I don’t even think that’s the ultimate argument. Executions are final. There is nothing you can do when you find out someone wasn’t guilty after all. And that happens way too often.

Don’t forget what I think is the most important reason for elaborate “humane” execution methods. Those ordering or tasked with the executions don’t want to think of themselves as the “bad guys”. Historically what that means has varied strongly. But in our societies we have very little official appetite for being bad or cruel in a physical manner.

And then it’s a matter of required competency. It seems to require real skill to decapitate a person with a sword cleanly. Hanging cleanly is much less simple than it seems. Killing is fairly simple. Killing in a socially acceptable manner much less so.

But that something else I don’t understand. Even DIY executions really should, scientifically, be a solved problem. Potassiumiodide as a leathal agent is essentially a stock compound that should easily be sourceable, even be made by oneself. Sure, pharmaceutical grade will be more difficult, but the goal is to kill someone. Afaik it’s quite an unpleasant experience, so for the executioners to feel better it’s proceeded by some sedative and perhaps a muscle relaxant. Both of those should be available as some generic noname drug. And even if not, those have been around for decades and are a solved problem that could be made in-state. If you consider how much money is thrown at the military-industrial complex and even at law enforcement with rubbish like tanks and heavy weapons for “law enforcement” the money for in-state manufacture of the required drugs should be available. Maybe they can’t find enough chemists/pharmacists without a conscience? But even so I suspect the real reason is simply them wanting to be cheapskates.

And if they want it cheap, they should man up and use one of those in old non-industrial methods. But I guess that makes them too obviously the bad guys.

Tldr: being so incompetent almost has to be a conscious choice.

That’s what is complicated with Heinlein. You can see it as him promoting fascism, as Verhoeven has.

But you also can read it as something promoting more healthy politics. Only people willing to put themselves on the line or at least endure some hardships were eligible to participate in politics. Johnny Rico’s parents didn’t want him to enlist as it was not necessary to have political rights if all you wanted was a good life.

If nothing else this policy would have not only prevented CPT Bonespurs from taking office but even that someone like him got a vote.

I do think though Heinlein was unrealistically idealistic with his book. And the movie took an even more pessimistic view than that.

Reich ME, considering how competent they run things.