Question regarding last meals on death row

Post Reply New Topic

I know that some states like Texas don't even do last meals at the prisoner's request anymore.

But one thing I've been wondering about... do they still feed the prisoner before they execute him? I can understand not wanting to give him a special meal of his choice because he is being punished for the crime he commited but not feeding him at all, even if it's on the day of his execution, seems kind of inhumane to me.

It's unlawful to deny anyone the necessities of life, no matter what's going to happen to them that day. They have the possibility of being pardoned right up until the moment of execution.

So as long as they still get fed I guess that makes me feel better.

Starving a prisoner the day he's executed just seems cruel.

I remember somebody on the internet made a comment about how "giving a prisoner who is going to die food makes as much sense as putting gas into a car with no engine".

I don't think it's right to compare a human being to a car. Just saying.

In the US, in some jurisdictions, they get to order a fantastic last meal.

One got this meal
20 beef tacos
20 beef enchiladas
2 double cheese burgers
1 jalapeno pizza
fried chicken
spaghetti
1 fruit cake
1/2 chocolate cake
1/2 vanilla cake
cookies and cream ice cream
carmel chunk ice cream
2 cokes
2 pepsi
2 root beers
2 orange juices

Yeah but apparently they quit doing that in Texas because one inmate ordered a very large expensive meal and decided he was "not hungry" when they brought it to him.

In Florida whatever food the inmate requests has to be purchased locally and I think in Maryland (I could be wrong) they give you a $20 limit of what you can eat.

I don't understand why Texas had to ruin that privilege for all the other death row inmates just because of one ***hole. Seriously, Texas sucks.

When people die they vomit and or poop out anything they’ve eaten. I’d hate to have to clean that mess up. Is that maybe a concern for not feeding them before execution?

Think about it, they deny the guy food, strap him to the chair and then the president calls with a stay or pardon. They unstrap him from the chair and he sues the government for mistreatment.

That's not even the same comparison, it'd be more accurate to compare it to putting gasoline into a car whose engine is going to be removed later that day. Or going the other way, your analogy would be better compared to putting food into someone that's already dead.

It wasn't my analogy.

And my point is I don't believe it's right to deny a man any food whatsoever just because he's about to be executed. If we start doing that then we might as well go back to the dark ages when we tortured prisoners into confessing to crimes they didn't do or did things like burning them alive at the stake.

Texas is cruel!

Not much crueler the. California

if executions are to be done, they should be done before dawn. if they could pump in a mix of carbon monoxide and tranquilizer into the death row cell [sealed] while the condemned is still asleep, that would likely be the most humane way. special last meal would be moot.

Or they could mix cyanide into their last meal.desth by carbon monoxide is horrible and too holocaust like.

that is the purpose of the tranquilizer gas before and simultaneous to the carbon monoxide. cyanide is a HORRIBLE suffocating death.

Execution is such a waste of life. Instead of executing criminals they should perform medical experiments on. This would provide two benefits. 1. It would provide more accurate results than performing the experiments on animals, who don't always react the same way to medications as human beings and 2. it would relieve many innocent animals of horrible suffering.

Cyanide is nearly instantaneous.

That’s inhuman treatment this illegal.