snooggums @ snooggums @kbin.social

Posts

0

Comments

2,105

Joined

2 yr. ago

If they solved the problem they wouldn't be able to complain about it.

I love that this is literally accurate.

How about revolving doors?

Be the change you want to see.

Yes, in this case it is intentional. That doesn't mean every slippery slope is intentional, because they can be accidental or intentional. A slippery slope does not imply being accidental, which is what I was responding to.

The slippery slope can easily be unintentional, like the fear that giving something up will just naturally lead to other things being given up as a logical extension of the first thing. That is why slippery slopes are often described when making exemptions for certain rights. It is not that someone is intentionally going to expand the exemptions, but that exemptions tend to lead to more and more exemptions as a slippery slope.

This one is intentional. Some slippery slopes are intentional and some are accidental. Intent does not matter.

That’s a conscious choice people are capable of making in that scenario.

I guess the person being put to death should have just made a decision to die then. That's what you are saying right, that they suffered because they didn't choose to just roll over and die?

Slippery slope implies that allowing the change will mean sliding further and further in the same direction. Intent does not matter.

This is a slippery slope because every time they say something has a limited scope they just keep increasing the scope.

Your proposal is unicorns and rainbows fantasy land bullshit.

you are conflating waterboarding with non consensual, but expected waterboarding.

What?

A person who is doing it voluntarily for suicide would not be struggling against impending doom and would be breathing normally. The context here is execution against someone's will.

No, your proposal would still need a doctor.

The only thing that wouldn't is a guillotine.

Why bother? People are being put to death in the real world where competent people are not involved in executions.

, I’m talking about qualified scientists designing it.

Which qualified scientists designed this system?

Hard to design a system that can be operated by a chimp when the people actually designing and implementing the process are clearly incompetent.

If they don't have a medical professional monitoring the person's oxygen levels to ensure he is dying as fast as it is supposed to work, how will they know if their made up bullshit about it being humane when forced upon someone is accurate?

Imagine if they were putting a free diver or other person who has practiced holding their breath for extended periods of time, how would they know if it was even working without monitoring them?

The states that execute people have lied about every prior method being 'humane' and non of them ever were in practice on someone who did not want to die. The electric chair supposedly killed the person instantly, but that was a lie. Lethal injection was supposed to be putting someone to sleep and described in the same way as nitrogen, but that was clearly a lie in practice because the people that do it are incompetent.

Smith clearly died in agony from this method. Lethal injection was also promoted as painless, which it would be in theory and was not in practice for the same fundamental issue that the whole death penalty process involves incompetent people fucking up because competent people won't take part in it.

I can't pick a method when it is guaranteed to be horrible because of the context of the death penalty.

I will gladly pick a method or two for people who want to be euthanized and participate willingly. Those same methods will always be torture to someone who does not want to die as long as incompetent people are running the show.

Being an ex criminal who is trying to reform after armed robberies, but still committing new crimes, is still being a bad guy. Choosing not to kill people doesn't make someone not a bad guy when they still continue to commit crimes as part of the game.

Painting the targets of their crimes as worse doesn't make them not bad people.

I will not choose a method because all options require a trained an licensed medical professional to implement humanely, and nobody who qualifies will participate because they have ethics that prohibit causing harm to be licensed medical professionals. That includes putting someone to death against their will.

Picking a method is agreeing with the assumption that we have to put people to death.

The thing is, all of the humane ways to kill someone require the person to be a willing participant in the process. Nitrogen works when the person is relaxed and breathing normally for example.

To be fair, in many of the GTA games, you’re not a bad guy.

I've played Vice City, 4 and 5 and every one of them started out with the main character(s) being a bad guy who is just a little less evil than the people around them, but still willing to kill to get what they want.

They cannot do it humanely with a method that requires the person to breath normally to work. If they can hold their breath it will always be inhumane because they will still be struggling and have the same impending doom and physical reaction as waterboarding.

It does not matter if the chemical properties are different when the person has a working brain and doesn't want to die. Or if it is being implemented by incompetent people who couldn't even kill him with lethal injection in 2022.