Not having the death penalty would definitely be infinitely better. But given the different ways of humane execution, this is actually an improvement over lethal injections. Unlike injected chemicals, it’s way harder to fumble and accidentally cause extra unnecessary suffering.
I fully agree with everything you said but I’m going to use your comment as a jumping off point anyway: I have to wonder, would the condemned feel like they’re suffocating as it’s happening due to lack of oxygen? Or would they simply not notice and just kinda fade out of consciousness?
When you’re suffocating, you don’t really notice that you don’t have enough oxygen. You just feel that you have too much CO2. So if you’re in a nitrogen chamber or in low enough pressure air, you don’t notice you’re suffocating. You just fall asleep.
Smarter Every Day did a video on oxygen depletion. You get loopy. As the other comment said, that burning feeling is from high CO2, not low O2. Put your mask on first, then help others.
fun fact: the brathing reflex is caused by excess co2 and not a lack of oxygen. thats why people regularely suffocate by going into enclosed spaces which are oxygen deprived
I totally get your point and the reasons you say that.
On the other side I find ridiculous the struggle to “find a better way to do it” instead of just getting rid of the whole death sentence alltogether.The best way of doing it is not doing it.
This is probably the best form of execution possible. Your body doesn’t know that there’s a lack of oxygen, but it does notice a build up of carbon dioxide. Nitrogen poisoning is not noticable until you’re already “drunk” and falling asleep. That’s why it’s so deadly to divers.
At what point do we admit that it’s more humane to just shoot someone in the brain? If you’re gonna have a death penalty, it should be dirty and fucked up. Making death penalty too neat and clean, just encourages the states to keep it around. Make the state feel that decision…
People used to botch that one all the time. Not everyone shot in the head dies. And now you have a gory mess that’s gurgling and trying to scream but keeps breathing and moving for several days. So humane.
And that’s not even considering the ethical issues of who pulls the trigger.
That’s my point, none of it is humane. And you can shoot a person more than once to make sure they’re dead, and like I said, the ethics of shooting someone in the head is not different than the ethics of injecting poison into someone, they’re both fucked up things to do, no matter how clean you pretend it is
It definitely didn’t come across like that’s your point, but I see it now. But no, shooting someone in the head or killing any human being in any way will ever be humane (caveat for assisted suicide in euthanasia, but that’s a different can of worms than the death penalty). How humane a given procedure to kill a person is can only be assessed in relative terms with one another. And in that comparison, nitrogen chambers are definitely way less painful and suffering inducing for the victim, as well as, arguably, ethically more acceptable for the people who technically have to set up the process and push the button. But I doubt this would sway legislation one way or the other, as the political discussions rarely touch on how humane the method is.
That’s why multiple people shoot and you can just shoot twice if it’s not deadly enough? Why would you let them survive - for several days no less. Two or three shots in the head are quicker than anything they do so far.
Are you just very cruel and sadistic or are you just ignorant of the history and reality of firing squads? Genuine question.
