Wait, doesn't the family also object to their loved one being returned to them deceased? Seems like we really aren't taking their objections too seriously already.

Fine, we'll ship all our worst child raping, torturing, completely batshit crazy murderers to the EU and they can deal with them.

I struggled against suggesting helium, for obvious reasons.

Why on Earth do we need observers? Make the chamber windowless, run it for several hours with a heart monitor that turns on after say a couple hours, and then come by and collect the corpse. How hard is that? You can use any gas that can replace oxygen slowly enough to not cause pain and suffering. Plenty of research on that one.

Just another argument for using simpler methods for execution. Take a gas chamber and replace the oxygen slowly enough that the individual loses consciousness, then eventually dies peacefully. Why we've come up with all these extraordinarily complex methods of carrying out what ought to be an absurdly simple sentence is beyond me. Put the person in a chair, play some classical music, drop the O2 levels, and let the life of a violent and destructive individual end so the rest of society may be spared.

To say nothing of the logistical headaches of range qualifications during jury selection.

We should be applying the lessons learned from the Innocence Project to better our justice system, not giving up on the idea that guilty people are being found, tried, convicted, and properly sentenced.

Could you please explain the difference between someone dying in an state execution chamber and someone dying in their prison cell of organ failure ("old age")?

Seems like neither is desirable and each has the same effect. While we should certainly do all we can to ensure no innocent people are sentenced to anything, that doesn't extend to letting everyone out of prison because there might be somebody innocent locked up with all the guilty people.

How many? Could you please list confirmed innocent people who have been executed?

It's generally understood that no justice system is perfect. My guess is that for every person you can find who's been executed, then later found to have been innocent, I can find someone who died after decades in prison and was later found to have been innocent. Seems neither is particularly appealing and we should do all we can to avoid them. That doesn't mean letting everyone out of prison to ensure we don't ever punish innocent persons.

If the state sanctions it, it is not - by definition - murder.

Further, the family cannot be involved since the crime is committed against society as a whole; not the family. It is society pursuing justice within the context of the trial and sentencing; not the family.

No individual should ever be in the position to make that determination. There should be an objective, fair, efficient, evidence-based system making that determination and it should be regularly reviewed and reformed as needed to ensure it's continuing to be fair and effective. What we have today isn't that and we should work hard on fixing that quickly.

They're two separate issues. Prisons should be reformed such that they provide maximum possible rehabilitation for those who can be rehabilitated (and so that no one is released until they are properly rehabilitated) and for those where rehabilitation is impossible, execution should be swift, humane, and simple.

There are, admittedly, a lot of steps to get us from where we are today in the US to where the above is possible. However, I think those steps are worth taking considering the monumental cost of crime.

That some utilize execution in improper circumstances does not negate the fact that execution is proper in others. Executing someone because they're homosexual is wrong. Executing someone who sets children on fire is appropriate; not for any reason of vengeance, but rather to ensure they cannot bring harm to anyone else ever again.

I would extend that to all murderers. Anyone who intentionally extinguishes human life without hesitation or remorse is so fundamentally broken that they should be permanently removed from society. Prison guards are people too and shouldn't have to be exposed to those kinds of threats. It's simply solved, humanely put an end to those who murder. (and before you try and go there, please do look up the definition of the word "murder". The words "execution" and "murder" are not synonymous)

Certainly not, but it is the collective opinions of individuals in a society that form its government and thus, by definition, its system of justice.

Now that simply isn't true. I stated my reasons a number of times throughout my post:

1. 1) such that there is no chance of them interacting with anyone ever again
2. 2) nor do I wish to dump resources into attempting to fix somebody who's so broken
3. 3) I merely want them removed so they're gone forever and nobody has to deal with them
4. 4) a desire to have them permanently removed from society in the hope that the rest of us civil beings can live normal, happy lives without them

I thought I was quite clear on the issue of why.

The existing system has a number of flaws which should be corrected with evidence-based reforms. We should not be treating people from different communities, races, families, or means any differently from one another. Rules of evidence should be reviewed in depth periodically (following an initial overhaul) to ensure they're based on the latest scientific understanding of what is and isn't an effective means to establish truth. The same should happen for investigative measures to ensure that fewer innocent people ever make it to a trial. Prisons should be completely reformed to rehabilitate effectively where possible and confine safely for execution where it is not possible. And all proceedings involved in executions should be overhauled and periodically reviewed to ensure that every possible effort is being made to ensure there is no chance of executing an innocent person.

That said, once the system itself is operating fairly, efficiently, and effectively to a certain degree, the delays associated with the high cost of modern execution sentences will have been reformed out of the system and the costs will decrease. Those costs may continue to be higher than keeping the individual in prison for life, but that seems a rather pointless endeavor to begin with. If the individual is such a threat that they can never be released, what is the point of having that individual alive at all? Seems as though you're merely reducing the threat they pose and forcing them on prison guards who are, themselves, law-abiding citizens who deserve protection from such threats. As such, establish guilt and execute. Threat is reduced to zero.

That's an unfair question. Let's take your question to the logical conclusion and state that we should simply release everyone in prison today, abolish the justice system, and abolish the police to ensure no innocent person is ever arrested, tried, convicted, imprisoned, etc. How many innocent people are we willing to confine in a cell for decades at a time?

We cannot have a perfect justice system, but we can certainly have one that's a lot better than what we have today. We should be constantly reforming and reviewing it from top to bottom, fixing perverse incentives, taking lessons from groups like the Innocence Project and applying them across the board, taking lessons from prisons that actually have success rehabilitating people, fixing our nearly non-existent mental health care system, and any number of other efforts to avoid causing harm to our own people. At the same time, we ought to recognize that some people are inherently broken. They are wired in such a way that they will always be a threat. Unless and until medical science improves to the point where we can identify and fix people like that medically, we should protect all members of our society from those individuals by simply removing them from our society.

If ending execution is that important, find a solution whereby such individuals can be safely removed from society in a way that no one who isn't like them will ever have to interact with them again and so that the threat they may pose to good and decent people is reduced to zero. Execution accomplishes those goals, but you don't like it. That's alright - the execution itself is merely an effective means to an end - just find some other means that's just as effective.

There we go. How's that look?