Method It is 100% foolproof!

[Marco77]

Would you like it? You just feel a light breath on your neck and then it's all over.

It just takes a little patience to build it, but the result is guaranteed. You will give a clean break to existence.

 

[CatLvr]

I'm not sure about the "quick" thing. I've read historical accounts of heads looking around at the crowd and blinking before the brain lost consciousness. Apparently there is evidence that it took several minutes before the head "died". That makes me a little nervous. I don't remember the article(s) -- I was in a Medieval Studies class in college. And I am old enough to be a bunch of y'all's grandma.

 

[opheliaoveragain]

No person in the present is just gonna build you one of these capable of taking out a person without asking some pretty invasive questions. This has been asked and answered.

 

[Worndown]

It needs to be fairly large.
Your neighbors might ask. Too tall for a swing, too short for an antnna.

 

[l1felover]

nah probably not smart. in theory, the head stays conscious for about 7 seconds before it dies. must be an agonizing 7 seconds.

 

[sos]

building this thing is mad and it couldn't exactly be ignored by other ppl if you have such a thing in your garden for example

only foolish thing that could happen is to get caught, like someone would surely say something about it / notify the authorities

not like you could use the excuse "yeh using it to cut onions"

 

[Marco77]

There is no type of ban. The authorities can do nothing.

nah probably not smart. in theory, the head stays conscious for about 7 seconds before it dies. must be an agonizing 7 seconds.

Decapitation involves the sudden cutting of all the blood vessels that transport blood, and therefore oxygen, to the head. Of course, there is still some oxygenated blood left in the skull, but it doesn't last long considering how much is consumed for brain activity. Lack of oxygen to the brain leads to loss of consciousness after about 10 seconds, while the first significant and irreversible damage to neurons (the main cells of the brain) occurs after 3-6 minutes of oxygen deprivation. Based on this evidence, it is difficult to imagine a head retaining any form of consciousness after decapitation. Most doctors agree that the almost instantaneous deprivation of oxygen, rapid loss of blood and cerebrospinal fluid cause irreversible trauma to the brain within 2-3 seconds. Loss of consciousness therefore occurs almost instantaneously during separation of the head from the rest of the body. In laboratory tests carried out on rats, to study more humane euthanasia techniques, researchers tried to measure the time between the decapitation of the animals and their loss of consciousness, using an electroencephalogram. The tests led to the conclusion that everything happened within a maximum of 4 seconds of being decapitated, in line with similar research carried out previously on other rodents. The electrical activity in the brain, these studies say, then continues for at least ten seconds, but without maintaining consciousness.

 

[sos]

There is no type of ban. The authorities can do nothing.

There is talk of the possibility of failure that all methods have according to some.

well i dont think that it would be considered as normal if people see this thing being build in your garden, questions will definitely be asked but yea, you could say tell them that you wanted a bigger knife to cut your vegetables

could always line up in front of this thing if one of us builds it and catch the knife to heaven, hell or whatever minecraft place people believe in

dont worry, not serious about doing it together

i think that there are better ways of going

and yes, every method has their risks

 

[Marco77]

well i dont think that it would be considered as normal if people see this thing being build in your garden, questions will definitely be asked but yea, you could say tell them that you wanted a bigger knife to cut your vegetables

could always line up in front of this thing if one of us builds it and catch the knife to heaven, hell or whatever minecraft place people believe in

dont worry, not serious about doing it together

i think that there are better ways of going

and yes, every method has their risks

Real. Even if I hang ropes with slipknots all around the house with helium and nitrogen tanks in every corner of the garden is not considered normal, but they can't stop me by calling the authorities.

 

[four_walls_girl]

I can't imagine the horrific agony of this getting stuck halfway through and having nobody around to help you out of it T_T

 

[Whale_bones]

There is no type of ban. The authorities can do nothing.

This is something I've responded to quite a few times on here, I know it's not common knowledge and I only found out myself from experience and research. In many countries, the U.S. for example, the laws and policies that govern involuntary hospitalization and treatment for mental health are completely separate from criminal law.

Criminal law affords the suspect a bunch of rights; the police need a search warrant to enter your home, you have the right to stay silent or get legal representation before you answer any police questions, and many other things. "Mental health statutes" vary by state in the U.S., but many allow a single police officer to forgo any of the rights that a suspected criminal would get, and make the determination by themselves of if you "appear to be a danger to yourself". Here's an example of Colorado's statute.

Many things a person would use to CTB aren't banned or illegal, and in the U.S it's not even illegal to kill yourself. So the police aren't acting on criminal law whatsoever, it's a completely separate area of law.

This example we're discussing, a guillotine, is well into the realm of what a police officer would likely use to say you're a danger to yourself. They often use much more obscure things, and they don't have to see any physical evidence, they can make the determination off of if you "appear" to be a danger to yourself, which is very vague and unclear wording. So yeah, a literal guillotine that someone can see as physical evidence is way more of a risk than would be sensible to take.

Again, this varies by country, and even has small variations state-by-state in the U.S., with some countries tending to be significantly worse than others. But what many countries have in common is that police interactions for mental health fall under a separate area of law from criminal law, and thus, what's banned or illegal is irrelevant.

 

[Life'sA6itch]

No form of ctb is foolproof. Some things have higher fail rates than others and everyone has their own preferences.

 

[opheliaoveragain]

Real. Even if I hang ropes with slipknots all around the house with helium and nitrogen tanks in every corner of the garden is not considered normal, but they can't stop me by calling the authorities.

people get their houses seized for having normal everyday crap in their yards, if you think nothing will happen if you have a 20 ft killing machine, assuming you can find someone to make it (lol), you desperately need a reality check.

also I know you were being sarcastic but the place you live would likely do something if your yard was full of active canisters of gas, or even empty ones. has no one seen hoarders?

 

[cloudyskye]

people get their houses seized for having normal everyday crap in their yards, if you think nothing will happen if you have a 20 ft killing machine, assuming you can find someone to make it (lol), you desperately need a reality check.

also I know you were being sarcastic but the place you live would likely do something if your yard was full of active canisters of gas, or even empty ones. has no one seen hoarders?

There is a difference between a city or county oridnance about trash and what can actually be seized. It takes a while for a city to actually be able to cone and take your belongings. They must warn you multiple times and in some cities take you to court before they can actually come in and forcibly clean and throw away someone's belongings.

 

[Sophie123]

Oh my god. the idea of these made me lightheaded.

 

[Wanting yet Unable]

I was actually thinking about this as a method a few months ago. I think I would choose this over gun If I was competent in construction and had the money/resources.

If I remember correctly the guy from the video gave a cost estimation of just under 2000 dollars(not including the blade) which doesn't seem too bad. He even has a website where he sells blueprints. Though I'm not sure how one could custom order a guillotine blade without questions arising. That would be the main obstacle I imagine.

I'm not too concerned about the pain and the loss of consciousness question in this scenario. All that matters to me is the lethality. No one survives getting their head cut off. And I highly doubt you'd be able to stay conscious very long with no blood flow happening. Actually if pain/consciousness is a concern that could be taken care of with meds/drugs no? There was a man named Boyd Taylor who constructed a diy guillotine and built a timing mechanism that would cut the blade. He took a bunch of sleeping pills beforehand.

 

[Sutter]

Would you like it? You just feel a light breath on your neck and then it's all over.

It just takes a little patience to build it, but the result is guaranteed. You will give a clean break to existence.

Not attempting to derail the thought but there is a "doctor" and team in China trying to transplant a human head. As I understand it, it is still a theoretical endeavor.

So in case there was any joy in this method, prolife and rich billionaires are still moving to thwart the action.

Course could be all bunk. Still though your final moments are staring out at a blade of grass or what have you on the ground. Dealing with a phantom body that isnt breathing air like you want. Spectacular way to go, hard to conceal it, may have some explaining to do while building it. In regards to the financially challenged it may not be as cost effective. In the realm of on the edge, would be up there with death by potato gun to the rear.

Ever see a fox make brain exploding symbolism with two paws? Working on it now.

 

[Marco77]

This is something I've responded to quite a few times on here, I know it's not common knowledge and I only found out myself from experience and research. In many countries, the U.S. for example, the laws and policies that govern involuntary hospitalization and treatment for mental health are completely separate from criminal law.

Criminal law affords the suspect a bunch of rights; the police need a search warrant to enter your home, you have the right to stay silent or get legal representation before you answer any police questions, and many other things. "Mental health statutes" vary by state in the U.S., but many allow a single police officer to forgo any of the rights that a suspected criminal would get, and make the determination by themselves of if you "appear to be a danger to yourself". Here's an example of Colorado's statute.

Many things a person would use to CTB aren't banned or illegal, and in the U.S it's not even illegal to kill yourself. So the police aren't acting on criminal law whatsoever, it's a completely separate area of law.

This example we're discussing, a guillotine, is well into the realm of what a police officer would likely use to say you're a danger to yourself. They often use much more obscure things, and they don't have to see any physical evidence, they can make the determination off of if you "appear" to be a danger to yourself, which is very vague and unclear wording. So yeah, a literal guillotine that someone can see as physical evidence is way more of a risk than would be sensible to take.

Again, this varies by country, and even has small variations state-by-state in the U.S., with some countries tending to be significantly worse than others. But what many countries have in common is that police interactions for mental health fall under a separate area of law from criminal law, and thus, what's banned or illegal is irrelevant.

I don't know the laws in the US. Here I asked my municipality and the police. The only problem is the wheels. If I want to fix the structure to the ground with concrete or something else, I must have a building permit. If it has wheels I can do whatever I want. It is considered a historical/decorative element. I explained to the police that I have no intention of using it. They started laughing. They recommended that I have a fence to prevent children from getting hurt.

The police advised me to make some changes so as to deposit the product at the patent office. Otherwise it is simply a copy.

 

[Whale_bones]

I don't know the laws in the US. Here I asked my municipality and the police. The only problem is the wheels. If I want to fix the structure to the ground with concrete or something else, I must have a building permit. If it has wheels I can do whatever I want. It is considered a historical/decorative element. I explained to the police that I have no intention of using it. They started laughing. They recommended that I have a fence to prevent children from getting hurt.

The police advised me to make some changes so as to deposit the product at the patent office. Otherwise it is simply a copy.

If you live in a place where you can intentionally contact police and directly tell them you're building a guillotine, and their response is to laugh and then leave you alone, you live somewhere that operates differently than the locations of many, many people who visit this forum.

That's genuinely lucky for you, but it doesn't mean you should be recommending it to others. For a huge amount of people it's something that would risk them losing their personal autonomy and freedom of choice. My post explained in detail why an object being legal or illegal is irrelevant in so many countries, and the details of things like patents and building permits in your rare, specific situation are even more unrelated.

 

[nothingspecial]

If anyone does build this and is willing to share it I'd LOVE to CTB this way.

 

[Wendigo]

My family and friends be like:
Why are you building a guillotine?

 

[Marco77]

If you live in a place where you can intentionally contact police and directly tell them you're building a guillotine, and their response is to laugh and then leave you alone, you live somewhere that operates differently than the locations of many, many people who visit this forum.

That's genuinely lucky for you, but it doesn't mean you should be recommending it to others. For a huge amount of people it's something that would risk them losing their personal autonomy and freedom of choice. My post explained in detail why an object being legal or illegal is irrelevant in so many countries, and the details of things like patents and building permits in your rare, specific situation are even more unrelated.

I asked for information and they were kind. If a person sees a guillotine in the garden he thinks that the owner is an eccentric person and wants to attract attention. I think it's a normal reaction. Not even I would think that my neighbor wants to commit suicide in 2024 with a huge guillotine in the garden. And then I don't think that anywhere in the United States there is any importance to a wooden construction that was needed 200 years ago. Decapitation is not even common. Who cares? Do you really think the police are coming?

 

[Whale_bones]

I asked for information and they were kind. If a person sees a guillotine in the garden he thinks that the owner is an eccentric person and wants to attract attention. I think it's a normal reaction. Not even I would think that my neighbor wants to commit suicide in 2024 with a huge guillotine in the garden. And then I don't think that anywhere in the United States there is any importance to a wooden construction that was needed 200 years ago. Decapitation is not even common. Who cares? Do you really think the police are coming?

You first say you have absolutely no familiarity with U.S. law, and then claim to have a good understanding of what's likely to happen here. I didn't argue with you when you said things work totally different where you live. I've never lived where you live, nor learned anything about it, so I assume out of the two of us, you're the one who's likely to know more about that.

I would think it only makes sense to give my words the same level of consideration, since I provided specific examples and went much more into depth. But if you start with the assumption that you know more than others about things you've never experienced or learned about, I think we're just going to disagree, and further conversation wouldn't be productive. So I'll wish you a good day or evening regardless.

 

[maniac116]

This is something I've responded to quite a few times on here, I know it's not common knowledge and I only found out myself from experience and research. In many countries, the U.S. for example, the laws and policies that govern involuntary hospitalization and treatment for mental health are completely separate from criminal law.

Criminal law affords the suspect a bunch of rights; the police need a search warrant to enter your home, you have the right to stay silent or get legal representation before you answer any police questions, and many other things. "Mental health statutes" vary by state in the U.S., but many allow a single police officer to forgo any of the rights that a suspected criminal would get, and make the determination by themselves of if you "appear to be a danger to yourself". Here's an example of Colorado's statute.

Many things a person would use to CTB aren't banned or illegal, and in the U.S it's not even illegal to kill yourself. So the police aren't acting on criminal law whatsoever, it's a completely separate area of law.

This example we're discussing, a guillotine, is well into the realm of what a police officer would likely use to say you're a danger to yourself. They often use much more obscure things, and they don't have to see any physical evidence, they can make the determination off of if you "appear" to be a danger to yourself, which is very vague and unclear wording. So yeah, a literal guillotine that someone can see as physical evidence is way more of a risk than would be sensible to take.

Again, this varies by country, and even has small variations state-by-state in the U.S., with some countries tending to be significantly worse than others. But what many countries have in common is that police interactions for mental health fall under a separate area of law from criminal law, and thus, what's banned or illegal is irrelevant.

I think that having one is ok by US law though there may be issues of having an "attractive nuisance". If law enforcement has a good reason to believe you are imminently going to use it, then you could be put on a psych hold.

 

[Marco77]

You first say you have absolutely no familiarity with U.S. law, and then claim to have a good understanding of what's likely to happen here. I didn't argue with you when you said things work totally different where you live. I've never lived where you live, nor learned anything about it, so I assume out of the two of us, you're the one who's likely to know more about that.

I would think it only makes sense to give my words the same level of consideration, since I provided specific examples and went much more into depth. But if you start with the assumption that you know more than others about things you've never experienced or learned about, I think we're just going to disagree, and further conversation wouldn't be productive. So I'll wish you a good day or evening regardless.

You were the one who said that there are variations from state to state in the US. Do you see that I value your words? I also listened to you when you made a split between what is forbidden and what needs intervention even if it is not criminal, but only because it falls within the sphere of mental issues, let's put it that way. I was very intrigued by what you wrote, it was absolutely not my intention to question your words.

I think that having one is ok by US law though there may be issues of having an "attractive nuisance". If law enforcement has a good reason to believe you are imminently going to use it, then you could be put on a psych hold.

So for a guillotine in the garden, in the USA you easily end up in a psychiatric clinic? It seems that in the USA the doors of the mental hospital open very easily.

 

[Whale_bones]

I think that having one is ok by US law though there may be issues of having an "attractive nuisance". If law enforcement has a good reason to believe you are imminently going to use it, then you could be put on a psych hold.

Like I say in my comment, the statutes that allow for psych holds are under a totally different area of law than criminal law, and the laws that govern things like building permits or nuisances in your yard. When you say "having one is ok by US law", I'm not sure if that's taking into account everything I've written in my comment. People here generally assume they won't be charged with a crime and put in prison for attempting CTB. I don't see that question being posed in threads and I think it could be answered quickly. They're worried about being physically detained, forced to go through involuntary treatment and having their bodily autonomy and freedom of choice taken away.

Yes, there will be cases that people who have a particular set of circumstances could do this. If you personally know the members of your local law enforcement, and know they're reasonable and trustworthy professionals, or if you don't know them but consider it worth the risk to allow a single police officer to decide whether you can be physically detained against your will, then building a guillotine could be considered worth it to you.

But I think the people who are already in that situation are aware of it, so it doesn't need saying. While on the flip side, most people have never heard of mental health statutes and how they totally bypass the rights given through criminal law. Even after extensive experience with the MH system, I wasn't aware of it until fairly recently, because even good counselors and MH workers are trained to explain these things in vague terms that leave out so much of the important information.

 

[F@#$]

Fuck yeah! Do you have a measured drawing? I could totally build one.

 

[Whale_bones]

You were the one who said that there are variations from state to state in the US. Do you see that I value your words? I also listened to you when you made a split between what is forbidden and what needs intervention even if it is not criminal, but only because it falls within the sphere of mental issues, let's put it that way. I was very intrigued by what you wrote, it was absolutely not my intention to question your words.

I appreciate you noting that you value my words. I'm not trying to come off as cross either (I know my writing can be blunt sometimes, unfortunately that's just how I write or it takes me too long thinking of how to say things ). What you say here makes sense to me, but to be fair, this is the first time you've brought up the difference between criminal law and laws governing mental health.

So for a guillotine in the garden, in the USA you easily end up in a psychiatric clinic? It seems that in the USA the doors of the mental hospital open very easily.

Yes, though this will be highly dependent on many factors, and of course there's exceptions to it. I do think I may just end up repeating a lot of what I said in my first post. But the statutes in many states allow for a single police officer to make the initial determination of physically detaining you. They don't specifically say how quickly the police officer has to bring you to a hospital or assessment facility, besides saying you have to be assessed in "under 72 hours".

Of course, a reasonable, professional, and educated police officer, who is morally alright, would do things in a way you wouldn't have to worry here (and if it's someone with those qualities, would even have a chance of listening to you if you say you weren't using a guillitone to harm anyone). But here in the U.S. we have a systemic problem with police that aren't any of those things (reasonable, professional, educated or morally alright).

That's why it's critical we have laws that uphold a person's rights so police officers aren't given unrestrained power to make choices by themselves. And in criminal law, over time many of these laws have been put in place (after police violated people's rights in such bad ways that it had to be directly written into law). As for mental health statutes, it's so far from that that few people even know about the statutes that are used, much less it being common knowledge, much less having people with resources working towards enshrining rights in law.

As a note, there are more things that are guaranteed once a person gets to a hospital or assessment facility; they atleast are guaranteed to be seen by a licensed mental health professional, who will at minimum have education in the field, at some point then. But I'm talking about everything that can happen before that, as you can imagine, 72 hours is very long window where a lot of bad things can happen.

Yes, you can theoretically bring a complaint or lawsuit against the police officer afterwards, but many people that will be affected by this are sick, don't have financial or physical resources, and just flat out don't have the ability to go through a long and painful legal process. Thus, a lot of us would rather make decisions that never risk us being in this position, because the potential gains are simply not worth the high risk of some very bad things happening.

 

[QueenInsomnia]

Would you like it? You just feel a light breath on your neck and then it's all over.

It just takes a little patience to build it, but the result is guaranteed. You will give a clean break to existence.

Depends. Will cake be offered before decapitation?

 

[Whale_bones]

Depends. Will cake be offered before decapitation?