Hmmmm

I'm against the death penalty. However, removing certain exterior organs, I'm all for.

Only if done with a very dull and rusty blade with plenty of salt, lemon juice and hot objects.

I'm all for the death penalty but honestly, that's too good for them. Why should they get the quick easy way out? Like @mrdad01 said, if it's painful and slow, I'm all for it.

Ironically, death penalty costs tax payers more, because of all the appeals granted to death row inmates...

So you're saying a slow shitty death is the way to go not just morally but also economically, love having all sides of a situation accounted for.

Chemical injection is actually insanely painful to the death row inmate, but the chemical cocktail is insanely expensive. A 9mm round to the head is much more cost effective but... apparently that's more barbaric then essentially liquefying someone's internal organs. Perception is reality I guess. Personally, I say load up on 9mm ammunition and put them down.

Lethal injection is meant to be the least painful as it causes the inmate to lose consciousness before their heart stops so they aren't aware of it. At least that's what all these articles are telling me, however some also say they sometimes screw it up. I think any method that isn't instant is unethical. Like with the electric chair, sometimes it wouldn't work the first time so it would just be an awful way to go. Firing squad, again not always accurate but also the stress you'd feel beforehand would be awful too.

Sorry if I seem harsh about this, its a topic that hits close to home for me. The victims of those monsters sometimes suffer for life provided they don't just off themselves that is. So anything that doesn't at least come within 1% of the survivors suffering seems too lenient and

Incorrect. Lethal injection gives the perception of unconsciousness, the individual still feels extraordinary pain. This has been proven several times over. "They examined post-mortem blood levels of anaesthetic and believe that prisoners may have been capable of feeling pain in almost 90% of cases and may have actually been conscious when they were put to death in over 40% of cases." Journal reference: The Lancet (vol 365, p 1412).

But, regarding the topic of cost, a single bullet to the head point blank was what I was referring to not a firing squad and would he significantly cheaper and instant.

@interesting A single bullet to the head is unlikely to cause instant death. That’s just a movie thing. Besides the list of normal people willing to shoot a complete stranger without any remorse is probably pretty short.

Really? Because I've seen people shot in the head and they dont usually live. Additionally, using trained military/security personnel and ordering them to shoot a convicted child molester probably wouldn't be that hard. In fact, most of the marines I know would probably volunteer.

And it sure looks like instant death.

Wow that's awful, they've been doing this the entire time and only recently found out they might not "actually" be unconscious? That's really sad. Some people have survived point blank gun shots, granted the bullet didn't shatter in their skull and the bullet didn't go through any vital sections of the brain. That's a pretty small percentage though. There has to be other more ethical ways then a gun.