The more things change the more they stay the same

A man in Utah has chosen to die via firing squad. Sentenced to death for a murder he committed twenty years ago, Ronnie Lee Gardner has made the decision to uphold his prior choice of method of death. A man has not been executed in this fashion since 1996. I had no idea that this was even an option! Doesn't the idea seem a little barbaric and outdated? Who is going to volunteer to do the deed, and how many men makes up a "squad"? One man clearly doesn't fit the bill, neither does two and three seems debatable. When I think of the word "squad" I think of at least eight people!

Is this guy really going to be shot down by eight or more men? The article says five, that seems a little sparse to be qualified as a squad.

All I can think of is mobster movies were the rat gets lit up by a crew of snarling revengists. Time slows down and the guys limbs are flailing, blood is splattering, his mouth is stuck open as if he about to break into an operatic wail. That's what I think of when I imagine a firing squad.

Now, I'm left wondering something: is there a firing squad handbook?

Upon becoming a warden at a Utah maximum secuirty prison, one is given a tour of the place.

"Here is the cafeteria. Watch out for riots."

"Here is the hole."

And then the boss points to a dusty old book in the corner of the office:

"That there is the firing squad handbook."

In the handbook are such chapters as:

" Calling the Shot: No One Likes a Quickdraw"

and

"Is He Dead Yet?: You Can Never Be Too Careful Better Give 'em Another"

There must be a section on the proper WHIMIS protocol, how to avoid getting blood on your uniform and such. What kind of guns do they use? Pistols would probably be took weak, but shotguns would be too messy. And where the heck does this all take place? Out in the yard while the other inmates are shooting some hoops?

Thinking about this has my mind just spinning! I can't wrap my head around the idea of someone getting gunned down LEGALY by five other men.

Not only that, but the article makes mention of electrocution as a method. People can still be given the chair? This is just bizarre!

Doesn't it seem a little morally counterproductive to murder a murderer?

Doesn't it seem a little sick to murder him at all? He is a criminal and everyone has their opinions on the death penalty, but I can't help but question its merit.

Just on a side note. Don't google image search "electric chair" without the search filter on, its creepy enough as it is! Trust me, I would have been better off without seeing the unfiltered images. Ugh .... I feel sick!