Which form of Execution would you prefer?

Fifty one posts so far, and no one has said.. I oppose capital punishment, in any form.

Here in Canada we did away with executions in 1972. A number of persons who were tried and convicted since then were not executed, AND at a later date, new evidence was brought forward that resulted in a new trial and their eventual acquittal by the court and their release. In some of those cases the convicted person was in prison for decades. David Milgard was one of them. Not executing people is a way to avoid killing persons who may be innocent, but were convicted based on faulty testimony, or poorly presented physical evidence.

Before any one brings up DNA, I am well aware of it's uses and it's ability to narrow down the suspect list, BUT do some research about the number of errors made by US crime lab technicians who bungled the evidence in the collection process. Its a long list. JIM.
 
jimintoronto said:
Fifty one posts so far, and no one has said.. I oppose capital punishment, in any form.
Click to expand...
I probably shouldn't have assumed that is largely taken for granted.

I got the feeling people were really talking about self-inflicted euthanasia, i.e. suicide but somehow hoping to escape the wrath of God through a loophole or something.
 

dusty said:
On September 10, 1945, farmer Lloyd Olsen of Fruita, Colorado, United States, was planning to eat supper with his mother-in-law and was sent out to the yard by his wife to bring back a chicken. Olsen chose a five-and-a-half-month-old Wyandotte chicken named Mike. The axe removed the bulk of the head, but missed the jugular vein, leaving one ear and most of the brain stem intact.[2][3][4]

Despite Olsen's attempt to behead Mike, the chicken could still balance on a perch and walk clumsily. It attempted to preen, peck for food, and crow, though with limited success; his "crowing" consisted of a gurgling sound made in his throat.[2] When Mike did not die, Olsen decided to care for the bird. He fed it a mixture of milk and water via an eyedropper and gave it small grains of corn and worms.[2][5]

Fame​

Once his fame had been established, Mike began a career of touring sideshows in the company of such other anomalies as a two-headed baby. It was also photographed for dozens of magazines and papers, and was featured in Time and Life magazines.[2] Mike was put on display to the public for an admission cost of 25 cents (equivalent to $3 in 2023). At the height of his popularity, the chicken's owner earned $4,500 per month (equivalent to $61,400 in 2023);[6] Mike was valued at $10,000 (equivalent to $136,500 in 2023).[2]

Death​

In March 1947, at a motel in Phoenix, Arizona on a stopover while traveling back from tour, Mike started choking on his mucus in the middle of the night.[4][7] The Olsens had inadvertently left their feeding and cleaning syringes at the sideshow the day before, and so were unable to save Mike. Olsen claimed that he had sold the bird off, resulting in stories of Mike still touring the country as late as 1949. Other sources say that the chicken's severed trachea could not properly take in enough air to be able to breathe, and he therefore choked to death in the motel.[7]

Explanation of the case​

It was determined that the axe had missed the jugular vein[8] and a clot had prevented Mike from bleeding to death. Although most of his head was severed, most of his brain stem and one ear were left on his body. Since basic functions (breathing, heart rate, etc.) as well as most of a chicken's reflex actions are controlled by the brain stem, Mike was able to remain quite healthy.
Click to expand...
I found this video featuring the illustrious Mike the headless chicken himself on film.
 
timoc said:

Which form of Execution would you prefer?​


Over a 30 year period, to be kissed to death by a bevy of beautiful women. šŸ˜Š
Click to expand...
Maybe using the right aftershave will increase the probability of that happening. The human female has been found to be deliriously susceptible to certain aromas.
 
Last edited:
jimintoronto said:
Fifty one posts so far, and no one has said.. I oppose capital punishment, in any form.

Here in Canada we did away with executions in 1972. A number of persons who were tried and convicted since then were not executed, AND at a later date, new evidence was brought forward that resulted in a new trial and their eventual acquittal by the court and their release. In some of those cases the convicted person was in prison for decades. David Milgard was one of them. Not executing people is a way to avoid killing persons who may be innocent, but were convicted based on faulty testimony, or poorly presented physical evidence.

Before any one brings up DNA, I am well aware of it's uses and it's ability to narrow down the suspect list, BUT do some research about the number of errors made by US crime lab technicians who bungled the evidence in the collection process. Its a long list. JIM.
Click to expand...
True, mistakes are made. Yet, some people feel that if the death penalty is abolished, then those who are genuinely guilty will not receive the punishment that they deserve. So having to choose between two negatives, they deem the risk you mention as acceptable.
 
KSav said:
I must disagree, and I apologize for sticking my virtual head in. It's been my experience that baked goods, though they may seem minor compared with religion, can indeed bring a grieving person a great deal of comfort.
Click to expand...
I guess everyone is different. My mother refused to eat whenever she was grieving. In contrast, my father would feast as if nothing had happened. Did it right after his mom died. Me? If hungry I would eat, but it would not alleviate my sorrow, just my hunger pangs. BTW When I was a JW, I once attempted to use resurrection scriptures to console a grieving woman who had just lost her husband. Well, to my amazement and dismay, it only caused her to burst out crying even more. It had baffled me for many years until just recently when I suddenly I realized that she might have imagined her husband destined to be heading in the other direction.
 
Last edited:
Warrigal said:
#5, then I could refuse the blindfold and shout "Shoot straight, you bastards!" *

*Last words of Harry Harbord Morrant, AKA The Breaker.
Click to expand...

Firing squad.

I think the blindfold is given for the sake of those doing the shooting rather than the person being shot? I don't know that the victim gets a choice.
 
dusty said:
A bullet travels faster than the speed of sound so no, you would not hear the sound from the gun. In some way you would be dead before you knew you were bein shot.
Click to expand...
That is something that impressed me while watching the film Quigley Down Under, where his enemies keep getting hit by bullets before the sound of the shot reaches them. Which means that the firing squad bullets will reach you before the sound does.
 
Last edited:
Radrook said:
That is something that impressed me while watching the film Ripley Down Under, where his enemies keep getting hit by bullets before the sound of the shot reaches them. Which means that the firing squad bullets will reach you before the sound does.
Click to expand...
Ripley Down Under ? Or Quigley Down Under ? [Tom Selleck]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top