As we know it, to be killed painlessly, is to be killed instantly
This is not necessarily true. There are ways to fall asleep and never wake up. Not instant, but painless.
this post was submitted on 16 Sep 2023
-11 points (38.8% liked)
Showerthoughts
28355 readers
954 users here now
A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The best ones are thoughts that many people can relate to and they find something funny or interesting in regular stuff.
Rules
- All posts must be showerthoughts
- The entire showerthought must be in the title
- Posts must be original/unique
- Be good to others - no bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia
- Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Why did you think killing someone (murder) could ever be humane in the first place?
Because the death penalty exists.
Because people are currently sentenced to execution even in the United States.
To those humans who are sentenced to death, why not choose a method that is instantaneous death, rather than something that can potentially fail.
I'd rather die instantly from a rock or a 12 gauge shell to the head than be injected or electrocuted.
Here is a tip: The world is not the USA...
If you are complaining about something that happens in the USA, say so.
But he isn't wrong, executions are regularly business everywhere except in EU Countrys.
144 countries had abolished the death penalty in law
The EU is a lot bigger than I thought...
Sorry, but there are more countries without the death penalty than with it.
The top 8 most populated countries still have it. Just those 8 (not including other countries where it's legal) make up ~4.3 billion people. Over half of the global population.
Abolished death penalty by law but still regularly kill people. And i said EU because its the only "continent" without it, excluding Russia. Its not necessary to name every individual country.
We do it everyday since we started existing, its completely normal.
We do it
Sorry but do not include the rest of us in whatever you are trying to justify.
We as in humanity.
144 countries had abolished the death penalty in law
Sorry, but there are more countries without the death penalty than with it.
Again, don't include the sane nations in your we.
Death penalty isn't the only way to kill people...
Murder, War, "Police" Violence, "Military interventions (totally 3 days only)"...
And no one would qualify those as "humane" either. So the argument still stands.
How about euthanasia?
It's a weird edge case that is between killing and assisted suicide, assuming there is consent.
Euthanasia without consent seems not so humane to me, but once again it is an edge case that is still hard to define.
No it doesn't.
There is a difference between shooting a invader of your house/country and capturing him and torturing to death.
There is a difference, but if you start saying that shooting an invader is humane, you have a serious problem.
Self-defense is inhumane? Call out the invader first, please, then we can talk about whether the defender is overdoing it.
Killing is inhumane.
Killing in self defense might be necessary, yet it does not become humane just because you want it to.
It is because of the way it is, otherwise he shoots you and rapes your children. (No exaggeration, Russians did that)
That sounds like your average american too.
Nonetheless, if you start thinking that killing is humane because "they deserve it", I will repeat myself, you have a serious problem.
Because I'm pretty sure that this horrible rapist invader is also convinced that you deserve it, yet I don't believe you would find their behaviour humane for that reason.
if you start thinking that killing is humane because “they deserve it”, I will repeat myself, you have a serious problem.
Fair enough. While I don't subscribe to pacifism, I do prefer that self-defense be regarded as an unfortunate necessity. Celebrating violence isn't going to help us.
It can be a necessity and still be inhumane.
Having to do something does not make it good, and it's fine as long as people see it.
Sounds like you support Russia.
Because I said that killing is inhumane?
Oh I forgot, Russia doesn't kill anyone, silly me /s
Most people are subject to the death penalty. The world population is approaching 8.1 billion souls. The ten most populous nations are India, China, the US, Indonesia, Pakistan, Nigeria, Brazil, Bangladesh, Russia, and Mexico, adding up to 4.6 billion -- over half the planet.
Of those, only Mexico has abolished the death penalty (though Brazil is listed as "extreme only" and Russia is listed as "suspended", having not officially executed anyone in the past decade*). Putting these together, at least 4.1 billion people out of the "first 4.6" that I looked at live under the specter of the death penalty.
I don't think you can no-true-scotsman your way out of the simple fact that it's still "normal" for humans to kill other humans. I also don't think that acknowledging that fact requires that you endorse the practice.
*whoa, is this a case where RUSSIA is more sane than the USA?! Strange times.
I looked up the population info on https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/population-by-country/ and cross-referenced with the site you posted.
To understand why it's legal in the USA you have to first understand how the US's government is structured. The Federal Government actually doesn't hold that much power, the most power is held by the States which decide on issues like this for themselves.
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2021/07/19/10-facts-about-the-death-penalty-in-the-u-s/
Oh, I understand quite well why it's legal in the US. It's been a topic of some debate my entire life here.
The key metric for 'human' actions is to avoid needless suffering. Livestock processed humanly is not panicked, not given a slow painful death, it should be quick, clean, and without pain.
Living conditions are human if they don't create needless suffering, i.e. animals living in a open farm are human, animals living their lives in changes is inhumane.
I think the golden rule applies, treat others how you would like to be treated, is basically being humane.
I think the golden rule applies, treat others how you would like to be treated, is basically being humane.
What if you are a masochist?
I mean, there is no humane way to kill someone.
But on the USA death penalty issue, yes, generally choices about how it is carried out, are made with the spectators in mind, and the process itself is made more torturous in order to make it look better. (John Oliver has some great information in his death penalty video)
And (afaik) with the executors mental health in mind as well.
e.g. if you just crush a head with a stone you will know you did it.
If two others and you have to push a button you can tell yourself that it's more probable you didn't kill somebody than that you did.
What about when it's their choice, like euthanasia?
Well you certainly chose an appropriate username.
Careful, you might to get crucified for ths opinion.
That would be inhumane
No.
Inert gas asphyxiation is considered as painless.
Accordingly, the human subject detects little abnormal sensation as the oxygen level falls. This leads to asphyxiation (death from lack of oxygen) without the painful and traumatic feeling of suffocation (the hypercapnic alarm response, which in humans arises mostly from carbon dioxide levels rising), or the side effects of poisoning.
Oof, -11. This should have been posted in !unpopularopinion@lemmy.world
I posted it there as well but people tend to be very touchy about human death regardless of circumstances.
I for one don't care what condition my body is in after I die as long as physically I didn't feel anything.
That makes me think of the Klingons from Star Trek "It is only an empty shell; do with it as you will."
ITT: Psychopaths failing to understand that not all people are psychopaths.