Execution by firing squad is a method of capital punishment in which a group of shooters kills a condemned person with firearms, ordinarily by firing together on command. It has been particularly associated with military punishment and wartime executions, although civilian authorities have also used it. It is a specific form of execution by shooting: not every execution involving a firearm involves a squad. (en.wikipedia.org)
Definition and terminology
A firing squad is the group assigned to carry out the shooting, rather than the court or authority that orders the execution. The expression describes a physical method, not the legal validity of the killing. Historical accounts apply it both to executions following judicial proceedings and to killings without a proper trial. Establishing whether an execution was lawful therefore requires examining the governing law, the authority responsible, and the proceedings preceding it. United Nations safeguards require capital punishment to follow a final judgment by a competent court after proceedings that protect the right to a fair trial. (en.wikipedia.org)
“Execution by shooting” is the broader category. It can include killing by a single executioner as well as by multiple shooters. Consequently, statistics that classify an execution simply as “shooting” do not necessarily establish that a firing squad was used. (en.wikipedia.org)
Historical use
Firing squads have historically been used against military personnel convicted of offences such as desertion, mutiny, or espionage, and against civilians under wartime or occupation authorities. Their association with military discipline distinguishes their historical role from methods more commonly administered by civilian executioners, although the distinction has never been absolute. (en.wikipedia.org)
During the First World War, shooting was used in military executions and in executions carried out by occupying forces. One documented case was Charles Fryatt, a British merchant-ship captain executed by German authorities in Bruges on July 27, 1916, after being tried for attempting to ram a German submarine. The National Army Museum identifies his execution as one carried out by firing squad. (collection.nam.ac.uk)
In the United States, the method has also been used within civilian criminal justice. In Wilkerson v. Utah (1879), the Supreme Court upheld a sentence of death by shooting against a challenge under the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment. The decision concerned an execution ordered under Utah territorial law, not a universal approval of every possible shooting procedure. (tile.loc.gov)
Organization and variation
There is no single procedure common to every firing squad. The number of shooters, arrangements for witnesses, use of restraints or blindfolds, and other administrative provisions have varied across jurisdictions and periods. Simultaneous firing is characteristic of the method, but historical and contemporary practices differ in important respects. (en.wikipedia.org)
Some arrangements have included a weapon loaded with a blank cartridge, traditionally understood as creating uncertainty about individual responsibility for the fatal shot. This is not a defining or universal feature. In South Carolina’s execution of Brad Sigmon on March 7, 2025, all three shooters used live ammunition. (en.wikipedia.org)
Sigmon’s execution was South Carolina’s first use of a firing squad and the first execution by that method in the United States since 2010. It illustrates the distinction between a method’s legal availability and its actual use: a jurisdiction may authorize several execution methods without regularly employing each of them. (scdailygazette.com)
Legal and human-rights framework
Under international law, the execution method is only one part of the legal assessment of capital punishment. Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights restricts the death penalty in states that have not abolished it. The United Nations Human Rights Committee’s interpretation also emphasizes compliance with the prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment. A firing squad’s authorization in domestic law does not, by itself, establish compliance with these obligations. (docstore.ohchr.org)
The United Nations safeguards adopted in 1984 require a fair trial, opportunities for appeal and clemency, and the suspension of execution while relevant proceedings remain pending. They also require executions to cause the minimum possible suffering. These safeguards concern capital punishment generally rather than endorsing a particular method. (ohchr.org)
In American constitutional litigation, firing squads have also been discussed as alternatives to other execution methods. In Bucklew v. Precythe (2019), the Supreme Court applied a framework requiring a prisoner challenging an execution method to identify a feasible, readily implemented alternative that would significantly reduce a substantial risk of severe pain. A concurring opinion discussed the firing squad as a possible alternative while expressly declining to decide its feasibility for every state. That discussion was not a finding that every firing-squad procedure is painless or constitutionally valid. (supremecourt.gov)
Cultural representation
Firing squads are a subject of painting and historical commemoration. Francisco Goya’s The Third of May 1808, painted in 1814, depicts French soldiers executing Spanish captives following the Madrid uprising against Napoleonic occupation. Its composition places the organized squad opposite individually represented victims. (fundaciongoyaenaragon.com)
Goya’s work influenced Édouard Manet’s Execution of Maximilian series. The Museum of Modern Art identifies continuities in the arrangement of the figures, the direction of the squad, and the placement of the victims, connecting two artistic treatments of state violence through a shared execution scene. (moma.org)
References
- Execution by firing squaden.wikipedia.org
- Execution by shootingen.wikipedia.org
- Safeguards guaranteeing protection of the rights of those facing the death penaltyohchr.org
- ‘To Capt Fryatt’s Murderers’, 1916 (c)collection.nam.ac.uk
- U.S. Reports: Wilkerson v. Utah, 99 U.S. 130 (1879)tile.loc.gov
- Brad Sigmon executed as South Carolina uses its first-ever firing squadwashingtonpost.com
- General comment No. 36 on article 6: right to lifedocstore.ohchr.org
- General comment No. 36 on article 6: right to lifedocstore.ohchr.org
- Bucklew v. Precythe (April 1, 2019)supremecourt.gov
- Third of May 1808 (El tres de mayo de 1808)fundaciongoyaenaragon.com
- Third of May 1808 (El tres de mayo de 1808)fundaciongoyaenaragon.es