• Texas Drops Special Last Meals for Death Row Inmates
    127 replies, posted
Source: [url]http://www.cnn.com/2011/09/22/justice/texas-last-meal/index.html?hpt=hp_t2[/url] [quote]The hefty last meal ordered but not eaten by an executed Texas inmate brought a complaint from a state senator and the end Thursday to the practice of special menus. Sen. John Whitmire, chairman of the Senate Criminal Justice Committee, wrote Thursday that he opposed the practice of providing a last meal of choice to the condemned. "It is extremely inappropriate to give a person sentenced to death such a privilege. One which the perpetrator did not provide to their victim," Whitmire wrote. The Democrat, who represents Houston and parts of north Harris County, said "enough is enough" after Lawrence Russell Brewer ordered two chicken fried steaks smothered in gravy with sliced onions, a triple-meat bacon cheeseburger, a cheese omelet with other ingredients, a large bowl of fried okra with ketchup, three fajitas, a pint of Blue Bell ice cream and a pound of barbecue with a half-loaf of white bread. The meal request also included a slab of peanut butter fudge with crushed peanuts, a pizza and three root beers. No more death row 'last meals' in Texas Brewer declined to eat the last meal Wednesday, said Texas Department of Criminal Justice spokesman Jason Clark. Whitmire, in asking the state to stop special requests, said he would seek the change by law if necessary. "I believe Senator Whitmire's concerns regarding the practice of allowing death row offenders to choose their last meal are valid," Brad Livingston, executive director of the Department of Criminal Justice, said in statement released Thursday. "Effective immediately, no such accommodations will be made. They will receive the same meal served to other offenders on the unit." Brewer, 44, was executed for his involvement in the infamous racially motivated 1998 dragging death of James Byrd Jr.[/quote] Only in Texas.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gN-FH6ST80s[/media]
[quote]"It is extremely inappropriate to give a person sentenced to death such a privilege.[/quote] So, we should let them starve before they die? That's seems logical, in Texas of course. It's only giving a human being one last meal before he dies, what's so "extremely inappropriate" about that?
i'm not really liking where america is going
[QUOTE=DrBreen;32442979]i'm not really liking where america is going[/QUOTE]Nobody is, except the politicians.
If you are going to execute them, you should at least give them a proper last meal. Execution is fucked up to begin with, but jesus fucking christ, have SOME honor about the ordeal. Assholes.
Pretty soon Texas will just decide to save money by building a gallows in the square by the courthouse.
[QUOTE=Pikachu231;32442968]So, we should let them starve before they die? That's seems logical, in Texas of course. It's only giving a human being one last meal before he dies, what's so "extremely inappropriate" about that?[/QUOTE] They are still fed, but in the United States a prisoner is traditionally allowed to have whatever they want as their last meal. They are removing that and just giving the condemned the same thing as everyone else.
[QUOTE=GunFox;32442999]If you are going to execute them, you should at least give them a proper last meal. Execution is fucked up to begin with, but jesus fucking christ, have SOME honor about the ordeal. Assholes.[/QUOTE]Yeah it is fucked up. It also costs more than jailing them for life.
[QUOTE=Pikachu231;32442968]So, we should let them starve before they die? That's seems logical, in Texas of course. It's only giving a human being one last meal before he dies, what's so "extremely inappropriate" about that?[/QUOTE] I think it's also inappropriate how most of the robbery-murderers ordered one hell of a last meal including; fried chicken, strawberry shakes, stakes, hamburgers.. you get the idea.
[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;32443004]Pretty soon Texas will just decide to save money by building a gallows in the square by the courthouse.[/QUOTE] Sadly it would be more humane than lethal injection. I maintain that if you are going to kill someone, and note that I don't think we should be able to execute anyone other than politicians, that the firing squad is the best method. It isn't unnecessarily cruel or unusual. Something which can't be said about virtually any other method. [editline]23rd September 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=faze;32443015]Yeah it is fucked up. It also costs more than jailing them for life.[/QUOTE] Yeah both morally and practically, it just doesn't work out in anyone's favor.
[QUOTE=GunFox;32443034]Sadly it would be more humane than lethal injection. I maintain that if you are going to kill someone, and note that I don't think we should be able to execute anyone other than politicians, that the firing squad is the best method. It isn't unnecessarily cruel or unusual. Something which can't be said about virtually any other method. [editline]23rd September 2011[/editline] Yeah both morally and practically, it just doesn't work out in anyone's favor.[/QUOTE]Agreed. Like they say, an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind...
Why can't we have all of the punishments? Death for the serious wank jobs, then 1 year up to life imprisonment for the rest of the criminals?
[QUOTE=Gekkosan;32443073]Why can't we have all of the punishments? Death for the serious wank jobs, then 1 year up to life imprisonment for the rest of the criminals?[/QUOTE] Because convictions are often wrong and death can't be taken back.
[QUOTE=Gekkosan;32443023]I think it's also inappropriate how most of the robbery-murderers ordered one hell of a last meal including; fried chicken, strawberry shakes, stakes, hamburgers.. you get the idea.[/QUOTE] It would be better if they negotiated. If they order something like that just say, 'na' then throw them a two pack of saltines.
[QUOTE=GunFox;32443086]Because convictions are often wrong and death can't be taken back.[/QUOTE]Often is an understatement... Like the guy from Georgia the other day.
[QUOTE=GunFox;32443086]Because convictions are often wrong and death can't be taken back.[/QUOTE] Assuming convictions go right.. I mean that should be for granted, so once convictions are 99%-100% of the time right, would you agree to have the death penalty alongside with 1 year up to life imprisonment for the rest?
[QUOTE=Gekkosan;32443102]Assuming convictions go right. I mean that should be for granted, so once convictions are 99%-100% of the time right, would you agree to have the death penalty alongside with 1 year up to life imprisonment for the rest?[/QUOTE]Where are you getting that percentage from?
[QUOTE=Gekkosan;32443102]Assuming convictions go right.. I mean that should be for granted, so once convictions are 99%-100% of the time right, would you agree to have the death penalty alongside with 1 year up to life imprisonment for the rest?[/QUOTE] So one out of every 100 people executed being completely innocent is an acceptable margin of error?
[QUOTE=GunFox;32443034]that the firing squad is the best method. [/QUOTE] I heard that the best way to be executed is nitrogen poisoning as you dont feel it.
[QUOTE=faze;32443106]Where are you getting that percentage from?[/QUOTE] Nowhere.. Well my head. But never did I imply the percentage is right. But [b]assuming[/b] convictions go right 100% of the time, I think it would be justice to have the death penalty for the most serious wank jobs.
[QUOTE=Gekkosan;32443139]Nowhere.. Well my head. But never did I imply the percentage is right. But [b]assuming[/b] convictions go right 100% of the time, I think it would be justice to have the death penalty for the most inhumane individuals.[/QUOTE]It costs more money to kill somebody than it does to let them get butt fucked for the rest of their life. I'd rather have them get butt fucked and me have to pay less for them.
[QUOTE=Gekkosan;32443139]Nowhere.. Well my head. But never did I imply the percentage is right. But [b]assuming[/b] convictions go right 100% of the time, I think it would be justice to have the death penalty for the serious wank jobs.[/QUOTE] But reality doesn't work that way. No justice system is even remotely 100% accurate.
Texas, separate from us please. Our bad rep is your fault.
[QUOTE=GunFox;32443156]But reality doesn't work that way. No justice system is even remotely 100% accurate.[/QUOTE] Yeah well. Innocent until proven guilty, even if guilty.
[QUOTE=Gekkosan;32443182]Yeah no shit. Innocent until proven guilty, even if guilty.[/QUOTE] Sooooooo practically there is no time in which you would employ the death penalty, even using your rules. [editline]23rd September 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Shiftyze;32443168]Texas, separate from us please. Our bad rep is your fault.[/QUOTE] Your nation flag is Chinese. Wat.
[QUOTE=GunFox;32443194]Sooooooo practically there is no time in which you would employ the death penalty, even using your rules.[/QUOTE] Guess not. It doesn't even really matter. If someone does a serious crime, he is gonna rot either way. Assuming he is proven guilty of course..
[QUOTE=GunFox;32443194]Sooooooo practically there is no time in which you would employ the death penalty, even using your rules. [editline]23rd September 2011[/editline] Your nation flag is Chinese. Wat.[/QUOTE]I'm from and live in America. oh
You can't kill people based on an assumption that they're guilty. That's like saying it's okay to burn people for witchcraft because you can take for granted that 99-100% of the time the tests for witchcraft are accurate.
Pragmatically I view that it's a waste to give food to people who are going to be executed. It doesn't matter about what they did, but if they are definitely getting executed and this cannot be changed a last meal seems wasteful.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.