The firing squad is back in Utah!

Ralphy1

Ralphy1

Well-known Member
It will be used as an alternative to lethal injection when the drugs aren't available. I'm on board with this in a slam dunk case as it is just as humane, though it is messy in comparison. We should skip the capital punishment argument and just agree on these being comparable means to an end...
 

Hmm, it might be hard to find an executioner for some cases like being stomped to death, hacked apart with a hatchet, or fed into a wood chipper, for examples....:D
 

The last time Utah had the firing squad, I believe that it was up to the choice of the prisoner. Does anyone remember if that is correct? I think his name was Gary Gilmore, but I don't know the details and am too lazy to Google it right now.
 
Yup, that was the guy. As I recall they did away with the death penalty for awhile, but after the Supreme Court upheld it, they have just brought it back. Care for a blindfold, or not?
 
I have often wondered why the firing squad was never
introduced after several executions went badly wrong
with the drugs.

It is certainly quicker and sure of a result.

Mike.
 
They have no trouble euthanizing large dogs at the vets office, I don't see what the issue is with an increased dose for a larger animal. I'm with Ken though, they should die the way they killed, there'd be less murders that way I bet, less nasty ones anyway.
 
To my way of thinking, warped as it may be, a firing squad would be my preferred method of exiting this world. Much less pain, and it's over a lot faster, than the other methods.

Now, if the criminal to be shot is guilty of a particularly gruesome crime, you could play with their heads by using paint-ball guns first. Then say "Oops" ...
 
I just finish reading a true crime book where the crime happened in Utah, it was stated that at that time prisoners could choose the method of execution, no one would chose a firing squad, so they dropped it...this was several years ago.
 
Execution is a difficult thing. Even with the firing squad, one blank bullet is used in one rifle.. and no one knows who has it so no one knows for sure if they were the one killing the person. In spite of the heinousness of the crime, few people want to be the one that executes.
 
Death penalty debate aside, I see using a firing squad as being neither cruel, or particularly unusual. Quick, painless- doesn't get much more humane.
 
QuickSilver said:
Execution is a difficult thing. Even with the firing squad, one blank bullet is used in one rifle.. and no one knows who has it so no one knows for sure if they were the one killing the person. In spite of the heinousness of the crime, few people want to be the one that executes.
Click to expand...

Heard an NPR segment on this within the past few days. They interviewed officials from Utah. The firing squad is made up of volunteers. The law enforcement agencies in the jurisdiction the crime was committed are given first chance at filling the squad. If there are not enough volunteers from the immediate jurisdiction, the law enforcement officials statewide can volunteer. In all the firing squad executions performed in Utah, there was never a need to go outside the immediate jurisdiction. Never was there a shortage of volunteers from local law enforcement agencies.
 
WATCH...if they use a firing squad, something wil go wrong like all these executions....

Lets see here.....bullets were the wrong color.
Member of firing squad was not qualified(argument with Mother-in-law that morning).
1 bullet miss its target.
Wrong type of weapon was used.
All member of firing squad were males says women's rights group.
1 female member of squad fainted after firing rifle.
GOD ,I could go on and on and on.
 
I have always supported the death penalty but the fact that a condemned man can languish 35-30 years due to all the legal issues has convinced me we should abandon it and instead make a life sentence mean life. No parole, and minimum privileges. We neds to quit being stupid about it.
 
AZ Jim said:
I have always supported the death penalty but the fact that a condemned man can languish 35-30 years due to all the legal issues has convinced me we should abandon it and instead make a life sentence mean life. No parole, and minimum privileges. We neds to quit being stupid about it.
Click to expand...


Hate to tell ya ,Jim, but there is no such thing as a permanent life sentence, one way or the other they always walk out those front gates.I'd rather pay someone on the "inside" to get rid of him/her.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top