Republican lawmakers in Arizona are advancing a proposal to make the firing squad the mandatory execution method for anyone convicted of killing an on-duty law enforcement officer, pairing a constitutional amendment with a detailed procedures bill that recently cleared a key Senate committee and is now headed to the full chamber. Supporters argue the move addresses ongoing problems with lethal injections, while critics contend it is an extreme measure that could spark expensive legal battles and national controversy.
What the measures would do
Senate Concurrent Resolution 1049 would amend Article XXII, Section 22 of the Arizona Constitution to give condemned inmates three choices for execution: firing squad, intravenous lethal injection or lethal gas. If a prisoner does not choose, lethal injection would remain the default. The resolution also specifies that anyone convicted of murdering a law-enforcement officer, and who knew or reasonably should have known the victim was acting in the line of duty, would be executed by firing squad.
The proposal spells out some of the mechanics: at least three volunteer shooters and one rifle loaded with a blank round so no one knows whose shot was fatal. SCR 1049 instructs the Secretary of State to put the constitutional change before voters at the next general election, according to the Arizona Legislature.
How the measures advanced
Sen. Kevin Payne, R-Peoria, introduced SCR 1049 earlier this month and filed a companion bill, SB 1751, to lay out the execution protocols that would apply if voters sign off on the constitutional amendment. Both measures were scheduled for a hearing and then advanced out of the Senate Public Safety Committee on Feb. 18, according to legislative tracking reported by LegiScan. Local TV coverage has described the resolution as moving through the Legislature this week, as noted by FOX 10 Phoenix.
Supporters and critics
Supporters argue that a firing squad is quicker, cheaper and less vulnerable to the drug shortages, medical complications and procedural misfires that have plagued lethal injection in Arizona and other states. They say the method is straightforward, easier for prisons to administer and more predictable from a legal standpoint.
Opponents counter that changing the method does nothing to address the risk of wrongful convictions, and they warn that locking in firing-squad executions for people who kill on-duty officers would deepen Arizona's reputation for harsh punishment. Critics also predict an uptick in litigation from death-row prisoners challenging the new setup, and they question whether the state is really prepared to train staff to carry out executions by rifle.
Many of those arguments grew out of a broader review of Arizona's execution protocols that has been a recurring topic at the Capitol. Testimony in committee and recent coverage have highlighted the divide. Arizona Mirror has outlined the talking points on both sides, while background on last year's attempt to move similar language has been chronicled in reporting by Capitol Media Services via KAWC.
Legal and human-rights questions
Legal experts say the proposal is almost guaranteed to trigger Eighth Amendment challenges over what qualifies as cruel and unusual punishment, and they warn that corrections officials could face serious logistical and training hurdles. Opponents have repeatedly pointed to a 2025 firing-squad execution in South Carolina, where attorneys and an independent pathologist said most of the bullets missed the inmate's heart and that he may have remained conscious for as long as a minute. That episode has become Exhibit A for critics who argue that firing squads are far from reliably humane.
Arizona's own track record with lethal injection also hangs over the debate. A series of troubled executions led to long pauses and official reviews of how the state carries out the death penalty, and skeptics say simply swapping methods will not spare Arizona from more intense court scrutiny. Details of the South Carolina execution have been reported by the Associated Press, while the state's capital-punishment history and ongoing policy fights have been covered extensively by the Arizona Capitol Times.
What comes next
Both SCR 1049 and SB 1751 now head to the full Senate. If the concurrent resolution clears both chambers, the Secretary of State would be required to put the question of allowing firing-squad executions on the November 2026 general-election ballot, in the form laid out in the resolution's language.
Supporters say SB 1751 would not take effect unless and until voters approve the constitutional change, at which point it would define the procedures for any future firing-squad executions. Opponents say lawmakers should instead zero in on preventing wrongful convictions and debating the future of the death penalty more broadly, rather than fine-tuning how the state kills people. More hearings and floor votes are expected in the coming weeks as the legislative session rolls on.
