Equally disturbing is that the state would allow one of its bureaucrats to dream up this idea, let alone actually do it.
Kenneth Eugene Smith was no angel and certainly deserved to be in jail for the murder he was hired to commit in 1988. Let's be clear that he was imprisoned for a crime he committed, and rightly so. The death penalty is a hot topic in the U.S. Its use is polarizing, and the methods are even more so. There is no, and I do mean NO, humane way to kill a human. Euphemisms, like they will die quickly by being injected with lethal drugs, shot through the heart, and shocked in a chair, are ridiculous. Even the guillotine caused pain and suffering, and that was considered a quick method of executing a person. No matter what method is chosen, there is going to be pain and suffering inflicted on the person being executed. The point of the death penalty is to punish, to inflict suffering, and to not only do that to the person being executed but to their family as well. It is an act of revenge, a controlled rage poured out on the person who committed the crime and the family members they leave behind. I say this because, from a biblical point of view, there is room for the use of the death penalty. It is mandated yet prohibited and permitted under a set of rules and guidelines and is to be used as the last resort. The problem is that in many places, including the U.S., it's the first action, not the last one to be taken.
Moreover, the death penalty does not reduce or deter crime. Lastly, on this point, the people involved in the execution of the death penalty should be persons with a moral character that is above reproach. I am not speaking about people who speed through red lights or jaywalking. Instead, those who embody decency and respect have a character not tarnished by scandal or history filled with skeletons in the closet. In other words, the standards for going forward with the death penalty need to be very, very high. In general, that is the case in the U.S.; in every death penalty case, the ruling is challenged immediately. That said, innocent people have been executed. There is room for error, and errors have been made in administering the death penalty. 3% is the figure that is touted as the error rate for executions in the U.S., the highest Lethal injection, with a rate of 7% of executions being botched. Oddly enough, the only method with 0 is the firing squad.
So now states want to use Nitrogen, citing the same old message: it's fast, humane, and less gruesome. As I said, there is no humane way to kill a human humanely—none zero.
If this form of punishment is allowed, it might be better for states to adopt the following rules.
- No circumstantial evidence. Most murder trials are tired of circumstantial evidence. The risk of error is too high in these cases, along with bias and binocular vision by the police and prosecution, which means the accused may not be getting a fair trial. It might be better to have a life sentence imposed instead of the death penalty.
- In many states that have the death penalty, sheriffs and judges, along with prosecutors, are elected officials. This introduces bias based on political motivations. That should not be a thing. A cadre of law enforcement officials who are professionally trained, unbiased, and untainted by political affiliation should be the standard. In other words, Bubba need not apply.
- The jury system needs to be changed in states where the death penalty cases are heard. The idea that you can have an all-white jury convict a black man or vice versa is not rational or fair. A balanced cross-section of the community is a much better way to go. This includes having people who are wealthy and poor serve on juries as well.
- Public defenders, this is a shot in the dark. The reality is that while the public defender is trained and does have some skill sets that can be helpful in a murder case, they lack the time and resources to do the job effectively. This leaves the person facing the charge at significant risk. The only natural way to fix this is to hire more to lessen caseloads and consider other ways to fund private counsel for the accused, like the proceeds from traffic tickets.
- The federal government should standardize the method of execution for all states that opt to use the death penalty. Everything should be the same in each state. How the case is tried, how it is appealed, how it is carried out, where it is carried out, and what method is used. In other words, combine the four other suggestions I have made and make it the way it is done in each state.
Lastly, anyone who dreams up such sick ways to execute a human should be kicked out of the civil service and possibly be required to undergo a mental health assessment. Only a sick, demented person would suggest suffocation or mutilation as a method of execution is acceptable. People who think like this should not be trusted or even allowed near a position of power. Only a psychopath would offer such an idea to the governor of a state. That is what this looks like from the outside looking in. This whole idea and the use of it was wrong. That said, Smith deserved to be in prison and may well have earned the death penalty sentence, but he did not deserve to be treated like a lab rat for a bunch of gouls who wanted to see what this method of execution looks like. Pro or anti-death penalty, this was wrong, plain and simple.
Resource: Death Penalty Information Center: Botched Executions.
