Normally only one would have a blank. You want multiple bullets to hit the target.

It’ll be a killer.

If you’re going to kill people, there are so many better ways:

Long drop hanging: gets the job done, quite effective, mature technology. Sometimes rips a head off (gruesome, but not more painful to the victim) or fails to break the neck (leads to rapid unconsciousness due to interruption of blood supply to the brain and cerebral oedema, then death by asphyxiation / cardiac arrest)

Guillotine: very effective if the machine is well designed and maintained. Makes a bit of a mess, but if you do it in a room that’s designed like an abattoir, it’s easy enough to clean up. Probably not much suffering for the victim - it’s debatable whether one can maintain consciousness, but either way, not for a long time.

Shooting: can be relatively humane if done properly, but can be messed up quite badly. In East Germany they did it by an unexpected shot to the back of the head at close range, which is surprisingly humane, considering what that government was capable of.

Nitrogen gas: leads to rapid, painless loss of consciousness. The victim will convulse, but they’re not conscious anymore by that time. If your systems are set up properly, it’s very effective.

But the bottom line is that it’s not a good policy to kill convicted criminals. No justice system is perfect, so innocents get executed. It’s been repeatedly shown to be ineffective as a deterrent. It’s difficult to do well, so it ends up being expensive, in most cases more expensive than just keeping them locked up.

I don’t think a doctor at a hospital gets to change her level of care just because her patient is condemned to death.

She’s now the latest entry on the List of botched executions on Wikipedia.

You don’t really have to say “alleged” if they’ve gotten a judgement against them in a court.

Rule of thumb

I see what you did there…

* I'm  
* it's  
* you're  
* imposingly  
* too