Why Don’t We Just Shoot Condemned Inmates?

Who cares?
Maybe if the media stopped sensationalising violent criminals, people would be less inclined to give these fucked up individuals their time and attention.
I mean, I see a lot of hate for "killers" in this discussion; but what's the point of exerting energy thinking about people you hate? What difference does it make to your life how long someone was able to "last in prison".

The concept of serial killers didn't even exist until the tabloid mass media created it. Pandering to people's morbid fascination with violence has only created more, as morbid fascination equates to attention, notoriety (and possibly martyrdom after execution?).
People with messed up, disenfranchised, damaged or psychopathic minds can - and have - been drawn into the seamy spotlight of the "serial killer" or "mass murderer" role society has created, where all eyes are on the crimes, and the resulting media circus of the hunt, arrest, trial and ultimate fate of the individuals alleged to have perpetrated such vile acts.
The media machine loves it, as do their advertisers, shareholders - because, it seems - the consumers of the whole macabre theatre keep lapping it up; tuning in or buying papers or whatever the case may be.

I would argue that rather than a deterrent, the death penalty has a neutral - if not positive effect on encouraging people to commit terrible crimes.
The celebrity level of notoriety "enjoyed" by household-name murderers speaks for itself really.
In an individualistic culture where being a "nobody" is seen as distinctly negative by some folk, the appeal of all that attention (like a movie star - but "real") seems rather obvious.

@ ro4eva and neversick - I guess the reason I find this an interesting topic is because it has been a non-issue in my home country since long before my birth. People here decided that - no matter how heinous the crime (and we've had our share) - its just not within the state's juristiction to execute people for criminal acts.
It's interesting to hear people's reasons for advocating it.
I read Dead Man Walking in high school, and have heard witnesses to the last hanging in an Australian prison (and how unexpectedly nauseated the witnesses were to be present at such a scene) and those two things greatly shaped my beliefs regarding capital punishment.
The counter argument has kind of fascinated me; especially when people who are generally distrustful of government in general feel ok about the state having an institutionalised system for executing people.

When those people call themselves followers of the teachings of Christ I'm even more intrigued.
I'm not saying this to generalise, stereotype or put people down - I'm just generally quite interested in that particular way of thinking - as well as the role played by the mass media in hyping an execution like some kind of fucked up boxing match.

As for the "it costs $x amount of tax dollars to house and feed these murderers" argument....how much of the American peoples' collective "tax dollars" goes into building, designing, training, feeding, housing and generally maintaining the "killers" known as the military?
Another sticky subject, but one I'm comfortable drawing a link on.
If killing is so wrong...why use depleted uranium tipped warheads in densely populated areas?
Do extra-judicial executions by drone strike exist in some kind of ethical vacuum?
Why is euthanasia aka "assisted suicide" regarded as murder - even when the "victim" is consenting - even asking - to be put out of their miserable suffering?

There are so many interesting ideological questions that arise (for me personally) which is why I engage in such discussions.
Disagreement is not intrinsically a bad thing.
 
Last edited:
I disagree. Serial killers existed throughout history. Besides countless military heroes you have people like H.H. Holmes and Jack the Ripper, who are notorious serial killers.

"Serial killer is first attested 1981 (in relation to John Wayne Gacy and Ted Bundy), though serial had been used in connection with murders since the early 1960s." - etymonline.com

These serial killers were around long before the concept was called serial killing.

There may be some level of competition among the murderers who want such notoriety.

Jesus was down with killing, obviously. He even kills himself. His favorite methods are stoning, stabbing, and burning.
 
When I was rather young and full of facts, I thought a serial killer had some serious issues with my Fruit Loops.

I just randomly thought you should all know - especially pmoseman.
 
Say I witness the crime. I guess if its someone I didn't know falling victim I wouldn't put my life on the line, unless emotionally struck in some way. But if its someone I know, and like, or family, I won't wait on "justice". That person is being dispatched.

So if there is beyond a doubt proof, unless we are going to rigorously test these individuals who kill, say maliciously, I have a tough time on keeping them alive.

But more on topic, perhaps why we don't just shoot the condemned instead of drugging them, is because its messy. Maybe drugging them makes it easier on those doing the killing. And maybe they are afraid of shooting someone and then that person surviving.. and requiring more shots. Maybe its the cleanup.
 
Last edited:
^ that's why they have "firing squads"; and so responsibility for the killing isn't all on one person's conscience.
Having said that, most western countries have grown out of the "killing as revenge for killing" concept in their legal systems.
Too messy.
 
Hmm, aside from the obvious pitfalls of the death penalty, one of which is the probable event that the state will eventually murder an innocent man with the imperfect justice we have; does him being a white supremacist really make him anymore reprehensible than being a serial killer? It is the first term used to describe him. It'd be a little easier on the eyes if one were to describe him as a "vile serial killer who happened to be a white supremacist that targeted... " ;) Not exactly a big deal, it just seems to me that him being a white supremacist is a bit lower on the scum-totem-pole than him taking the lives of innocent people. Jus' sayin is all
 
Eventually murder an innocent man? Man - if only!
I think the white supremacist thing is like a little hint; "hey, we done killed a white fella this time".

In all seriousness though, scum comes in all shapes and sizes, rich, poor, old, young - ugly human qualities manifest in all kinds of people.
How we - as a society - deal with severely damaged, and clearly dangerous people like this is both a dilemma and an indicator of the sort of society we are dealing with.
I sort of agree that if a state or nation is going to take it upon itself to kill people, then the niceties of killing employed in execution in various US jurisdictions - "painless", "clean" deaths - it detracts from the reality of the situation - that an individual is being killed - something no amount of sugar coating should detract from.
It seems like the whole purpose of such efforts to ensure a "humane" killing is to deflect debate away from the reality of the situation.
Lethal injection, hangman's noose, firing squad, crucifixion, electric chair....the result is more or less the same - in the end.

I understand the American exclusion of "cruel and unusual" punishments - but really, what could be more cruel than being killed for an act you did not commit?
I think I've blathered enough about this, haha. Sorry folks.
 
Unless the family or families of the victim wanted the murderer dead (in which case I'd get them to 'push the button' during execution), I'd keep him/her alive.

Call me a pussy but I couldn't bring myself to kill another human being for murdering a stranger. If the victim was a family member, perhaps (most likely) it would be a different story.
 
Agreed - but why involve the legal system?
You wanna kill for revenge?
I'm a great believer in the DIY approach. But the legal system making the call? Not so much.
It's not that I don't trust the integrity of police and prosecuting attorneys and/or judges...hmmm.
 
^ I'm honestly not sure what I would do regarding this.

I think I'd respect the wishes of the victim's family, and I'd leave it at that.

With the exception of a close friend who was murdered nearly a decade ago, I'm clueless about how I would handle such an issue (no experience).

In other words, perhaps it would have been better if I kept my mouth shut.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top