The idea of execution by firing squad may be unsettling, but the recent use of this method has reignited debate over what constitutes a “humane” execution.
On March 7, the state of South Carolina executed Brad Sigmon, a convicted murderer, by firing squad—the first such execution in the U.S. since 2010—after he opted to forgo lethal injection, a method increasingly under scrutiny due to drug shortages and botched procedures. Once dismissed as “barbaric,” the firing squad’s return raises new questions about execution methods and the evolving landscape of capital punishment in the U.S.
Professor Deborah Denno
In the following conversation, Deborah Denno, Arthur A. McGivney Professor of Law, founding director of the Neuroscience and Law Center at Fordham Law, and a leading expert on execution methods, discusses the controversies surrounding capital punishment and weighs the relative pros and cons of the firing squad versus lethal injection, the most prevalent form of execution in the U.S.
What is the history of the firing squad as a method of execution?
Execution by firing squad is the most widely used method in the world, and it has been for a long time. It was also the first execution method in the United States, dating back to 1608, which was a military execution. It was notably used during the Civil War to deter desertion. Since the nation’s founding, there have been 145 civilian executions by firing squad. While hanging became the predominant method across many states in U.S. history, the firing squad remained, though primarily associated with Utah. Today, we have five states on the books that permit execution by firing squad.
Why has the firing squad been used so rarely in modern times?
Until the advent of electrocution, the U.S. adopted hanging as the primary method of execution. We got it from England, historically, because it was England’s preferred method. Additionally, public perception associates firing squads with military or police violence, making this method controversial. However, the increasing failures of lethal injection have prompted states to reconsider older methods like the firing squad.
What has led to the increasing problems with lethal injection?
Introduced in 1977 as a supposedly more humane method, lethal injection has faced multiple problems from its inception. The three-drug protocol often proves inadequate, leaving inmates conscious but paralyzed and in pain. Since 2009, drug shortages have led states to experiment with untested alternatives, resulting in a higher rate of botched executions. Moreover, a lot of those alternatives are made in Europe, which started banning the drugs for sale in the U.S. And it’s just not economically feasible for the United States to make many of these drugs, so the circumstances just made lethal injection much worse than it ever was.
How does the firing squad compare to lethal injection?
The firing squad is the only method for which we have trained people to perform executions. Skilled professionals—such as retired police officers or military shooters—are trained to kill, and we have lots of them in this country. This is not the case with lethal injection, where the people doing the executions are not adequately trained, which increases the risk of a botched execution.
The firing squad is also much speedier, which means less suffering. A 1938 Utah study—the only one of its kind—monitored an inmate while he was being executed by a firing squad and it showed the death occurred in under a minute. Even a quick lethal injection takes about seven minutes under the best of conditions, and we just don’t know whether the inmate is consciously aware while they are essentially suffocating to death. So, compared to lethal injection, death by firing squad is pretty instantaneous. And, of course, the firing squad has no recorded botched executions in the modern era, which compares favorably to lethal injection.
Many people feel the death penalty is wrong, regardless of the execution method. Why do you choose to focus on this topic and what would you say to them?
I also feel the death penalty is wrong as it is currently administered. The punishment is rife with racial and socioeconomic bias and incompetent lawyering, among a host of other challenges. My first foray into examining the death penalty consisted of working with my criminology colleagues for seven years on a large statistical study of New Jersey’s death penalty process, finding substantial racial bias, and then strategizing with attorneys to present our results in court. It was during my research on the history of the Eighth Amendment’s Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause that I ventured into examining the cruelty of execution methods, the impetus for the Eighth Amendment’s creation. It soon became clear that academic work in this area was immediately helpful to attorneys, and has remained so, which is why it is my focus. Besides, not all that many people want to take this work on.
How does the work on the Neuroscience and Law Center relate to this research on execution methods?
Research on the potential cruelty of execution methods focuses on the degree of an inmate’s awareness of pain and suffering. The measure of that level of awareness is directly a brain science issue, along with gathering information on what can impact it. A large part of the Center’s mission is educating attorneys and the public on the brain’s role and importance in so many different facets of our lives, and our law, down to how we carry out the execution of inmates.
