When Utah inmate Ronnie Lee Gardner was executed by firing squad recently, the debate over the death penalty arose anew.

Gardner was sentenced to death for the fatal shooting of a Utah attorney during an attempted escape April 2, 1985.

While handcuffed and surrounded by prison guards, a female acquaintance slipped Gardner a gun. He shot Michael J. Burdell in the head and wounded a court bailiff.

 We remind you of Gardner’s actions not because we feel they justify the death penalty, but as a reminder Gardner was not the only person who lost their life.

And to remind you that Gardner is not the tragic figure here. Instead, Burdell and the guard were doing their jobs before Gardner took it upon himself to play would-be executioner.

One reason death penalty opponents are highlighting Gardner’s execution is because the nature of the execution appears to be cruel and unusual.

We remind you that Gardner had a choice between lethal injection and the firing squad.

Gardner chose the firing squad.

He chose this before Utah eliminated the firing squad as an option in 2004.

Gardner told his lawyer he preferred the squad, not because he wanted  his execution to draw attention.

There are some that feel death by firing squad is an abhorrent way to execute prisoners.

Eyewitness accounts differ on how cruel the execution appeared.

One called it “almost sanitary;” another said it was very violent and not at all clinical.

There are those that feel government should not put anyone to death.

We agree.

This board reversed its stance on the death penalty recently. Too many instances were reported of inmates being freed from death row because new evidence proved their innocence.

It became clear that some innocent people were being put to death.

One innocent person suffering the ultimate penalty is too much.

There is no indication that Gardner was innocent.

But sparing Gardner’s life is preferable to an innocent person being put to death.