Somebody has been executed for murder in the United States. I can already hear you yawn. It probably wasn't Tony Hayward so why get interested? The interesting thing about this execution was that it was conducted by firing squad. At least the media seemed to find this interesting, I'm not entirely sure why. Is there something intrinsically more fascinating about riddling somebodies carcass with bullets than there is about pumping poison into their veins? The recipient is going to wind up just as dead either way. Still, for some reason it caught whatever it is that the news media uses instead of imagination.
Execution by firing squad is legal in Utah and only at the request of the recipient. Excuse me, that needle looks dirty, do mind shooting me instead? As I understand it the Mormon faith (quite strong in Utah) believes in blood expiation. That is you can atone for your sins by shedding your own blood. Since most forms of execution don't actually shed blood death row inmates in Utah are given the option of death by firing squad which does. Especially if its done badly.
Take Marshal Ion Antonescu for example. He was dictator of Romania during the Second World War and led his country against the Soviet Union at Hitler's side. In Romania political miscalculation wasn't a hanging offence, it was a firing squad offence. After the war the communists took over and Antonescu, quite predictably, wound up with his back against a wall. Antonescu was fully aware of the shortcomings of the Romanian army and when the firing squad didn't actually manage to kill him his last words were said to be "You can't get anything right". The officer charged with delivering the coup de grace then proved him wrong.
Firing squads have always been popular in the army and various military aligned criminals (eg Hermann Goering) were terribly miffed when sentenced to hang rather than be shot. I must confess by the time the judge put the black cap on his head I would have lost interest in the proceedings but I suppose it matters to some people.
Frankly, if you're going to go the blood expiation route I can't help thinking the guillotine is the baby you want. Although possibly the authorities in Utah felt it was a little too French. Methods of execution have changed over the years as people have noticed that killing folk tends to hurt. Somehow ending somebodies life is a lot more acceptable if they don't suffer too much.
The truth of the matter is that a humane execution is much easier on the people watching. It is a lot easier to be comfortable with the death penalty if the person most directly involved isn't screaming for twenty minutes. If you really wish to ban capital punishment you shouldn't make executions less painful you should make them more painful. There would be very few people who would be prepared to stomache an execution if the method used was a chainsaw.
In the same way that funerals have very little to do with the actual dead person so executions have very little to do with the condemned person. Funerals and executions both exist largely so that the living can feel better about themselves and move on with their lives. This isn't a bad thing since the subject of both either has, or soon will have, no interest in proceedings whatsoever.
Does anybody honestly believe that a dead person is monitoring their own funeral to see how many people turn up and whether a good show was put on? I won't be. I fully intend to have better things to do with my afterlife than hanging around something as depressing as a funeral, particularly my own. Similarly an execution, the condemned is probably more interested in making sure his last meal is well cooked than what happens later. Like most things funerals and executions are designed for the spectators rather than the participants. Don't tell the condemned though, for many of them this will be their one moment in the spotlight and you don't want to ruin it for them.
No comments:
Post a Comment