"Instantaneous" death


china
#1
Why are many accidental deaths referred to as "instantaneous" when most technology used in capital punishment requires seconds, if not minutes, to kill a person?
 
MikeyDB
#2
China

If we fear death...we fear it for others as well.... the manner of our death is important in that if one fear...the fear of dying is cascaded on top of other fears....all fear grows....

We may not "fear" pain but we all appreciate the experience of pain isn't pleasant....to the majority...some people practice giving and recieving pain....but for the majority of folk...pain is an unpleasant experience....

When the experience of pain is extended through/over...time....we term that condition as "suffering"...and we all generally agree that suffering is unpleasant as well....

In some circumstances "instantaneous death" relieves us of the burden of resonating ...intuiting or empathizing with that pain or suffering.....

I don't fear death per se...but If I had any control or input to the moment of my death I'd prefer to die quietly in my sleep....or die very quickly..."instantaneously"....because I don't like pain and suffering...

I don't like them when they influence or affect me personally as an individual and I don't like them when anyone else experiences them either...
 
karrie
#3
Quote: Originally Posted by chinaView Post

Why are many accidental deaths referred to as "instantaneous" when most technology used in capital punishment requires seconds, if not minutes, to kill a person?

Because to kill someone 'instantaneously' would be inhumane in most cases.

A 120km/h collision which crushes someone's ribcage, thus stopping their heart.

Being driven over by a tractor, again, crushing and stopping the heart.

These are about as instantaneous as death gets, unless you count the man killed by lightning where I was camping on the weekend. But, to recreate them is not only difficult, but inhumane if you get it wrong by an inch or two, or misjudge the speed needed, etc.
 
MikeyDB
#4
I understand what you're saying...Karrie...I think...but I disagree...

If you're asking me to believe that we couldn't drop a ten ton block of concrete on a human being and that that death wouldn't be instantaneous....I have my doubts....

The question is I believe attempting to elicit consideration of why we use particular language in particular situations...
 
eh1eh
#5
How long does death take. If you are crushed by truck and are injured then die one hour later can it be said death took one hour? No death is something that always happens instantaniously. Because if you are injured you are alive. When all brain activity ceases you are dead. Can you meassure the time between the functioning of the brain and when it stops?
 
karrie
#6
Quote: Originally Posted by MikeyDBView Post

I understand what you're saying...Karrie...I think...but I disagree...

If you're asking me to believe that we couldn't drop a ten ton block of concrete on a human being and that that death wouldn't be instantaneous....I have my doubts....

The question is I believe attempting to elicit consideration of why we use particular language in particular situations...

No, we couldn't kill anyone in any manner... and countries which do practise capital punishment are generally held to a standard of not being allowed to kill 'inhumanely.'

Inhumane doesn't refer strictly to the person you're killing, but also to the grieving family left behind. Mashing someone's loved one to a pup with a concrete block... I can't say it gets much more inhumane than that.
 
triedit
#7
For me, it's apples and oranges. "Intantaneous death" could apply in lots of scenarios without a judgement of right or wrong, homicide or accidental.
 
MikeyDB
#8
Death is Death Karrie...

If you're suggesting that some psychological "closure" can be effected if the remains are nicely clothed and lain out in a five thousand dollar casket....or their burned and put in an urn to sit over the fireplace....then yes, the event, the phenomenon of death....might be important...but it's important to the living.....and the personalizing of how that death occurred...

By the way...

Using medical procedures to extend the period over which a human being can be held between death and being alive....that would be more inhumane than squashing somone in an instant..????
 
karrie
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by MikeyDBView Post

Death is Death Karrie...

If you're suggesting that some psychological "closure" can be effected if the remains are nicely clothed and lain out in a five thousand dollar casket....or their burned and put in an urn to sit over the fireplace....then yes, the event, the phenomenon of death....might be important...but it's important to the living.....and the personalizing of how that death occurred...

By the way...

Using medical procedures to extend the period over which a human being can be held between death and being alive....that would be more inhumane than squashing somone in an instant..????

Death is death when it happens naturally.

When man steps in and decides to create death, it's an entirely different story. We hold humanity to higher moral standards in how we handle the affair of ending a life, than those to which we hold nature.
 
MikeyDB
#10
No Karrie you're wrong.

When I shoot a man in the head with my rifle he's dead. When I blow him up with a bomb he's dead.

When men women and children are burned to death in their beds...they're dead...

The factors contributing to or playing a role in how the condition of death arrives....is secondary.... When you're dead you're dead.

And yes death is entirely "natural"....how one dies arrives at the nexus of lethal cause and circumstance or combination of events and conditions that results in death...can be different and varied but the person killed...the person who dies....that person is dead Karrie....
 
#juan
#11
In my life I have seen a couple of "instantaneous" deaths. Both were industrial accidents. One was a fall from over a hundred feet. Death was instantaneous unless you count the time it took to fall. The other was a violent blow to the head that involved massive head trauma. I was only a few feet away from either and there was no doubt the deaths were instantaneous. Both deaths were brutally quick, and both were extremely ugly to see. Both were closed casket funerals. There is no way to compare these deaths with capital punishment of any kind.
 
karrie
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by MikeyDBView Post

how one dies arrives at the nexus of lethal cause and circumstance or combination of events and conditions that results in death...can be different and varied but the person killed...the person who dies....that person is dead Karrie....

You're quibbling over semantics Mikey. The fact stands that we hold humanity to certain standards when it comes to bringing about someone's death. Crushing people to death as a form of capital punishment wouldn't be tolerated, regardless of YOUR views on it. As it is, we expect that IF a person needs to bring about a death, they do it as respectfully and painlessly as possible, when it's happening in a government sanctioned setting.

Executions can't be performed in the same manner as my friend being run over by a tractor. It simply wouldn't stand with society. Thus, the reason for the discrepancy. Why 'instantaneous' deaths can occur in accidents, but not so with most execution methods.
 
karrie
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by #juanView Post

In my life I have seen a couple of "instantaneous" deaths.

Brutal stuff to have to witness juan. I'm sorry you went through that.
 
#juan
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

Brutal stuff to have to witness juan. I'm sorry you went through that.

I knew both men and I lost a lot of sleep over these incidents......We are talking about almost forty years ago. I'm sure today, we would have some kind of counselling and a week or two off the job for anyone witnessing this kind of accident.
 
karrie
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by #juanView Post

I knew both men and I lost a lot of sleep over these incidents......We are talking about almost forty years ago. I'm sure today, we would have some kind of counselling and a week or two off the job for anyone witnessing this kind of accident.

That all depends on the industry. A friend of ours was on a rig roughly 5 years ago when someone fell. There was nothing any of them could do, as he died on impact. They were back to work as soon as the ambulance picked up the body and they got the blood and gore cleaned up. I thought it was a pretty sad way to do business.
 
IdRatherBeSkiing
#16
Only the dead person knows for sure whether the death is instantaneous.

Just because the heart stops doesn't mean the conciencness is not still alive. I think I read somewhere the French did studies with people executed with the guiotine and found that the head would blink at them for sometimes several minutes after detatchment.

Since nobody knows exactly where the conciencness is in the body, it is impossible to say when death actually occurrs.

I think the term is primarly used to indicate that there was no need to take the corpse to the hospital or attempt recessitation.
 
MikeyDB
#17
I'm sorry Karrie but semantics is the theme of this thread.

Is your decision that a family of Afghanis or a family of Iraqis or anyones family for that matter are killed more "properly" if they're burned to death in their beds...or shot as they attempt to escape the flames....

The manner of bringing death...capital punishment....war and homicide...all result in death....that's why it's such a nasty thing to have to deal with I suppose...

You have created for yourself a sub-category of the morality issues regarding the death of some person that is somehow related to the manner and "rationale" behind that death....

The notion of instantaneous....in an instant when we execute a felon or employ capital punishment as the choice of our courts and legal system...is loaded with both semantical and rational and philosophical and religious and and and....

But the person is dead..... and if we try to bring "honor" to death...a Kamikazi prepared to bring about his own death has this notion this idea of "honor", and as concept or notion the death of another human being is regarded as an event that may or may not have the trappings of "honor".
 
karrie
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by MikeyDBView Post

I'm sorry Karrie but semantics is the theme of this thread.

Is your decision that a family of Afghanis or a family of Iraqis or anyones family for that matter are killed more "properly" if they're burned to death in their beds...or shot as they attempt to escape the flames....

The manner of bringing death...capital punishment....war and homicide...all result in death....that's why it's such a nasty thing to have to deal with I suppose...

You have created for yourself a sub-category of the morality issues regarding the death of some person that is somehow related to the manner and "rationale" behind that death....

The notion of instantaneous....in an instant when we execute a felon or employ capital punishment as the choice of our courts and legal system...is loaded with both semantical and rational and philosophical and religious and and and....

Mikey, how I feel about war and murder is quite irrelevant to the OP, as it pertains to capital punishment and accidental death. I merely pointed out that SOCIETY expects capital punishment to be carried out within a set framework, which makes 'intantaneous' death nearly impossible to bring about. It's not a 'subcategory' I've created, it's the issue the OP brought up.

The facts are simple. Capital punishment is governed by guidelines which limit the ways in which a prisoner can be killed.
 
MikeyDB
#19
And you believe that the choice isn't imporant is that the flip-side?

The question asks :
"Why are many accidental deaths referred to as "instantaneous" when most technology used in capital punishment requires seconds, if not minutes, to kill a person?"

We don't hear...John Doe was instantaneously killed by the state of Florida..or Texas etc....what we do hear is "John Doe was executed by lethal injection...hanging....electrocution...firing squad...as required by..."

We quite frankly don't care if they die quickly or not....

Just so long as they're dead...
 
karrie
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by MikeyDBView Post

And you believe that the choice isn't imporant is that the flip-side?

We quite frankly don't care if they die quickly or not....

Just so long as they're dead...

Why would you assume that I don't believe the choice matters? I stated what IS... not what I would like to see.

The FACTS of the matter are that countries which engage in capital punishment can't kill prisoners instantaneously, because society places restrictions on the manner in which prisoners are killed.
 
MikeyDB
#21
Would you mind pointing me to the legislation or law that says that we can't or aren't "supposed to" kill prisoners of the state quickly and humanely....

I was unaware that we'd decided as a society to practice torture and protracted executions...as means of stressing the issue that Joe Criminal deserves to die a long and painful death...

I was under the impression that if we could put a person to death quietly and quickly that that would be the prefferred model.

If we're actually saying that a hanging that doesn't kill someone right away...when it takes hours to choke to death...is the preferred model because it really drives the decision to take a life for a life...into the mind of the person we're killing...and of course the audience chanting its approval...

Wouldn't make good TV or movies I guess if we just killed em quick....
 
karrie
#22
'We' don't have any legislation like that. 'We' don't engage in capital punishment.

Naturally, the leading model and best social comparison when it comes to capital punishment is the US. And they have laws, regulations, whatever you might call them, surrounding the methods with which prisoners are killed. I just don't happen to keep them on me at all times.




Quote: Originally Posted by MikeyDBView Post

Would you mind pointing me to the legislation or law that says that we can't or aren't "supposed to" kill prisoners of the state quickly and humanely....

I was unaware that we'd decided as a society to practice torture and protracted executions...as means of stressing the issue that Joe Criminal deserves to die a long and painful death...

I was under the impression that if we could put a person to death quietly and quickly that that would be the prefferred model.

If we're actually saying that a hanging that doesn't kill someone right away...when it takes hours to choke to death...is the preferred model because it really drives the decision to take a life for a life...into the mind of the person we're killing...and of course the audience chanting its approval...

Wouldn't make good TV or movies I guess if we just killed em quick....

 
no new posts