Oh no, if they use expired drugs, people could die.
Really if they’re so dedicated to the death penalty, why not just use a firing squad? A box of good bullets and one of blanks for individual plausible deniability can’t be more then 20 bucks can it? Heck, get some Nitrous Oxide to knock the guy out before killing him even.
That said, I’m not for the death penalty, morally, logically, and economically its unsound.
It absolutely baffles me how states are able to botch executions like they’re doing. I’ve had many dogs over my lifetime and sadly that means I’ve seen many of them off to the rainbow bridge at the ends of theirs, and there’s never been a botched euthanasia. I guess vets are just more professional and compassionate than these executioners.
I oppose the death penalty universally. But I’ve long argued that if you absolutely must execute someone and must avoid the messiness of exploding their brain for instant painlessness and reliability, then nitrogen gas asphyxiation is probably the best way to go - completely painless and incredibly hard to botch. Just flood the room with nitrogen gas, how hard is that? It’s a common industrial accident. And yet there was a case recently where a state tried nitrogen gas asphyxiation and the monsters somehow managed to botch even that.
Different rainbow bridge with a different afterlife on the other end. I hope the signage is clear. I can only imagine a couple of very confused Vikings are wandering around, perhaps disappointed there’s no big battles to participate in but on the plus side having tons of dogs that are happy to see them there. And conversely, a couple of good bois running around Odin’s hall having fun with all the commotion and feasting and whatnot going on there.
It seems to me that when there’s a need to give members of a firing squad “plausible deniability” then it’s because someone on the squad knows it’s unethical to participate in the first place and therefore makes one more argument in favor of eliminating the death penalty altogether.
-It seems similar to an argument against using a paralytic in the lethal injection. If the immediate audience is too squeamish or shocked to participate in such events then it’s probably because those events shouldn’t be taking place.
Oh no, if they use expired drugs, people could die.
Really if they’re so dedicated to the death penalty, why not just use a firing squad? A box of good bullets and one of blanks for individual plausible deniability can’t be more then 20 bucks can it? Heck, get some Nitrous Oxide to knock the guy out before killing him even.
That said, I’m not for the death penalty, morally, logically, and economically its unsound.
I imagine the concern is that the drugs lose their efficacy as they age, so there’s the risk that the DON’T kill.
An execution is bad, but a lengthy botched one is worse.
It absolutely baffles me how states are able to botch executions like they’re doing. I’ve had many dogs over my lifetime and sadly that means I’ve seen many of them off to the rainbow bridge at the ends of theirs, and there’s never been a botched euthanasia. I guess vets are just more professional and compassionate than these executioners.
I oppose the death penalty universally. But I’ve long argued that if you absolutely must execute someone and must avoid the messiness of exploding their brain for instant painlessness and reliability, then nitrogen gas asphyxiation is probably the best way to go - completely painless and incredibly hard to botch. Just flood the room with nitrogen gas, how hard is that? It’s a common industrial accident. And yet there was a case recently where a state tried nitrogen gas asphyxiation and the monsters somehow managed to botch even that.
Never heard the rainbow bridge saying, does that imply that dogs go to Valhalla? I guess the wild hunt would need hounds.
Seems to be from some short stories and poems that have been published over the years.
Different rainbow bridge with a different afterlife on the other end. I hope the signage is clear. I can only imagine a couple of very confused Vikings are wandering around, perhaps disappointed there’s no big battles to participate in but on the plus side having tons of dogs that are happy to see them there. And conversely, a couple of good bois running around Odin’s hall having fun with all the commotion and feasting and whatnot going on there.
Wasn’t there an article the other day about how they botched a firing squad execution?
Found it: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/may/08/south-carolina-firing-squad-execution
South Carolina has entered the chat
It seems to me that when there’s a need to give members of a firing squad “plausible deniability” then it’s because someone on the squad knows it’s unethical to participate in the first place and therefore makes one more argument in favor of eliminating the death penalty altogether.
-It seems similar to an argument against using a paralytic in the lethal injection. If the immediate audience is too squeamish or shocked to participate in such events then it’s probably because those events shouldn’t be taking place.