On Mon, 9 Mar 2009 19:05:49 -0600, "KLC Lewis"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
Oh, and your refutation of "torture" equating to "cruel"? Did I miss
that? Twist and squirm all you want Dave, the subject was "Torture",
irrespective of which techniques comprise that term. Stephen says he
sanctions "Torture", not just waterboarding, and that violates a
constitutional prohibition. Time to wake up and smell the 18th century.
Was that too many syllables for you?

Keith

Let's look at it this way:

The prohibition is against "cruel and unusual punishment." It can be either
cruel OR unusual, but not both. As long as we do it all the time, it's not
unusual at all, and so therefore we can be as cruel as we like.

Winning hearts and minds, one at a time.

I suggest that the meaning is cruel punishments and also unusual
punishments.
Cheers,

Bruce
(bruceinbangkokatgmaildotcom)

On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 12:22:43 +0700, Bruce In Bangkok
wrote:

I suggest that the meaning is cruel punishments and also unusual
punishments.

I happen to have a book on the subject of execution of death sentences
by hanging. It was well into the nineteenth century before hangmen
started using the long drop, one which breaks the neck, so that the
body doesn't thrash around, neater that way. This also shuts off the
blood flow to the brain, causing immediate loss of consciousness.
On the other hand, the good old short drop took about twenty minutes
to kill, as the air was not shut off completely. Certainly cruel, but
it was the usual method. The condemned at Nuremburg were killed
indoors, on a portable gallows that was supposed to be set up over a
hole in the ground. Those *******s got the short drop.

Hanging was invented to be less cruel than boiling in oil or breaking
on the wheel. It achieved that at least.

The state of Utah used to offer the choice of hanging or shooting,
Nobody ever picked hanging.

Casady

On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 14:20:44 GMT, (Richard
Casady) wrote:

On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 12:22:43 +0700, Bruce In Bangkok
wrote:

I suggest that the meaning is cruel punishments and also unusual
punishments.

I happen to have a book on the subject of execution of death sentences
by hanging. It was well into the nineteenth century before hangmen
started using the long drop, one which breaks the neck, so that the
body doesn't thrash around, neater that way. This also shuts off the
blood flow to the brain, causing immediate loss of consciousness.
On the other hand, the good old short drop took about twenty minutes
to kill, as the air was not shut off completely. Certainly cruel, but
it was the usual method. The condemned at Nuremburg were killed
indoors, on a portable gallows that was supposed to be set up over a
hole in the ground. Those *******s got the short drop.

If what I read is correct hanging was very much a spectacle in
England. Crowds of people, bets taken on how long the hangee would
last, speeches from the gibbet, a real outing.

Hanging was invented to be less cruel than boiling in oil or breaking
on the wheel. It achieved that at least.

The state of Utah used to offer the choice of hanging or shooting,
Nobody ever picked hanging.

Casady
Cheers,

Bruce
(bruceinbangkokatgmaildotcom)

Richard Casady wrote:

Hanging was invented to be less cruel than boiling in oil or breaking
on the wheel. It achieved that at least.

The state of Utah used to offer the choice of hanging or shooting,
Nobody ever picked hanging.

Casady

I used to think that beheading was barbaric.
By ax, saber or guillotine. And I'm sure it sometimes was - when the
executioner had to take several swipes before the neck was severed.
But a clean cut through the spinal column, specially if the major blood
vessels were severed, was faster than the long drop. I think that was
likely a humane end in the best case.

Brian W

"Brian Whatcott" wrote in message
...
Richard Casady wrote:

Hanging was invented to be less cruel than boiling in oil or breaking
on the wheel. It achieved that at least.

The state of Utah used to offer the choice of hanging or shooting,
Nobody ever picked hanging.

Casady

I used to think that beheading was barbaric.
By ax, saber or guillotine. And I'm sure it sometimes was - when the
executioner had to take several swipes before the neck was severed.
But a clean cut through the spinal column, specially if the major blood
vessels were severed, was faster than the long drop. I think that was
likely a humane end in the best case.

Brian W

If the end is to devise and use the most humane form of execution, it's hard
to beat nitrogen asphyxiation. The condemned simply falls asleep and dies,
with no sense of panic from CO2 buildup. They don't even have to know it's
coming. Put them in a sealed chamber and gradually replace the oxygen with
nitrogen. They could fall asleep and die watching The Sopranos. The kindest
thing would be to tell them they'll be released in the morning, here's a
special waiting room while we do the paperwork...

On Sat, 14 Mar 2009 21:25:20 -0600, "KLC Lewis"
wrote:


"Brian Whatcott" wrote in message
.. .
Richard Casady wrote:

Hanging was invented to be less cruel than boiling in oil or breaking
on the wheel. It achieved that at least.

The state of Utah used to offer the choice of hanging or shooting,
Nobody ever picked hanging.

Casady

I used to think that beheading was barbaric.
By ax, saber or guillotine. And I'm sure it sometimes was - when the
executioner had to take several swipes before the neck was severed.
But a clean cut through the spinal column, specially if the major blood
vessels were severed, was faster than the long drop. I think that was
likely a humane end in the best case.

Brian W

If the end is to devise and use the most humane form of execution, it's hard
to beat nitrogen asphyxiation. The condemned simply falls asleep and dies,
with no sense of panic from CO2 buildup. They don't even have to know it's
coming. Put them in a sealed chamber and gradually replace the oxygen with
nitrogen. They could fall asleep and die watching The Sopranos. The kindest
thing would be to tell them they'll be released in the morning, here's a
special waiting room while we do the paperwork...



Or just reduce the air pressure. I understand that is how some of the
vets put dogs down these days. No panic, just pass out.

Cheers,

Bruce
(bruceinbangkokatgmaildotcom)

On Sun, 15 Mar 2009 19:45:36 +0700, Bruce In Bangkok
wrote:

Or just reduce the air pressure. I understand that is how some of the
vets put dogs down these days. No panic, just pass out.

I have been high enough in an unpressurized aircraft to die fast
without oxygen equipment. Watch my Stuka impression if the oxygen gear
fails. Basically you pass out often without noticing anything wrong.

You want to gas someone carbon monoxide is painless, unlike cyanide
which may not be. The gas chamber starts out with a breath holding
contest.

Casady

KLC Lewis wrote:
"Brian Whatcott" wrote in message
...
Richard Casady wrote:

Hanging was invented to be less cruel than boiling in oil or breaking
on the wheel. It achieved that at least.

The state of Utah used to offer the choice of hanging or shooting,
Nobody ever picked hanging.

Casady
I used to think that beheading was barbaric.
By ax, saber or guillotine. And I'm sure it sometimes was - when the
executioner had to take several swipes before the neck was severed.
But a clean cut through the spinal column, specially if the major blood
vessels were severed, was faster than the long drop. I think that was
likely a humane end in the best case.

Brian W

If the end is to devise and use the most humane form of execution, it's hard
to beat nitrogen asphyxiation. The condemned simply falls asleep and dies,
with no sense of panic from CO2 buildup. They don't even have to know it's
coming. Put them in a sealed chamber and gradually replace the oxygen with
nitrogen. They could fall asleep and die watching The Sopranos. The kindest
thing would be to tell them they'll be released in the morning, here's a
special waiting room while we do the paperwork...


Hmmm...this is a strangely topical note. There has been recent police
action directed to a group that sets out to aid the incurables and
unconsolables to end their lives.
The method they adopted was a plastic bag over the intended suicide,
with a stream of helium admitted to it.

The police action centered on the active nature of the assistance - they
assert the helpers were holding down the victims' hands. The helpers
insist they were holding hands with the suicide as a gesture of support.

Brian W

"Brian Whatcott" wrote in message
...
Hmmm...this is a strangely topical note. There has been recent police
action directed to a group that sets out to aid the incurables and
unconsolables to end their lives.
The method they adopted was a plastic bag over the intended suicide,
with a stream of helium admitted to it.

The police action centered on the active nature of the assistance - they
assert the helpers were holding down the victims' hands. The helpers
insist they were holding hands with the suicide as a gesture of support.

Brian W

I believe it is the absolute right of a free person to end their own life if
they so choose. But "assisting" in this manner strikes me as homicide.

On Sun, 15 Mar 2009 09:05:05 -0600, "KLC Lewis"
wrote:


"Brian Whatcott" wrote in message
.. .
Hmmm...this is a strangely topical note. There has been recent police
action directed to a group that sets out to aid the incurables and
unconsolables to end their lives.
The method they adopted was a plastic bag over the intended suicide,
with a stream of helium admitted to it.

The police action centered on the active nature of the assistance - they
assert the helpers were holding down the victims' hands. The helpers
insist they were holding hands with the suicide as a gesture of support.

Brian W

I believe it is the absolute right of a free person to end their own life if
they so choose. But "assisting" in this manner strikes me as homicide.


If the "helpers" aren't family members and are indeed holding down the
hands of the suicide in a restraining manner, it doesn't look good.
But you might need a qualified stationary engineer to turn the helium
valve due to union rules. Do you know if it's a union shop?

--Vic