I think that decompression or something along those lines (Carbon monoxide?) works quite well as it does not invoke panic. Though for the capital punishment mob it is too kind.

I think that the only group that should face it should be politicians who commit a war crime.

You'll find that a significant portion of people who've been seriously bent (decompression sickness) before, would prefer drowning next time. The Bends is not a pleasant way to go.

Decompression is probably the wrong term. It is the loss of consciousness from high altitude that I was trying to describe. I am not sure what it was called.

I think it's the lack of oxgyen in the air that causes that.

Yes that is it, but I cannot remember the name for it. It basically means that the person gets euphoric but dies peacefully. I am wondering if Carbon Monoxide is involved in the process.

You can do it with pretty much any gas you fancy, just slowly up the concentration of a gas (nitrogen being the one used in testing due it it being harmless on release) and as the concentration gets higher the euphoria increases until you blank out.

There was a very good program that Michael Heseltine did a few years back on the death penalty.

That was the programme I was thinking of. while I am against the death penalty, it would be good for euthanasia.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

If you're going to gas someone then Nitrogen is the best choice because the body doesn't automatically rebel against it as we breath it in all the time anyway so there is no way for the brain to detect that there is a problem.
Carbon monoxide would be a pretty nasty way to go if you were concious as it causes a severe headache and nausea. After a certain amount of exposure it also essentially irreversible as the CO binds preferentially to haemoglobin so even treating with pure O2 won't fix the problem (a blood transfusion might work though).

I saw the Heseltine program as well. Very interesting.

Well I'm glad we have humane options. But from a deontological perspective, revenge is always a bad motive.
From a utilitarian one; capital punishment is expensive because it requires so many checks and balances to be even passably just, and it fails to deter.
And in practical terms; it is virtually impossible to arrive at a method of choosing who is to die that will not convict and slaughter some who probably shouldn't be.

The downsides of mistakes are just too severe, so the lack of a death penalty is the right option. Though humane methods for assisted suicides might make sense, we should not consider state ordered murder.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

Yeah I did hear somehwere that in the USA, it costs more to kill someone than it does for life in jail. Probably because they can be on death row for decades with tonnes of legal appeals.

Yes $400 000 for life in prison against $1.6 million for legal costs. The figures are old but it gives a sense of scale.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

Whilst the idea of the death sentence appeals, I would have to go against it. A confession isn't enough - it could have been coerced. I would want solid, indisputable, 100% reliable evidence. And that's very rare. I'd prefer criminals to be punished by sisyphean methods.

I think it was Lexx where the souls in limbo had to keep peddling or lose their heads. Perhaps a similar scheme could be used to generate electricity from porridge.