News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
My position: no government should be given the power to kill its citizens under any other circumstances than to protect other people from imminent violence, i.e. the same circumstances that would qualify as self-defence by a private individual.
For the sake of argument: if you really wanted a painless and humane death what could be better than a carefully modulated dose of opioids?
I'm guessing the answer is if they get high on the way out then it isn't justice because only fear and suffering will assuage those with a vengeance boner.
No, it's because opioids aren't 100% effective at a painless death either. At this stage, no death we know of is truly "painless". Well, that we can prove anyway. They've had patients hooked to brain monitors when they've died in their sleep, the brain goes through severe stress at the moment of death. Drowning is meant to be okay, but for obvious reasons, we can't prove that.
There's no way drowning is the way to do it... There's a reason waterboarding is an "effective" means of torture.
Waterboarding isn't drowning. It's like mega drowning. Here's one of many studies done on drowning that shows many people found it kind of calm as they neared death.
I offered proof that drowning is calm. You've claimed the opposite but haven't proven it. So, prove it.
I live within walking distance of a beach, I swim.in the ocean plenty. Got any more dumb insults, or are you actually going to surprise me and attempt to prove your point?
I've done long distance ocean swimming before, not being able to see the shore is not that scary.
And it's quite telling that you can't provide any evidence to back your claim. I've provided proof, why can't you?
Where do you think the data from the study I provided came from? Here's a clue: it came from real life experiences.
Then it should be easy to prove it. I have literally provided evidence. You haven't. Stop trying to belittle me and prove your point. Cos I'm starting to think you can't.
Then prove it. There should be hundreds of studies proving you right. You can't even provide one.
Don't waste your time trying to patronise me, use that time to find evidence to support your claim. And maybe pick up a book, you're syntax is extremely hard to parse.
I've literally provided evidence that it's calm. This isn't me just making something up, unlike you. Provide proof of your claim like I have. That's all I'm asking. Your refusal is indicative as to how poor critical thinking is in the general public. No wonder the world is imploding.
People commit suicide by drowning all the time. I can prove that too. Which is more than you've done here. Seriously, it's not a hard problem. You should have mountains of proof to counter me. Yet you haven't.
This isn't a belief I hold. This is a fact supported by science. What you hold is an opinion not backed by science. You have provided 0 evidence to support your claim. Support your claim.
Then prove it. Should be simple.