0

Have there been any cases of cerebral hypoxia-induced executions in US or elsewhere in the world? (IE using altitude or N2O for asphyxiation)

Since it is the most foolprooth and ethical method of execution, it was signed off and approved by Oklahoma in 2015. If there have been no such executions, why is this the case? Why is this method not widespread and written into law?

  • Semi-serious side-note: this could be a fun alternative. – Psi Feb 5 '17 at 23:42
  • > it is arguably the most foolprooth and ethical method of execution if it is arguably the most fool proof and ethical method of execution, it cannot be the most fool proof and ethical method of execution; just as if it is politically correct, it cannot be correct. – dannyf Feb 6 '17 at 0:14
  • Some would say that no version of execution is ethical – CGCampbell Feb 6 '17 at 18:32
  • 1
    "Cyanide poisoning is a form of histotoxic hypoxia" -- so yes, lots. – Roger Aug 26 at 20:55
  • 1
    @Psi -- the classic 'gas chamber' execution method uses inhaled cyanide gas, not injection. – Roger Aug 26 at 21:04
2

Have there been any cases of cerebral hypoxia-induced executions in US or elsewhere in the world?

The answer to that is in the very article you linked to:

There are no reports of nitrogen gas ever being used to execute humans...

If there have been no such executions, why is this the case?

Again, answered in that same article (same paragraph):

critics say that one concern is that the method is untested. Some states even ban its use to put animals to sleep.

Granted, there is a counterpoint:

But supporters of Oklahoma’s plan argue that nitrogen-induced hypoxia – or a lack of oxygen in the blood – is a humane execution method. “The process is fast and painless,” said Christian, a former Oklahoma Highway Patrol trooper who wrote the bill. “It’s foolproof.”

I don't know Christian's credentials in regarded to human biology, but my guess is that the reason it's not in widespread use is simply because the 'foolproof' claim seems tenuous, at best, at this time given the fact that it's never been actually used on humans.

  • First point is invalid since the article is from 2015... Second point too since the method has now been fully tested on animals and is really fail-safe. It is also extremely well documented in research. – Psi Feb 5 '17 at 23:50
  • @ThomasHollis what does "really fail-safe" mean? As in approved by some authority for use on humans? – user1530 Feb 5 '17 at 23:52
  • By fail-safe I mean it has 100% success rate as humans are truly incapable of survival without oxygen to the brain. Unlike most other execution methods that occasionally fail. – Psi Feb 5 '17 at 23:53
  • 3
    @ThomasHollis if it's been approved, then I guess I don't know why it's not more widespread...though if I had to guess, it's perhaps due to the general apathy towards the death penalty these days in general. Maybe it's just not a priority. – user1530 Feb 5 '17 at 23:55
  • 2
    @ThomasHollis other methods occasionally fail because of practical or technical problems with implementation. Humans are truly incapable of survival after having their heads severed, yet beheadings sometimes fail. So it seems to me that not only the idea of suffocating people with nitrogen gas in order to kill them needs to be approved, but also specific protocols for killing them reliably using that method. – phoog Feb 6 '17 at 5:28

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.