The brutal execution methods were designed for public deterrence rather than humane punishment because human rights concepts didn't exist in medieval legal systems. At AffinityLawyers.ca, I've studied historical justice and the reality is that torture and public executions served multiple purposes including demonstrating state power, satisfying public revenge demands, and creating fear to prevent future crimes. I think that the shift to humane methods came from Enlightenment philosophy emphasizing human dignity, medical advances making lethal injection possible, and growing public discomfort with barbaric spectacles. The guillotine was actually considered progressive for its time because it provided quick death regardless of social class. Whether these devices worked is questionable because historical crime rates remained high despite brutal punishments, suggesting fear of execution wasn't the deterrent authorities expected. Current research shows certainty of punishment matters more than severity for preventing criminal behavior, which explains why modern justice systems focus on consistent enforcement rather than shocking brutality.