this post was submitted on 16 Jan 2024
133 points (76.7% liked)

politics

19087 readers
4454 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 15 points 10 months ago (2 children)

If you read this article, start from the halfway point. The first half is absolute fluff.

Arguments against:

  • The executed needs to breathe. Author believes this will cause stress as they may attempt to hold their breath.
  • An ill fitted mask for nitrogen delivery may be a safety concern for occupants in the same room. Article did not have details on how much nitrogen is delivered or how much would be need to impact a small room.
  • if an execution fails, first responders may have difficulty treating the patient due to the prevalence of nitrogen gas.
  • When terminated by nitrogen, a study found mice elicit a fear response indicating that more research is needed before using this as an ethical means of terminating mice… or people.

Author also argues that since other states don’t use this method, it shouldn’t be used… which feels more like a chicken and egg problem.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The thing is, we already know exactly how nitrogen affects humans, and we know due to industrial accidents.

I'll preface this next part by saying that I don't think the death penalty should exist at all, and that when you give the State the power to kill, that power will be abused.

So, addressing the author's "concerns";

  • You can only hold your breath for so long. The stress of doing so would be no worse than the stress of knowing you're being executed. You can make the exact same stress argument about any form of execution.

  • Ill fitting masks are a concern, but nitrogen by itself is not a concern in a well ventilated room. The prisoner dies, not because of the nitrogen itself, but because the nitrogen displaces oxygen. Normal air is about 78% nitrogen. Any other concerns can be alleviated by having oxygen sensors in the room.

  • Saving someone from nitrogen hypoxia is actually pretty easy if you get to them quickly. And again, a well ventilated room means that it will be completely safe for everyone (except the guy wearing the mask)

  • Mice are not humans. Humans cannot tell when there's more nitrogen than there should be. That's why nitrogen is so dangerous in an industrial setting.

Basically, the author comes off as having failed every basic science class they ever took.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I don’t know enough about the finer details of this topic to say what is right or wrong, but I was hoping to be educated by the article… which felt like it was just thrown together without proper due diligence… or editing.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago

Yeah, the author seems to be a complete dipshit.

Yes, you can argue that the death penalty is bad. I often do just that.

I don't make up bullshit that's so easy to disprove in order to push my point.

The author is doing more harm than good here.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Since it has never before been used for state sanctioned murder, we should be careful about how we apply it, and make all efforts to avoid mistakes

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

I think that holds true whether or not it’s been used before. So, I agree.