc. If the patient is aware, it's given in conjunction with something for sedation like a benzo.
In an execution it's given after a barbiturate for sedation , then followed with potassium chloride to stop the heart ... assuming mistakes aren't made, or something goes wrong.
The United Nations and European Union have already put out some public statements regarding this (well, about this new method), it was pretty big news (internationally). Apparently official reports say he was visibly shaking and had cramps during the execution...
That's my understanding as well. So since I don't see anyone else saying this in detail here goes:
I am not a biologist or a medical professional, but this is my understanding of the process.
The human body does not monitor blood oxygen levels. When you or I hold our breath, the feeling of urgent discomfort we feel is due to a rise in the carbon dioxide (more specifically the carbonic acid) in our blood. Inhaling pure nitrogen will still allow CO2 to exit the bloodstream, so if someone is not made aware of the fact that they are breathing pure nitrogen, they won't even know they are dying.
This person knew they were being executed, which I can only imagine induced a ton of stress and anxiety, yes. However, if you were to tell me that I was being executed tomorrow but I could pick which of the methods currently employed in the US I would be killed by, this would be at the top of the list.
If you want to argue that executing people is morally wrong and we should stop, sure, let's have that discussion. However, we don't need to characterize this method as more inhumane than others to do so.
Couldn't have said it better myself. I for one personally believe that capitol punishment is inherently inhumane and shouldn't be practiced in a functional contemporary society.
That said, nitrogen asphyxiation is by far one of the most humane execution methods employed today and, on paper, shouldn't cause the victim any pain, discomfort or distress. If you actually look at the symptoms of nitrogen narcosis and hypoxia you'll see that pretty clearly.
In this case, as the article explains, the victims suffering was self inflicted as a result of stress, distress, and previous medical conditions.
To paraphrase the article, a previously botched execution via lethal injection years before resulted in ongoing nausea. The man expressed concern that this could cause him to vomit in the nitrogen mask which could have caused him to drown in his own vomit so he was starved for 10 hours prior to prevent this from happening.
During the actual execution, the victim reportedly attempted to hold his breath as long as he could before struggling against his restraints for as long has he retained consciousness. This is just a stress response to being executed, not a side effect of the execution method. It's not an uncommon reaction to various other execution methods like gas chambers or lethal injection.
If you want inhumane execution methods, lethal injections are often botched and typically in extremely painful and torturous ways.
Arguably, the most humane, quickest, and most reliable painless method would probably be something like the guillotine but I'd be surprised if that got widespread support.
Again, by no means do I support capitol punishment but as execution methods go, this is probably the most humane way we've tried so far.
The guillotine?! Which your brain/consciousness can stay functioning for 30 sec and up to like 4 min? That is better than nitrogen asphyxiation?
Now by all means by your criteria, yes it is fast and there is very little room for failure. However I think we still don't know if it is as painless as we perceive it to be with how long you can stay concieous.
Regardless I am also of the same mind that we could move away from capital punishment as a society.
There's no evidence that it's painless and there is evidence that you stay awake and aware of what's happening to you for several seconds after you are beheaded.
We have no means by which to determine that death by beheading is not painful.
We do, however, have plenty of examples of nitrogen hypoxia, it's effects and the sensations associated with it as you die, by people who were either revived or recovered from situations caused by nitrogen hypoxia.
Personally, I would be okay with death by nitrogen hypoxia, if I either wanted to, needed to, or were forced to die before the end of my life naturally. I presently have no desire to die, nor any need to, nor have I been sentenced to death (or any sentence) for crimes (of which, I have not committed any).
So my opinion is just that, an opinion. I would vastly prefer to continue living at the moment; so I'll just stay out of trouble with the law by doing the same things I always have, and hopefully my health doesn't cause the situation to change.
Death by beheading doesn't sound very nice, but bluntly, it's hard to screw up with something like a guillotine. Since law enforcement (specifically those in charge of executions), seem to be inept, the guillotine may be a better option, since it would be much more difficult for them to do in a way that's so incorrect that it causes more suffering than what is normal for that process. IMO, that's the only significant merit to something like the guillotine. It's so basic they would have to try, in order to do it wrong.
Nitrogen hypoxia sounds more humane, indeed if done correctly. Otherwise the explosive taped to the head sounds pretty foolproof as well like some people suggested. Perhaps a bit disturbing though.
But I agree, the first step should be to not get into a situation where you're facing this in the first place. But if we have to choose, good to have some options in mind.
Think about how a guillotine works. It cuts off your head from your neck.
Think about how your body works. All of “you” exists in the head. You are dependent on everything below the neck to keep the head alive.
The guillotine doesn’t kill you. It separates “you” from the system that keeps “you” alive. It cuts off oxygen and energy from the brain. It is essentially suffocating, but without the muscles to suffocate.
So you are likely fully awake and aware of your surroundings. You are, in effect, holding your breath until you die, but also aware that “you” are in a tiny basket, separate from the things that keep “you” alive.
No thanks.
You know this smug motherfucker?
That’s Antoine Lavoisier, 18th century French chemist. Brilliant man. This is the guy who named oxygen. One of the founding fathers of the fucking metric system.
He was executed by guillotine during the French Revolution for adulterating tobacco. In reality, he had invented a process for curing tobacco in a way that made it more difficult for retailers to cut or modify tobacco, and the retailers really didn’t like that. He was an aristocrat prior to the revolution and, well, you can see how that ended up.
Anyway, he told his buddy to count his blinks right after his head was cut off.
His buddy counted 12.
Lavoisier was exonerated a year and a half after his death.
"La République n'a pas besoin de savants ni de chimistes; le cours de la justice ne peut être suspendu." ("The Republic needs neither scholars nor chemists; the course of justice cannot be delayed.") Judge Coffinhall, who sentenced Lavoisier. He himself was executed three months later
"Il ne leur a fallu qu'un moment pour faire tomber cette tête, et cent années peut-être ne suffiront pas pour en reproduire une semblable." ("It took them only an instant to cut off this head, and one hundred years might not suffice to reproduce its like."). Mathematician Joseph Louis Lagrange on his death.
I heard that story as well; not sure what to make of it though.
If I understand it correctly, the pressure of your blood is gone right away, circling you in an unconscious state. Blinking could be a reflex of the last thing you were doing. But even if you do stay focussed, 12 seconds seems a lot better than 20 minutes. To be fair though, we don't know how long it 'feels', perhaps longer than the actual seconds.
A grenade bound to the head would be more humane then perhaps. If you don't care about the body. I'd go for that if it was offered.