Ed Aum Shinrikyo Cult Leader Executed

[arthwollipot]

Hanging is among the quickest execution methods if performed properly. Trapdoor opens...fall some measured distance...neck snaps.

So is beheading.

 

[Roboramma]

No, I meant to say "That's not very civilised". While it is true that I also find the idea personally offensive, that was not what I was trying to say.

What's it got to do with civilisation?

 

[Sabrina]

So is beheading.

Theoretically a head can remain conscious for several minutes following separation. There are records of someone subjected to the guillotine who responded to audio stimuli nearly fifteen minutes after being beheaded (someone shouted the guy's name and the head's eyes popped open and rolled around).

If we must kill people, I favor the humane method of putting them to sleep like we do aged and infirm pets. No pain, no muss, no fuss; they go to sleep and never wake up. Aside from that though, I prefer that we not enforce the death penalty, even on pieces of crap like this guy.

 

[zooterkin]

Theoretically a head can remain conscious for several minutes following separation. There are records of someone subjected to the guillotine who responded to audio stimuli nearly fifteen minutes after being beheaded (someone shouted the guy's name and the head's eyes popped open and rolled around).

[Citation required]

A few seconds seems plausible, I've not seen any reliable reports supporting a minute, let alone 15.

https://www.theguardian.com/notesandqueries/query/0,5753,-8010,00.html

 

[lobosrul5]

Theoretically a head can remain conscious for several minutes following separation. There are records of someone subjected to the guillotine who responded to audio stimuli nearly fifteen minutes after being beheaded (someone shouted the guy's name and the head's eyes popped open and rolled around).

If we must kill people, I favor the humane method of putting them to sleep like we do aged and infirm pets. No pain, no muss, no fuss; they go to sleep and never wake up. Aside from that though, I prefer that we not enforce the death penalty, even on pieces of crap like this guy.

There aint no way you're surviving for 15 minutes without a body. You'd die much quicker than that from the lack of having lungs, for one thing. Seems to be perhaps one minute if you're thinking of the same story I am.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guillotine#Living_heads

 

[JoeMorgue]

Even if you are technically by some definition alive for X amount of time after decapitation I can't image all the factors involved; the massive near total loss of blood pressure, the overwhelming trauma of the decapitation yourself, and the brain suddenly have to deal with a loss of sensory inputs from the rest of the body would leave you in anything resembling a state of consciousnesses.

 

[Sabrina]

Okay so I was off on the total amount of time; I'll take the hit on that one. But the legal definition of death in most technologically advanced countries is brain death, not when the heart stops beating, so theoretically, so long as there is brain activity (which wouldn't be long, I grant you, but still there for as long as a minute following decapitation), the head is still technically alive. How coherent or conscious it is is anyone's guess, but given that there is that period of time when there is still brain activity, I still advocate humane methods such as putting the person to sleep if we absolutely MUST enact the death penalty. Still prefer it be gone totally though.

 

[JoeMorgue]

I still advocate humane methods such as putting the person to sleep if we absolutely MUST enact the death penalty. Still prefer it be gone totally though.

The problem with that (and again as you said it's better if we didn't do it at all) is that we risk going with methods which "look" peaceful and are non-gory over methods which instantly end life without pain.

Lethal injection and gas chambers do have questions to their effectiveness but the few modern countries that still use the death penalty prefer them because they look so neat and clean.

Honestly, again if we just have to do it, I'd go with a modified guillotine but instead of a blade that separates the neck from the body it would be a massive weight that crushes the entire head completely flat at once. That much cranial trauma would leave no reasonable fear of a lingering consciousness.

 

[lobosrul5]

The problem with that (and again as you said it's better if we didn't do it at all) is that we risk going with methods which "look" peaceful and are non-gory over methods which instantly end life without pain.

Lethal injection and gas chambers do have questions to their effectiveness but the few modern countries that still use the death penalty prefer them because they look so neat and clean.

Honestly, again if we just have to do it, I'd go with a modified guillotine but instead of a blade that separates the neck from the body it would be a massive weight that crushes the entire head completely flat at once. That much cranial trauma would leave no reasonable fear of a lingering consciousness.

Rather gruesome cleanup process for some poor bastard. I say, why not use high explosives? Just wait until someone needs to do some serious blasting. Tie up the accused near the explosion. They'd be vaporized given a large enough explosion. No extra danger to anyone because the explosion was necessary for other purposes, mining, military practice etc.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Rather gruesome cleanup process for some poor bastard.

But that's my point. If we're going to go forward under the assumption that capital punishment can be done humanely, we shouldn't pick the methods that make it easier for us.

If the goal is capital punishment in a way that is palatable to use, we as a society should at least own up to it and not hide it behind how "humane" it is if that's not really what it's about.

 

[Sabrina]

The problem with that (and again as you said it's better if we didn't do it at all) is that we risk going with methods which "look" peaceful and are non-gory over methods which instantly end life without pain.

Lethal injection and gas chambers do have questions to their effectiveness but the few modern countries that still use the death penalty prefer them because they look so neat and clean.

Honestly, again if we just have to do it, I'd go with a modified guillotine but instead of a blade that separates the neck from the body it would be a massive weight that crushes the entire head completely flat at once. That much cranial trauma would leave no reasonable fear of a lingering consciousness.

So, instead of a lack of gore, you'd rather have as much gore as possible if we absolutely must enact the death penalty?

(I did see that you agree it should be ended; this is not about that)

The issue with current methods of lethal injection can be traced to the fact that we aren't using methods that have been proven not to cause some pain. I believe most states which execute via lethal injection have often noted that the condemned person will struggle and complain of pain or a feeling of burning before sucumbing to the injection, so clearly the drugs we are using to kill these people are not "humane" in the same manner as the drugs we use to put an animal to sleep (although I am aware that an animal cannot truly let us know if it is experiencing pain from those drugs; however, as the method is considered highly humane toward the animals its practiced on, I have to operate under the thought that they do not cause significant pain). I personally would advocate that we utilize a method whereby the individual be put to sleep using similar drugs to those, which I am more than confident we can figure out a dosage of to simply humanely poison the condemned person to death IF and ONLY IF we absolutely must enact the death penalty. Call me squeamish, but somehow I don't consider crushing a person's head, even if it is, in a split second, to be a humane method of death.

 

[angrysoba]

That much cranial trauma would leave no reasonable fear of a lingering consciousness.

A lingering what?

 

[JoeMorgue]

So, instead of a lack of gore, you'd rather have as much gore as possible if we absolutely must enact the death penalty?

No. I'm saying if given the choice between a messy but quick death and a neat & clean but slow death we shouldn't pick the later option because it causes us less emotional turmoil. At least not without admitting that's what we are doing.

 

[Sabrina]

No. I'm saying if given the choice between a messy but quick death and a neat & clean but slow death we shouldn't pick the later option because it causes us less emotional turmoil. At least not without admitting that's what we are doing.

I don't think it's about picking a fast over a slow death, though. Reasonably speaking, lethal injection as it is right now takes perhaps ten minutes and causes pain to the person it's administered to, if the data coming out of prisons is true. For a pet, the vet administers two shots; one to put the animal to sleep, the other to kill it painlessly. Depending on the strength of the first, it can take up to 15 minutes for the animal to fall fully asleep, but the second, if given intravenously, kills within seconds. Why not adopt that method, if we absolutely must carry out the death penalty, for humans? Not only does it cause less emotional turmoil for everyone around them, the person themselves dies absolutely painlessly and their last memory is simply falling asleep.

I'm more than positive, given the choice between a painless shot and having their head crushed, most inmates on death row would choose the former. And I don't know of ANYONE who would want to witness someone's head being smashed to pieces on a reasonably regular basis either (considering that death row only hires so many guards, the odds that they'd all witness multiple executions becomes a lot higher than for a normal person). So it's not about sparing US emotional turmoil, because I can guarantee the very idea would cause just about anyone, the inmate included, emotional turmoil to know that they're going to be killed via a heavy rock literally crushing their head to death.

 

[Roboramma]

No. I'm saying if given the choice between a messy but quick death and a neat & clean but slow death we shouldn't pick the later option because it causes us less emotional turmoil. At least not without admitting that's what we are doing.

Why not?

If you look at the history of executions, the progress toward outlawing the death penalty entirely began with the idea of making it more humane and less gruesome. From public torture shows for even relatively minor offences to public decapitations and hangings limited only a handful of the worst crimes, to private lethal injection. The process here is people becoming less and less comfortable with the idea of torturing and/or killing another human being, even one convicted of the worst crimes.

Furthermore, the gruesomeness of the act of taking a human life and the act of taking a human life are separable things. One can object to one without the other, or to both. There's nothing incoherent in objecting to the former but not the latter.

 

[ddt]

Does the EHCR have jurisdiction to rule on UK sentencing decisions?

Yes, the ECHR is a court of last resort for all signatories of the ECHR (the convention), i.e., all the 47 member states of the Council of Europe. It doesn't matter for your appeal there if you appeal against the verdict or the sentence.

 

[The Norseman]

Okay so I was off on the total amount of time; I'll take the hit on that one. But the legal definition of death in most technologically advanced countries is brain death, not when the heart stops beating, so theoretically, so long as there is brain activity (which wouldn't be long, I grant you, but still there for as long as a minute following decapitation), the head is still technically alive. How coherent or conscious it is is anyone's guess, but given that there is that period of time when there is still brain activity, I still advocate humane methods such as putting the person to sleep if we absolutely MUST enact the death penalty. Still prefer it be gone totally though.

So, instead of a lack of gore, you'd rather have as much gore as possible if we absolutely must enact the death penalty?

(I did see that you agree it should be ended; this is not about that)

The issue with current methods of lethal injection can be traced to the fact that we aren't using methods that have been proven not to cause some pain. I believe most states which execute via lethal injection have often noted that the condemned person will struggle and complain of pain or a feeling of burning before sucumbing to the injection, so clearly the drugs we are using to kill these people are not "humane" in the same manner as the drugs we use to put an animal to sleep (although I am aware that an animal cannot truly let us know if it is experiencing pain from those drugs; however, as the method is considered highly humane toward the animals its practiced on, I have to operate under the thought that they do not cause significant pain). I personally would advocate that we utilize a method whereby the individual be put to sleep using similar drugs to those, which I am more than confident we can figure out a dosage of to simply humanely poison the condemned person to death IF and ONLY IF we absolutely must enact the death penalty. Call me squeamish, but somehow I don't consider crushing a person's head, even if it is, in a split second, to be a humane method of death.

I'm against the death penalty for any reason.

Just thought I'd mention this part, though: three states so far now utilize neutral gas asphyxiation for executions. So-called "exit bags" or suicide bags are also recommended for those who wish to gently, painlessly self-kill when they feel their time is up.

I'd probably opt for this method if given a choice and a choice must be made. I'd insist on a goodly portion of oxycodone first, however.

 

[erwinl]

Apparently the rest of the gang has been executed yesterday.

https://www.telegraaf.nl/nieuws/2350765/japan-executeert-zes-sekteleden-sarin-aanslag

(sorry, dutch language)

 

[angrysoba]

Apparently the rest of the gang has been executed yesterday.

https://www.telegraaf.nl/nieuws/2350765/japan-executeert-zes-sekteleden-sarin-aanslag

(sorry, dutch language)

There were thousands of members of Aum, and I think there still are that number of the successor organization, Aleph. But these are the last members who are heavily implicated in the following three incidents:

1.) The sarin attack on the Tokyo subway.
2.) The sarin attack in Nagano.
3.) The brutal murder of the anti-cult lawyer, Tsutsumi Sakamoto, his wife and infant son.

 

[erwinl]

There were thousands of members of Aum, and I think there still are that number of the successor organization, Aleph. But these are the last members who are heavily implicated in the following three incidents:

1.) The sarin attack on the Tokyo subway.
2.) The sarin attack in Nagano.
3.) The brutal murder of the anti-cult lawyer, Tsutsumi Sakamoto, his wife and infant son.

Yeah.
That's what I meant to say.