Tuesday, January 14, 2014

A better method of execution.

I understand that Wyoming Senator Bruce Burns is proposing firing squads for execution.  His reasoning is:
"The state of Wyoming doesn't have a gas chamber currently, an operating gas chamber, so the procedure and expense to build one would be impractical to me," said Burns, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

"I consider frankly the gas chamber to be cruel and unusual, so I went with firing squad because they also have it in Utah," Burns said. He's introduced the bill for consideration in the legislative session that starts Feb. 10 in Cheyenne.

"One of the reasons I chose firing squad as opposed to any other form of execution is because frankly it's one of the cheapest for the state," Burns said. "The expense of building a gas chamber I think would be prohibitive when you consider how many people would be executed by it, and even the cost of gallows."
Actually, the guillotine is a much less expensive and cost effective method of execution. It has the additional deterrent value of being able to stick the criminal's head on a pole as a warning to others not to commit a crime. It was used in Europe well into the 20th century, which means that it may not fall under the constitutional prohibition on "cruel and unusual punishments".

It's a win-win!

After all, see how well it worked after the French Revolution!


  1. "The guillotine became the symbol of a string of executions. Louis XVI had already been guillotined before the start of the terror; Queen Marie Antoinette, Barnave, Bailly, Brissot and other leading Girondins, Philippe Égalité (despite his vote for the death of the King) Madame Roland and many others were executed by guillotine. The Revolutionary Tribunal summarily condemned thousands of people to death by the guillotine, while mobs beat other victims to death."

    It might work better with some due process thrown in.

  2. As Sarge points out, it wasn't the method that was the problem.