yeah
https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/south-carolina-house-adds-firing-squad-execution-methods-77518005
Gotta love how, after a series of botched executions by lethal injection, dozens of executed inmates later found to be innocent, and most major drug manufacturers refusing to sell states the drugs required, Amerikkka has decided to just switch back to the old way of killing people instead of making any positive change
America forever headbutting the BARBARISM button of "socialism or barbarism".
public hangings and beheading are back
:inshallah: :no-fash: :gui-better:
Any argument about the death penalty is always this:
"There is no evidence it reduces crime, it's more expensive than life imprisonment, life imprisonment does the exact same thing since it keeps the criminals away from society, but doesn't have the downside of being irreversible if the person is exonerated, there's no justification for the death penalty."
"Yeah, but... have you considered that I want those guys killed?"
I remember hearing that the cost to execute the death penalty is significantly more expensive than life imprisonment with regards to the layers and layers of judicial and legal bureaucracy and procedures that have to be performed in order to legally enact it vs permanently incarcerating someone.
This is 100% correct. The cost is in the appeals process.
And even with the extensive appeals process, we still wind up executing innocent people. There really isn't any excuse to use the death penalty outside of a revolutionary context, and even then, Mao's treatment of Emperor Puyi is in every way superior if you have the luxury to do it.
I disagree, life imprisonment is only cruel if your system is designed for cruelty. There are people that are genuinely a threat to society to the point they have no hope of being integrated. Prisons in the common understanding of it aught to be abolished but that does not mean there won't be some form of exception.
I point to the Swedish incarceration system as a decent starting point where criminals who's mental illnesses are so severe and untreatable are kept in well furnished rooms with common amenities that anyone would have. They aren't treated as beasts or monsters but as people who's conditions renders them unable to be part of society through no fault of their own.
Much like how it's dependent upon who controls the State determines for who's benefit the state acts for, the same method must be applied to all aspects of society - the incarceration system included.
Virtually everyone on death row uses every single legal tool at their disposal and appeals basically everything, since at that point, they have nothing to lose.
"Hey boss, we keep running out of lethal injection drugs because they know we keep using them to kill people and won't sell us anymore"
"WE NEED TO KEEP KILLING, THE BLOOD MUST FLOW LEST I LOSE MY GUBERNATORIAL POWERS"
Reminder that the death penalty is both irrational and immoral and any socialist revolution should do away with it, especially in peace time
We are not in the era of peace, but that of barbarism. Any socialism in the US is going to have to reckon, and likely embrace it.
Reminder that South Carolina was the first state to secede because they were scared that slavery was going away.
Wasn't the big issue that people really hate being part of a firing squad, are we just gonna automate them now? Drone firing squads
Yeah I often wonder if we're at the point of desensitisation that stuff people in the early 20th century wouldn't do would pass as standard now
Plenty of people did horrid shit back in the day. Firing squads just happened to cross summary execution with military conscription. You weren't giving the job to hardened sociopaths, you were giving it to green recruits.
Just open places on the firing squad to the public. Let them bring their own guns and you'd have a waiting list of oakley wearing truck guys with ar15s that's miles long.
Part of me thinks the actual act of taking a human life or doing any personal violence would shatter their psyches but I'm not familiar enough with Americans tbh
It's a numbers game.
Some of them would probably recoil at actually having to get their hands duty. Others would get off on it. Run the experiment long enough and eventually you build a reserve of blooded psychos.
I've heard that when it comes to killing, there's basically three kinds of people. Some can never get over it and it haunts them for the rest of their life, some find it horrible but can deal with it somehow by rationalizing it ("it was either them or me") and some just go "oh, it's that easy?" I don't have numbers on how these three groups break down, or how much that differs from society to society, but i've also heard that the US Army, who are sadly a bit of an authority on murdering people, found that only 4% of recruits are capable of killing without remorse. Untrained people, that is. It's part of the training of frontline soldiers (and, in the US, also of normal beat cops) to bring that number up through desensitization, conditioning and an institutional culture that normalizes violence. And honestly, it wouldn't surprise me if those 4% who are supposedly "natural born killers" simply went through some kind of desensitization process before joining the army. I have a strong suspicion that social animals, including the human animal, just aren't born as killers, but need to learn how to kill. Even in predatory pack hunters like wolfs or orcas, we can observe that while they have very strong instincts to play-fight, to chase prey etc., the act of killing is something they have to be taught by their elders.
Very interesting! I think your theory follows very well, i've often wondered if arch-capitalists lack that empathy that allows them to be so cruel to others, I definetely think they have a resentment to the mass shared social experiences the lower classes can take part in and that's part of their constant need to destroy it
I've been able to observe some members of the bourgeoisie closely for years - definitely not enough people to have a good sample size, but those that i've come across have to go to very great lengths to convince themselves they aren't heartless ghouls. They fully buy into being "job creators" and a good boss and deserving of their wealth. These are people who intuitively play along with the class antagonism, who are perfectly capable of exploiting their workers and putting themselves above others - if it was otherwise, they couldn't be in their position in a competitive system, they'd just get pushed out of the market. Yet they manage to split that part of themselves off completely and think of themselves as honest, empathetic and caring human beings.
They're just like us - with one big difference. Well, two actually. The main difference is that generational wealth has put them in a starting position that enabled them to operate as members of the bourgeoise class, the second is that they have, from an early age, internalized behavorial routines and managerial skills that allow them to play the cruel game of capitalism from that very position. Growing up wealthy, they have gained an intuitive understanding of exercising authority, thinking economically, being callous whenever it's needed. But they do not see either of that, because then they couldn't function like this.
This is one of the reasons why it's so important to make the argument against capitalism not from a moral, but from a systemic point of view. Capitalism isn't as monstrous as it is because there's greedy, evil people who just love to exploit others while sitting atop a pile of gold. Capitalism is as monstrous as it is because it enacts market pressures on people that will always turn some into opressors, while punishing all those that do not go down that path.
This makes a lot of sense, thank you for the perspective! I'm definitely guilty of just assuming they're evil sometimes but they as much as we are are a product of the material conditions and a system that seeks to replicate itself
For some of them it probably would. Or some would show up and he unable to pull the trigger. But for every once of those there would be three guys in the parking lot sitting in their truck and livestreaming about which of their four AR-15s to take if they get picked.
if they get picked.
Is there really an upper limit to how many people you can have in a firing squad?
how many people you can pack shoulder to shoulder before it becomes a semicircle
Well you can move people further back. If you want to get creative, use scafolding so you can have vertical rows.
Or suspend the victim via a crane, and then an entire crowd can shoot together.
I’m pretty sure firing squad is the “most humane” execution style. But also capital punishment doesn’t work.
No it ignores the fact that most criminals plan is to not get caught
Studies on deterrence have found exactly this. Researchers have interviewed people in jail and found that they largely didn't know the extent of the punishment, and/or viewed people who do get caught as having made some mistake that they're too smart or careful to make. It gets down to the fact that effective deterrence relies on people accurately assessing the risk of getting caught, and people are fucking terrible at assessing risks.
Tbh the death penalty might be a solid deterrent for white collar crime.
I don't like how much I like that idea. The death penalty isn't a deterrent to violent crime because no one doing violent enough crimes to be executed hasn't already accepted their own death. You don't do shit that heinous (talking about civilian on civilian crime here -- death penalty for merking feds is obviously political shit) unless you've essentially already died. But white collar shit? They don't need to do that. They're just sickos that love the game. But I think a lot of them would rather be alive or seek power in other ways or wouldn't be as encouraged to engage in antisocial behavior if they could get executed for helping their boss steal tax money.
I'm guessing that's the conclusion the CPC reached considering how their Bourgeoise react to receiving death sentences.
Well yes under the dictatorship of the proletariat when the minority is the oppressed class.
Only if you shoot for the head. Modern American firing squads shoot for the heart, which is much less humane.
"Humane" methods of execution was never about being humane to the victim. It was always about protecting the perpetrators from having to face the reality of their actions, enabling them to still feel good about themselves.
I disagree. The psychological trauma of killing somebody doesn't go away regardless of how desensitized a normal person becomes.
The difference of the frantic killing in self-defense, or from being trained to do so from muscle memory vs the intimate act of executing someone face to face that has done you no personal wrong is the difference of spur of the moment decisions vs making a deliberate choice.
It can be easy to kill somebody in the split second when you realize "it's either them or me", which is not to trivialize the damage to your psyche from it, but staring eye to eye with somebody that you may murder with your firearm breaks you in a different way that has no comparison.
Which is why even the Nazis switched from firing squad executions to their non-direct execution methods, those soldiers kept breaking down to the point they could no longer function as normal people.
Only genuine psychopaths, like the Dirlewanger battalion, can draw any pleasure from such acts.
Lets not trivialize death and the act of killing.
Death sucks, there’s pretty much no way to get both of those things outside of very specific chemical cocktails
Nitrogen canister + mask.
Actually, I'd argue against it even for war criminals. The death penalty is monstrous and goes against basic human rights. Just wanted to point out that if these assholes really cared about finding a "humane" way for the victim, it exists.
Kissinger and Mussolini are different, as their crimes are both on a larger scale than what any normal criminal is capable of perpetrating due to the sheer power differential between some random bloke with a gun and somebody able to comfortably delegate their murders to millions of random blokes with guns; because they committed their crimes so openly it's absolutely clear they're guilty; and because they are so protected by the system that getting your hands on them is only possible after a political collapse that creates a lawless transitional period. The upper echelons of imperialist regimes are just entirely outside of the scale of what a criminal justice system should be designed for. Exceptional cases always make bad law. Discussions of the death penalty should be centered on somebody accused of shooting a cashier while robbing a gas station, not on somebody publicly setting entire nations on fire.
I doubt we’d argue much if Kissinger got murked on a vacation to Cambodia though
Oh, I'd definitely get out the Champaign; but that doesn't mean I agree with an actual legal system that includes murder as a punishment. Deaths during social upheavals / revolutions is different.
I would honestly rather be killed by firing squad than injection
Good to hear, since we're basically out of the cocktail used for lethal injection.
Is it? Isn't there a good chance you'll have to roll up there with a pistol and finish the guy off?
:gui-better: or bust
I think modern firing squads have 6 rifles, only one of them has a blank. 5 bullets aimed directly at or near the heart is enough trauma to kill EVERYONE pretty much immediately/within seconds.
Consciousness from a guillotine can be recorded for about twelve seconds or so after the chop, the head should be held up as to drop pressure to the brain and cause blackout>death.
As an SC resident I can safely say that we’re at the best the 4th most hellish state in the US
*Correctional executions, obviously firing squad executions have been policy in the field for some time
