Too much can go wrong with chemicals. An exploding bullet to the brain (when he is not looking) would result in instantaneous cessation of brain activity. It would be succinct. It would be about as humane as can be when killing someone. It would be a grisly mess, but why should killing someone look pretty? It should be televised, so that persons who tacitly or otherwise support the death penalty would have something to think about.This was the proscribed method of dispatching those who committed capital crimes in the old Soviet Union. They were taken to the basement of the prison and simply shot in the back of the head. As to televising it or allowing public executions, people would flock to the site to watch it. The prisoner could pick his own venue and method of death, tickets could be sold to the event and the money used for prisoner rehab. I'm being facetious of course; I'm entirely with Lois on this one. Just throw them in a cell for life. Viewers see enough of this faux killing on TV, cop shows, documentaries, war dramas, etc. to satiate their blood lust. Cap't Jack
On the more serious side, I did get to work in one of Tesla’s old AV generating plants near Telluride a few years back. So interesting being in those places directly touched by great events. To say nothing of the impressive structure, equipment and that huge pipe coming down the mountain.Wow, this sounds like a page out of a steampunk novel! Interesting CC. I'm familiar with the Tesla coil and all of that fantastic 30's static electricity machines in Frankenstein (one of my favorite movies BTW). You probably know that the very same machinery was used in the 70's version by Mel Brooks. Incidentally, I learned about Tesla's experiments from an old physics prof I had who accidentally shocked himself into a heart attack and was so hunched backed he looked like Igor, I kid you not. He was messing with a Van Der Graaf generator and tried to jump a spark onto a metal rod he held in his hand. The guy was fascinating though and it satisfied my math requirement. Cap't Jack
Quoting TimB:
Too much can go wrong with chemicals.Hmmmmph. As a retired chemist, I take umbrage at that statement. NOTHING goes wrong with the chemicals, just the people who use or administer them.
:lol:And what happens if the guy who is firing the exploding bullet’s aim is off?
I still like the idea of making all felonies capital offences with no right of appeal, but if evidence showing that the person executed was innocent is later turned up, then the judge, all members of the jury, the prosecuting attorneys, and the witnesses against the person will all automatically be charged with a capital offence and immediately executed. Somehow I think there’d be far fewer executions. :lol:
Occam
What drives me absolutely nuts are the people who either don’t pay enough attention to know what’s going on right in front of them, or just don’t care to know.A lot of that going around Axegrrl. Politicians here are often elected by a minority of eligible voters, some as low as 8% which was the voter turnout in our last local election, and most of them were over fifty. Cap't Jack
Wow, what a very poor example the people who are taking this most important of issues completely off topic are setting.
I’m no longer going to participate in a site that shows such basic contempt for the respect of knowledge.
Wow, what a very poor example the people who are taking this most important of issues completely off topic are setting. I'm no longer going to participate in a site that shows such basic contempt for the respect of knowledge.Untwist your panties, Fuzzy. This happens on the Internet. The topic will come back round in this thread.
Sorry Fuzzy, I didn’t mean to derail your topic, just got carried away with CC’s responses. I have always had a tendency to digress.
Cap’t Jack
Wow, what a very poor example the people who are taking this most important of issues completely off topic are setting. I'm no longer going to participate in a site that shows such basic contempt for the respect of knowledge.Sorry Fuzzy, it was just an interesting aside that was close to home. As for Canada - it's shocking as hell what's going on there, and I appreciate all the information you are spreading around - wish more people did it. I can't wrap my head around how people allowed those religious crazies to take over their government, but then we did it here with Bush, and no one seemed to learn the lesson from that disaster. But, at this point it's also feeding some deep hopelessness impulses.
Quoting TimB:I know you're kidding around. And I do appreciate that last idea. Re: the aim question. The botched execution, recently was probably due, in large part, because competent medical professionals refuse to be involved. I don't think, in our gun obsessed society, that competent marksmen would be difficult to find for such a task.Too much can go wrong with chemicals.Hmmmmph. As a retired chemist, I take umbrage at that statement. NOTHING goes wrong with the chemicals, just the people who use or administer them. :snake: :lol: And what happens if the guy who is firing the exploding bullet's aim is off? I still like the idea of making all felonies capital offences with no right of appeal, but if evidence showing that the person executed was innocent is later turned up, then the judge, all members of the jury, the prosecuting attorneys, and the witnesses against the person will all automatically be charged with a capital offence and immediately executed. Somehow I think there'd be far fewer executions. :lol: Occam
But back to the thread. Is there something wrong with the water up in Canada. How the f#@k did you produce someone like Ted Cruz? We have enough idiots in Texas. We shouldn’t be subjected to this Canadian reject immigrant.
Lois is correct, however, if we were going to be a bit more humane the system would be: a) assign an execution date, b) a week or so before, very secretly load the prisoner's food with ketamine (date rape drug), c) after s/he's completely unconscious, pump nitrogen into the cell, d) his/her heart will quietly stop, so move the body to the refrigerator, e) a week later, put it on a gurney, cover with a sheet, wheel it into the execution room and make believe doing a standard one. Everyone else is politically happy, and the inmate didn't have to suffer the pain of a standard execution. OccamIf the inmate it sentenced to life he wouldn't have to suffer the pain of execution, either and nobody would have to dream up more and more bizarre ways to carry it out. But pain is not the point, nor is it a rational reason to do away with the death penalty. It should be done for moral reasons. Most of the world has done it, why not the so-called leader of the western world? Other countries are not being overrun with criminals because there is no death penalty. What's wrong with the US? Lois
The day after I seen the article showing that meteorologists are forbidden to discuss climate change, I seen this: Desmond Tutu urges Canada to address climate change 'powderkeg' | CBC News
I guess Archbishop is a more qualified authority than a weather forecaster. Although I’m not against the Archbishop from having his say either, it just seems like it’s the wrong people to suppress, if silencing unqualified people is the goal.
The day after I seen the article showing that meteorologists are forbidden to discuss climate change, I seen this: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/desmond-tutu-urges-canada-to-address-climate-change-powderkeg-1.2659447 I guess Archbishop is a more qualified authority than a weather forecaster. Although I'm not against the Archbishop from having his say either, it just seems like it's the wrong people to suppress, if silencing unqualified people is the goal.They're supressing qualified people, that's the point. Lois
The day after I seen the article showing that meteorologists are forbidden to discuss climate change, I seen this: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/desmond-tutu-urges-canada-to-address-climate-change-powderkeg-1.2659447 I guess Archbishop is a more qualified authority than a weather forecaster. Although I'm not against the Archbishop from having his say either, it just seems like it's the wrong people to suppress, if silencing unqualified people is the goal.They're supressing qualified people, that's the point. Lois Actually I would agree that someone who exclusively studies meteorology is not the most qualified person to comment on climate change. Although I doubt that most of them ignore the evidence of climate change which may be outside their field of weather forecasting.
The day after I seen the article showing that meteorologists are forbidden to discuss climate change, I seen this: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/desmond-tutu-urges-canada-to-address-climate-change-powderkeg-1.2659447 I guess Archbishop is a more qualified authority than a weather forecaster. Although I'm not against the Archbishop from having his say either, it just seems like it's the wrong people to suppress, if silencing unqualified people is the goal.They're supressing qualified people, that's the point. Lois Actually I would agree that someone who exclusively studies meteorology is not the most qualified person to comment on climate change. Although I doubt that most of them ignore the evidence of climate change which may be outside their field of weather forecasting. It would seem to me that meteoroligists have more information on the topic than the average layperson. At the very least meteorologists have been taught science and the scientific method. "Meteorology, climatology, atmospheric physics, and atmospheric chemistry are sub-disciplines of the atmospheric sciences. Meteorology and hydrology compose the interdisciplinary field of hydrometeorology. Interactions between Earth's atmosphere and the oceans are part of coupled ocean-atmosphere studies. Meteorology has application in many diverse fields such as the military, energy production, transport, agriculture and construction." Lois
The day after I seen the article showing that meteorologists are forbidden to discuss climate change, I seen this: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/desmond-tutu-urges-canada-to-address-climate-change-powderkeg-1.2659447 I guess Archbishop is a more qualified authority than a weather forecaster. Although I'm not against the Archbishop from having his say either, it just seems like it's the wrong people to suppress, if silencing unqualified people is the goal.They're supressing qualified people, that's the point. Lois Actually I would agree that someone who exclusively studies meteorology is not the most qualified person to comment on climate change. Although I doubt that most of them ignore the evidence of climate change which may be outside their field of weather forecasting. It would seem to me that meteoroligists have more information on the topic than the average layperson. At the very least meteorologists have been taught science and the scientific method. "Meteorology, climatology, atmospheric physics, and atmospheric chemistry are sub-disciplines of the atmospheric sciences. Meteorology and hydrology compose the interdisciplinary field of hydrometeorology. Interactions between Earth's atmosphere and the oceans are part of coupled ocean-atmosphere studies. Meteorology has application in many diverse fields such as the military, energy production, transport, agriculture and construction." Lois So we're in agreement then? It's ridiculous meteorologists aren't allowed to comment on climate change while a religious authority, or anyone really, may do so freely in the media.
As for Canada - it's shocking as hell what's going on there, and I appreciate all the information you are spreading around - wish more people did it. I can't wrap my head around how people allowed those religious crazies to take over their government, but then we did it here with Bush, and no one seemed to learn the lesson from that disaster.As much as I loathe the Harper government (and boy, do I) to be fair, the damage he's been doing doesn't have as much to do with him/them being 'religious crazies' as it does with his (seeming) desire to obliterate information/evidence, his increasing the independent power of the PM, and lining the pockets of corporations/oil industry. He (quite deliberately) isn't bringing religion into things ~ marriage equality hasn't (and won't be) touched by his gov't, and I don't think abortion is going to be directly addressed anytime soon (despite his very specifically excluding funding for abortion in his recent much-ballyhooed maternal health plan). He's smart enough to not attack 'socially liberal' issues.......instead, he attacks things surreptitiously, like: our once-renowned environmental record and environmental protections, our election system (utilitzing American-style voter suppression tactics), our very own 'ownership' of our country.......and he's doing it all via doing the exact opposite of his pledged election promise: bringing "accountability and transparency" to government. And so brazenly, to those of us who are paying attention, it almost seems as though he's testing Canadians ~ to see just how much he can get away with. What really scares me at this point is thinking/wondering if there'll be any way of undoing the malignant damage he's done. p.s. my friend in Australia is currently feeling about their government the way I do about Harper and co.
What really scares me at this point is thinking/wondering if there'll be any way of undoing the malignant damage he's done. p.s. my friend in Australia is currently feeling about their government the way I do about Harper and co.Yea, the Australian situation is about as spooky.
http://ourworld.unu.edu/en/silencing-the-scientists-the-rise-of-right-wing-populism Silencing the Scientists: the Rise of Right-wing Populism DEVELOPMENT & SOCIETY : Climate Change, Politics, Technology 2011•03•02 Clive Hamilton Australian National UniversitySo how did so many decent people vote thugs like them into office?
What really scares me at this point is thinking/wondering if there'll be any way of undoing the malignant damage he's done. p.s. my friend in Australia is currently feeling about their government the way I do about Harper and co.Yea, the Australian situation is about as spooky.
http://ourworld.unu.edu/en/silencing-the-scientists-the-rise-of-right-wing-populism Silencing the Scientists: the Rise of Right-wing Populism DEVELOPMENT & SOCIETY : Climate Change, Politics, Technology 2011•03•02 Clive Hamilton Australian National UniversitySo how did so many decent people vote thugs like them into office? Right wingers the world over have a habit of voting against their own interests. I'm as flummoxed as anyone as to why. I can only assume they have bought the untrammeled capitalism argument, hook, line and sinker--even the ones with no money to speak of. They seem to have been indoctrinated to the hogwash that if they toe the conservative line and create a capitalist world (or country, at least) that they'll be wealthy one day soon, despite reams of evidence to the contrary. Lois
There you go, Lois, imputing logic and reason to people. I think it goes as follows:
- The people know they are pretty low in the barrel, and they need someone to
blame. - Newspaper, radio and television stories tell how horrible the government is and
how it’s hurting everyone. - They believe whatever they hear repeatedly.
- They learn to hate government, and when presented with “reams of evidence
to the contrary” their response is
“Evidence, we don’t need no stinkin’ evidence.”
Occam