Squish Him! (Alternate method of execution)

See, the problem with this idea of death by squishing is the mess. Executions shouldn't have to have a huge amount of clean up when they're done properly. If you go squishing a guy's guts out you'll get all this gooey stuff everywhere, and have to wash, disinfect and then make the weight ascend again. All this work, jeez an axe would be easier to make from steel.

Another part is that the dead man walking can probably hear the thing falling onto him. Giant discs made of metal have a noticeable 'woomf' type sound when they drop. That person would likely scream as they detected the drop. No one wants to hear the man scream.

Violence is all good and well when you're an angry mob, but it doesn't do when you're trying to maintain a civilization. To keep the proles afraid you need the Death Penalty, but to keep their minds off death you want it to be forgettable and a non-event. If they get all excited for sentencing someone to death they'll make up shit in order to watch someone get killed.


Thats why I will rather prefer to be subjected to the piston helmet model, with the additional twist that the sentence is declared executed in the moment said helmet is worn and the piston is activated by a timer randomly set to activate the piston in the next minute, the scare/revenge effect is still obtained in the public wile not vexing the executed.

I agree wit William Blake about the death penalty is a huge admission of failure, a flebile deterrent and bad for the image of any state...
But if You want to go ASB I prefer confession The Sword of Truth stile to the fate that lurks in room 101
 
The problems with squishing are first the mess it would make, and secondly, it'd be pretty hard to keep the condemned from realizing he's about to be squished by a giant weight falling towards him- there's probably a 'cruel and unusual' punishment argument to be made even if people were willing to put up with the mess.

I'm puzzled... Why any country callous enough to implement death penalty during peacetime didn't try a guillotine-like method using a gun instead of a blade? If the aim is to destroy the brain rapidly and cheaply is it possible to design an helmet with a built in gun :)eek:aimed inward, this is impotant!)that never misses the targhet and could be opereted with a simple swich on the wall... Hell, if you wanna be dirt cheap use an Hydraulc piston instead of a gun! Save bullets!

In 1914, the state of Nevada actually tried something kind of like that, a mechanical firing squad, in order to reduce human error, where a stand that held several rifles, which would be aimed at where the condemned would, sit strapped into a chair, and the rifles would be fired simultaneously once a lever was pulled. They didn't go for headshots, but it probably wouldn't be too hard to go for one if you restrained the condemned's head. It was only used once, and worked fine; however the next time Nevada had to execute someone, the governor & legislature, fascinated by the use of chemical weapons in World War I, decided to build the first gas chamber in the US, a rather dangerous and messy contraption. Nevada stuck with the gas chamber, and the mechanical firing squad sat forgotten in a back corner of a prison until it was donated to a World War II scrap drive. If it was up to me to select a method of execution, the mechanical firing squad is what I'd go for- fairly simple and reliable, within the possibility of current technology, quick, and assuming the rifles are powerful enough and are aimed property, fairly humane. (Personally, I think the idea of making executions totally painless is a bit silly, since it is supposed to be punishment.)

Actually, an execution is an admission of failure.
By resorting to kill an individual, the State admits it has
failed in educating him/her as an useful citizen.
One less messy way to go about this execution business
is the psychological execution. The convict is subjected to such
psychological conditioning that his memory and overall personality gets erased, and a new personality, a whole
new psyche is created in his body. Even as a deterrent, it
is perhaps better than outright squishing, since the new individual gets to ambulate around his acquaintances, sometimes for years, showing them what happens to those who break the law...

The idea of a mind wipe is certainly intriguing, but to erase the personality & memories like that is probably beyond what's possible with current technology. As an aside, on the TV show Babylon 5, the Earth Alliance used that to 'execute' civil criminals, where the condemned would be mind-wiped, and given a new identity and a personality programmed towards community service and social work type jobs.

However, I have to disagree with your contention that an execution is a show of failure by the state. One of the most fundamental duties of the state under the social contract is to ensure the security and safety of its citizens and their property, and sometimes, extreme measures are necessary to ensure that- there are those who by their conduct have shown themselves to be incapable of living in society and therefore forfeited their right to be part of it- some murderers (and if it were up to me, the list would also include child molesters, human traffickers, high-level drug traffickers, and those executives and buisness types who commit multi-million or even billion-dollar fraud). Furthermore, there are those whose conduct so endangers society that they have also forfeited their right to live in it- treason, espionage, terrorism, violations of the customary laws of war, and certain offenses against military discipline such as cowardice, attempting to force a surrender, mutiny, being intoxicated/sleeping on duty in wartime, desertion during wartime, etc.
 
Pressing to death was the fate of those who would not plead (guilty or not guilty) as a way of preserving their assets for their heirs.

I have often thought that the punishment should fit the crime, in case of murder. The execution of a terrorist by explosives might be one possibility. :D
 
I can't believe I read this thread. Honestly. I can see where the ideas come from, but I can't think of anything here which isn't painful or has problems.

Squishing somebody will reduce that person's body to mush. I don't think a sane person could clean up that sort of a mess any more than once or twice without going insane. The body problem has already been elaborated on - but do any of you think you could clean up that sort of a mess?

A lethal injection is a painless task, mainly because they put the condemned to sleep first, then administer the lethal injection, so that he passes peacefully. That doesn't always happen, but it usually does. As for the idea of killing them in a nasty manner, we don't want to sink to their level, do we?
 

maverick

Banned
I think the main issue is that the body can't be buried/burned anymore.

Several churches would have problems with that.

Can a Jewish criminal be buried if his body is a big pile of mush?

Can a Protestant resurrect and face the final judgement if he has the consistency of a pile of manure?

And I'm sure Buddhists, Catholics, Muslims, Pagans, Atheists and deists would object just for the sake of it being appalling and disgusting
 
I'm sure pressing to death by piling rocks up on the victim was used as a means of execution somewhere, I just cant remember where.
 

Thande

Donor
I'm sure pressing to death by piling rocks up on the victim was used as a means of execution somewhere, I just cant remember where.

I know they used it against unrepentant Catholics during Elizabeth's reign here. But of course that was supposed to be slow and painful.
 
A lethal injection is a painless task, mainly because they put the condemned to sleep first, then administer the lethal injection, so that he passes peacefully. That doesn't always happen, but it usually does. As for the idea of killing them in a nasty manner, we don't want to sink to their level, do we?

As for the idea of killing anyone in any manner, we sink to, well, murder level.

executing will be acceptable under live combat conditions, and only where you do actually apply the military codes of war (this will force anyone who want to start a war to actually declare formally said war)
 
There is no comparison between the rules of engagement for the military and executing a condemned criminal.


Very true, I was thinking to an officer executing a desertor or a mutinee on the front, the same thing will not be acceptable, say, during peacetime...
Generally if you got the time to organize a formal rial, you also get alternatives to execution.
 
I am against the death penalty, but if you have to do it then lethal injection seems the most humane method, adding that before you do it you should put the person to sleep using anaesthetics or something similar, preferably half an hour or more before the killing just to make sure. I don't really see why the executee has to be conscious when its kill time.
 
Top