this post was submitted on 09 Mar 2025
110 points (95.8% liked)

politics

21419 readers
4320 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 13igTyme@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Getting shot by multiple people in the chest and stomach isn't going to be any more painless.

[–] Empricorn 1 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

No one is arguing it's perfect or "painless", but in light of high-profile botched executions where the convict is unintentionally(?) tortured for hours before they died it seems to be the better option.

Multiple people targeting your brain and heart... It will be worse to watch and you might cause psychological damage to anyone watching or taking part... but at least you won't suffer for long.

EDIT:

and stomach

As I mentioned in another comment, they aim for the heart, from 15 feet (4.5 meters) away. And there's usually at least 3 shooters, so even if multiple people are abysmally bad marksmen, no one's dying slowly from a gut shot...

[–] MojoMcJojo@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

They don't aim at the head. They aim at the heart. And not every rifle has a live round so no one knows who fired the killing shot. At least that's how it was traditionally done.

[–] Empricorn 1 points 5 hours ago

You're right, I've since read the article and they aimed for the heart. Death was pronounced within 3 minutes of the shots. But I don't think this particular execution used the "random bullet and 2 blanks" method, or at least that's not a detail mentioned in the article:

"He chose the firing squad knowing that three bullets would shatter his bones and destroy his heart," said King. "But that was the only choice he had, after the state's three executions by lethal injection inflicted prolonged and potentially torturous deaths on men he loved like brothers."

[–] MoistOwlette@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

still id rather get shot, and die of shock and blood-loss in under a minute then be paralyzed and in agony for a half hour. Lethal injection may look more humane, but appearances are deceiving, with a firing squad what you see is what you get, multiple rifle rounds turning your organs into slush.

Edit: 3 hours of them trying to administer the lethal injection https://www.the-sun.com/news/6015918/joe-nathan-james-jr-longest-lethal-injection/

[–] skulblaka@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 day ago

Death by potassium overdose causes runaway cell death. When a cell dies and ruptures it releases potassium which then ruptures and kills other cells.

Essentially, melting your flesh off your body from the inside.

I'll take getting shot, thanks.

It will at least be quicker!