Botched Shots Spark Chilling Idaho Question

As Idaho makes the firing squad its main execution method, fresh evidence from South Carolina raises a chilling question: are some shooters missing on purpose?

Story Snapshot

Idaho’s new law makes the firing squad the primary way the state executes death-row inmates.
Detailed Idaho rules promise a fast, sure shot to the heart from trained law enforcement volunteers.
A recent South Carolina case shows bullets missed the heart and the inmate stayed conscious up to a minute.
Critics now ask whether human error — or even intentional bad shooting — can turn executions into slow torture.

Idaho’s firing squad law: what the state is promising

Idaho lawmakers passed House Bill 37 in 2025, making the firing squad the state’s primary execution method starting July 1, 2026, with lethal injection as backup. Supporters say drug shortages and repeated lethal injection failures pushed them to look for a method that is fast, certain, and less likely to be botched. Under Idaho’s protocol, the condemned prisoner is strapped to a chair, a target is placed over the heart, and trained shooters fire from a set distance with specified rifles and ammunition.

The Idaho Department of Correction’s 36-page “Execution Procedures” lays out an almost military-style plan meant to remove guesswork. The rules require three law enforcement volunteers who have been certified by the state’s police standards agency for at least three years and who pass a marksman test using a target that matches the condemned person’s chest area. All three fire.308 caliber rifles with 110‑grain rounds from about 10 yards, and the shots are supposed to strike the heart at the same time.

Promises of a “humane” death meet troubling real-world failures

Idaho officials and some conservative backers argue that a quick shot to the heart is more reliable and even more humane than chemical cocktails that often fail. The federal Department of Justice under President Trump has also endorsed firing squads as a legitimate method and added them to federal options, citing concerns about lethal injection problems. Yet critics point out that Idaho has never carried out a firing squad execution, so all claims about speed and certainty are still theory, not proven track record.

South Carolina’s experience shows how badly things can go when the theory breaks down. In 2025, that state resumed firing squad executions for the first time in fifteen years. In the case of condemned inmate Mikal Mahdi, an autopsy found that only two of the three intended bullets were present and that both missed his heart, instead damaging organs like the diaphragm, liver, and pancreas. A pathologist hired by Mahdi’s attorneys said he likely stayed conscious and in severe pain for 30 to 60 seconds.

Could shooters be “intentionally botching” the shots?

The South Carolina case has fueled fears that firing squads are not foolproof and that human motives matter. Reports from that state describe practice sessions where targets sometimes showed only one or two hits from three live rounds, signaling accuracy problems even before real executions. The South Carolina Supreme Court later ruled that the firing squad violated the state constitution, calling it a method that risks torture and lingering death. That ruling directly undercuts the claim that firing squads are automatically humane or precise.

Idaho is making a major change to how it carries out executions.

The state is now the first in the nation to designate the firing squad as its primary method, following years of challenges with other approaches.

The move has reignited conversations about capital punishment…

— 1080 KRLD (@KRLD) July 2, 2026

So far, there is no direct proof that any American firing squad team has missed on purpose rather than through stress, poor training, or bad design. But the combination of secret shooter identities, shield laws that block detailed public review, and visible failures invites suspicion. When the state hides key facts, citizens who already distrust big government and soft‑on‑crime elites can easily imagine scenarios where reluctant shooters pull high or low to ease their own conscience while the inmate slowly bleeds out instead of dying instantly.

What Idaho gets right — and what still worries critics

Compared with South Carolina, Idaho’s written rules look stricter on paper. The state spells out the rifle caliber, the round type, the distance, and shooter qualifications, and it requires a marksman test that mirrors the real shot zone. Volunteers may take part only if they are law enforcement officers in good standing, and there are alternate shooters on standby, which in theory should keep unfit participants off the line. A mild sedative is offered the night before and within four hours of the execution, which the state says will reduce fear and movement.

Even so, a number of red flags remain for anyone who cares about limited, accountable government. Idaho spent over one million dollars to build out its new firing squad chamber, despite some politicians selling the method as a cheaper alternative. State law keeps the names of the shooters secret and restricts access to detailed execution records, making it difficult for independent doctors, reporters, or citizens to verify whether shots hit the heart every time. Death penalty researchers warn that every new method has arrived with promises of being more humane, only to reveal a similar pattern of failures once the curtain is pulled back.

What conservatives should watch for next

For many on the right, the death penalty is about justice for victims and respect for the rule of law, not cruelty. That means if the state is going to take a life, it must do it in a way that is honest, open, and as quick and clean as possible. Idaho’s first firing squad execution reports — including time to death, bullet locations, and any complications — will be the real test of whether the new system lives up to its claims.

Going forward, conservatives who back the death penalty can still demand serious safeguards. That includes independent medical reviews, ballistic testing of the chosen ammunition, and tighter oversight so no activist judge or bureaucrat can twist the system into something it was never sold as. Above all, they can insist that the state never hide behind secrecy when it exercises its most awesome power, because when government can kill in the dark, every other constitutional right is one step closer to the firing line.