454
submitted 6 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

Move follows Alabama’s recent killing of death row inmate Kenneth Smith using previously untested method

Three of the largest manufacturers of medical-grade nitrogen gas in the US have barred their products from being used in executions, following Alabama’s recent killing of the death row inmate Kenneth Smith using a previously untested method known as nitrogen hypoxia.

The three companies have confirmed to the Guardian that they have put in place mechanisms that will prevent their nitrogen cylinders falling into the hands of departments of correction in death penalty states. The move by the trio marks the first signs of corporate action to stop medical nitrogen, which is designed to preserve life, being used for the exact opposite – killing people.

The green shoots of a corporate blockade for nitrogen echoes the almost total boycott that is now in place for medical drugs used in lethal injections. That boycott has made it so difficult for death penalty states to procure drugs such as pentobarbital and midazolam that a growing number are turning to nitrogen as an alternative killing technique.

Now, nitrogen producers are engaging in their own efforts to prevent the abuse of their products. The march has been led by Airgas, which is owned by the French multinational Air Liquide.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 6 months ago

This is an honest question. In the US we probably put down thousands of household pets each month. Many of them have their owners right there beside them holding their paw. It isn't tramatic for the pet or the owner.

How can it be this difficult for us to humanely execute a human?

[-] BreakDecks@lemmy.ml 13 points 6 months ago

Because we're kill our pets out of love, and we kill inmates out of hate. Humane treatment isn't difficult, the cruelty is intentional.

So long as were still using the barbaric practice of state-sanctioned murder, the practice itself will remain barbaric. The only solution is to eliminate the death penalty like the rest of the civilized western world.

[-] I_poop_from_there@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago

There are plenty of options to 'put down' a human as well, but most of those require medical expertise to administer.

Medical personnel generally frown upon the whole idea of putting people down, so they're not really an option

[-] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 3 points 6 months ago

That was explained in the post: drug manufacturers are careful who they sell to and they do their best to prevent their products from being used in executions.

[-] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 2 points 6 months ago

If a human chooses euthanasia because of endless and needless suffering, say stage 4 cancer, that sort of thing, I'll sit right next to them, hold their hand too.

When we execute a human, it's a different story and as I wrote this I wonder if I really have to explain the difference between euthanasia and an execution...?

[-] Worx@lemmynsfw.com 2 points 6 months ago

You're missing the point. The question was, "how is it medically different" rather than, "how is it morally different"

[-] Zanothis@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago

The moral question is still the issue, though. The original question was asking how is it so difficult to humanely execute a human.

It's difficult only because of the difference between execution and euthanasia. The drug companies argue that execution is inhumane and euthanasia is humane.

As a result, they have made it harder to execute people while making the process of euthanasia as painless as possible.

[-] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 1 points 6 months ago

You asked how it's different to kill a human than a pet. Medically speaking there isn't, really, so you get the moral answer

[-] echodot@feddit.uk 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I'm sorry I really don't understand what your point is.

The question is why does execution have to be so awful, and your answer is because it's an execution. But that doesn't really answer the question, is execution of punishment or is it just a method to get rid of dangerous individuals? If it's a method to get rid of dangerous individuals then there's no reason for it to be unpleasant.

If it's a punishment then wouldn't the great a punishment be life in prison. Where they have to deal with it every day, rather than getting out early?

[-] Zanothis@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago

is execution of punishment or is it just a method to get rid of dangerous individuals?

It's neither. The dangerous individuals have already been removed from society so killing them is unnecessary. And, as you've pointed out, a life sentence is a much better punishment so executions aren't about punishment. It's not a deterrent, as some advocates suggest, since the homicide rate is higher in states with the death penalty than those without.

Ultimately, the purpose of executions seems to be revenge. I think there's more nuance than that but every time I attempt to express it I discover that I can't do so succinctly. I sincerely apologize to anyone that might read this and feel like I'm misrepresenting their position.

[-] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 1 points 6 months ago

there is no reason for it to be unpleasant

If you find killing humans not unpleasant just because those human beings are bad then you might want to get a psychiatric checkup

The answer is that anyone with a medical degree will not participate in any way, even in an advisory capacity.

this post was submitted on 11 Mar 2024
454 points (98.3% liked)

News

22876 readers
3831 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS