do you think that Tookie Williams should executed?

[Vic]

Originally posted by: AnthroAndStargate
I guess the best point would be, lets hope none of you are ever accidently put on death row, be it in America or Iran.

Whereupon you imply that America's legal system of an impartial trial by jury, proof beyond reasonable doubt, and a lengthy appeals process is no more fair than Iran's system of religous trial by mullah, no evidence required, confess to Allah, and off with your head that very same day.

To which I say: fsck the hell off, asshole.

 

[eits]

Originally posted by: KarenMarie

Originally posted by: eits

the argument i've made (and that i've been consistent in making) is that tookie williams does not deserve to die. why? because of a few things.... 1, he's helping society... 2, he's writing books, which help kids learn that gangs are bad (no matter what his motivation is, that's what he's doing with favorable outcome from the community).... 3, because the death penalty hasn't slowed down crime.... 4, because forfeiting one's life for the lives they took by sitting alone in a jail cell for the rest of his life is the proper punishment.... 5, because a quick and painless death is not fitting for a murderer and a cruel and unusual practice of executing is not becoming of "the greatest nation on earth".... 6, because killing someone doesn't teach anyone that it's wrong to kill.

1. He is helping society? How exactly is he doing that? He sold less than 400 books, and any attempt at gang truces have failed. And that is just the target society. The rest of society... there is no benefit what-so-ever in prolonging his existence.

2. There are millions of ppl who write kids book. Millions of these books are based on teaching kids that violence is wrong, and self respect is good. Not all of them have been violent murderers.

3. The death penalty is not meant to slow down crimes. It is meant to deal with the criminals that have been legally found guilty and sentenced to death. And as of right now, i have never, ever heard of an excuted criminal coming back to commit another crime.

4. Each state gets to vote and pass laws on what they feel the proper punishment is. That is why some states have the death penalty is legal in some states and not in others. The law abiding, voting citizens of Calif. have decided that the proper punishment is the death sentence. And if we are going by opinions, my opinion is that life in prison should consist of being locked away, with no teevee, no cable, no gyms, no basketball, no visitors, no exercise rooms, no college educations, nothing... just a room with food twice a day. And 'out time' can be an hour a day with the other violent offender. But it is not just about my opinion. The voters have spoken.

5. The laws have decided that it is not cruel and inhumane punishment. Previously, you likened the legal injection to nazi experiments, now you are saying that it is quick and painless. This honestly confuses me. In any case, he gets an easier death then his terrifed INNOCENT victims.

6. killing someone may or may not teach ppl that it is wrong to kill. but an excuted criminal doesnt ever get another chance.

1, yeah, he is. that's 400 books bought by people. people don't buy books if they don't want to read them for themselves or to their kids. if a handful of people can UNDERSTAND why gangs are wrong rather than see some dude die, it is more impacting and long-lasting.

2, good.... you can add tookie to the list of those who've written books against gangs and violence who are reformed violent murderers.

3, you're right. the death penalty was meant to deal with criminals who've been legally found guilty and sentenced to death. good job. you just formed a circular statement.

4, i agree with you.

5, i likened it to nazi experiments because they were... not only that, but because it's an unusual form of execution. however, it is quick and painless in the sense that you are put in a sleep state, paralyzed, and finally killed. it's a morbid way to get the job done, but my argument is not JUST the fact that it's inhumane OR that it was developed by the nazis, but that he deserves to be locked away from the rest of the free world forever.

6, locking them up in jail forever accomplishes the same goal.

 

[SmoochyTX]

I think a bigger deterrant would be if we executed these murderers quicker instead of letting them languish around for 15+ years. It would be nice if death row actually meant 'death row'. Texas needs to step it up some I say.

 

[KarenMarie]

Originally posted by: eits

Originally posted by: KarenMarie

Originally posted by: eits

the argument i've made (and that i've been consistent in making) is that tookie williams does not deserve to die. why? because of a few things.... 1, he's helping society... 2, he's writing books, which help kids learn that gangs are bad (no matter what his motivation is, that's what he's doing with favorable outcome from the community).... 3, because the death penalty hasn't slowed down crime.... 4, because forfeiting one's life for the lives they took by sitting alone in a jail cell for the rest of his life is the proper punishment.... 5, because a quick and painless death is not fitting for a murderer and a cruel and unusual practice of executing is not becoming of "the greatest nation on earth".... 6, because killing someone doesn't teach anyone that it's wrong to kill.

1. He is helping society? How exactly is he doing that? He sold less than 400 books, and any attempt at gang truces have failed. And that is just the target society. The rest of society... there is no benefit what-so-ever in prolonging his existence.

2. There are millions of ppl who write kids book. Millions of these books are based on teaching kids that violence is wrong, and self respect is good. Not all of them have been violent murderers.

3. The death penalty is not meant to slow down crimes. It is meant to deal with the criminals that have been legally found guilty and sentenced to death. And as of right now, i have never, ever heard of an excuted criminal coming back to commit another crime.

4. Each state gets to vote and pass laws on what they feel the proper punishment is. That is why some states have the death penalty is legal in some states and not in others. The law abiding, voting citizens of Calif. have decided that the proper punishment is the death sentence. And if we are going by opinions, my opinion is that life in prison should consist of being locked away, with no teevee, no cable, no gyms, no basketball, no visitors, no exercise rooms, no college educations, nothing... just a room with food twice a day. And 'out time' can be an hour a day with the other violent offender. But it is not just about my opinion. The voters have spoken.

5. The laws have decided that it is not cruel and inhumane punishment. Previously, you likened the legal injection to nazi experiments, now you are saying that it is quick and painless. This honestly confuses me. In any case, he gets an easier death then his terrifed INNOCENT victims.

6. killing someone may or may not teach ppl that it is wrong to kill. but an excuted criminal doesnt ever get another chance.

1, yeah, he is. that's 400 books bought by people. people don't buy books if they don't want to read them for themselves or to their kids. if a handful of people can UNDERSTAND why gangs are wrong rather than see some dude die, it is more impacting and long-lasting.

2, good.... you can add tookie to the list of those who've written books against gangs and violence who are reformed violent murderers.

3, you're right. the death penalty was meant to deal with criminals who've been legally found guilty and sentenced to death. good job. you just formed a circular statement.

4, i agree with you.

5, i likened it to nazi experiments because they were... not only that, but because it's an unusual form of execution. however, it is quick and painless in the sense that you are put in a sleep state, paralyzed, and finally killed. it's a morbid way to get the job done, but my argument is not JUST the fact that it's inhumane OR that it was developed by the nazis, but that he deserves to be locked away from the rest of the free world forever.

6, locking them up in jail forever accomplishes the same goal.

I will not go number by number again, as it seems that we will just have to agree to disagree on the death penalty in general.

but i would like to point out that in this case in particular, tookie is NOT repentant.

 

[eits]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: eits
you truly are delusional.

how in the hell am i changing my argument? my argument is that executing the murderer is the wrong move to make. you can't "call me out" on anything because i haven't said anything that can be "call out"-able.

the argument i've made (and that i've been consistent in making) is that tookie williams does not deserve to die. why? because of a few things.... 1, he's helping society... 2, he's writing books, which help kids learn that gangs are bad (no matter what his motivation is, that's what he's doing with favorable outcome from the community).... 3, because the death penalty hasn't slowed down crime.... 4, because forfeiting one's life for the lives they took by sitting alone in a jail cell for the rest of his life is the proper punishment.... 5, because a quick and painless death is not fitting for a murderer and a cruel and unusual practice of executing is not becoming of "the greatest nation on earth".... 6, because killing someone doesn't teach anyone that it's wrong to kill.

You want this to be personal? Sure...

crack is bad, mmm'kay.

:roll:

1) Wrong. No one would know who he is if he wasn't go to the chair.
2) 400 copies sold!!!
3) Deterrence is irrelevant to punishment. We remove murderers from our society because we don't want to get murderered AND because no society could claim to protect its citizens if it did not do so. Claiming that punishment should prevent crime is simply idiotic. Crime cannot (and should not, as attempting to is unjust) be prevented, only punished.
4) So is forfeiting his life on the chair. Either way he dies in prison. Why wait?
5) The first part of this is simply your opinion and second part is an abuse of the constitution on your part, as I pointed out (and you even quoted) several posts back.
6) This is essentially the same argument as #3, and also irrelevent.

1, doesn't matter. he's still doing it. think about it.... say he's a good guy and does it out of the kindness of his heart and betterment of society; ok, he did it. now, let's say that he's a bad guy, but he does it because he wants off of death row; ok, he STILL did it. people STILL benefitted from it, regardless of his motivation.
2, read above, numbnuts.
3, i make that case because there are some idiots who believe that capital punishment will deter crime. seeing how you're an idiot, i assumed you were one of those idiots. i apologize for the assumption.
4, because it isn't right to kill people. if we are living by that golden rule, what makes the killer any worse than the killer with a syringe?
5, the first part is fact. the second part is fact. you don't know dick.
6, you're still essentially an idiot.

 

[Leper Messiah]

nuke em. Did the crime, do the time (in this case death).

 

[Pliablemoose]

Originally posted by: eits
because it isn't right to kill people. if we are living by that golden rule, what makes the killer any worse than the killer with a syringe?

Hand me the syringe, I've taken dozens of people off life support, I can kill Tookie

BTW, for someone advocating calmness & appropriate responses to murder, you sure are getting worked over an internet forum.

 

[AnthroAndStargate]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: AnthroAndStargate
I guess the best point would be, lets hope none of you are ever accidently put on death row, be it in America or Iran.

Whereupon you imply that America's legal system of an impartial trial by jury, proof beyond reasonable doubt, and a lengthy appeals process is no more fair than Iran's system of religous trial by mullah, no evidence required, confess to Allah, and off with your head that very same day.

To which I say: fsck the hell off, asshole.

Our system is better, but it is not perfect.

But I suppose you dont care about that if the system works most of the time and as long as we execute (atleast in some states - cause remember the DP is not equal in all states) for most of those that have murdered, right?

 

[eits]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: eits
the nazis developed the "humane" arts of execution we use today....

those nazi's were so humane. they didn't let those dirty pollocks sit cruelly in their rooms.... no no.... they humanely injected them with poisons to end their lives, electricuted them to death, and gassed the air out of their bodies. God bless those nazis for giving us the oh, so humane form of execution.

Hey, you were the one who brought up the Nazis. Can we safely assume that you would reject receiving any type of organ transplant should you ever require one? Because those Nazi doctors invented that too. Little hidden secret of the medical community. Not that I am praising the Nazis, you're just switching to that tack because you've frustrated all your arguments. I'm just pointing out that your argument (once again) had no logic when you said that a reason we shouldn't use the lethal injection was because it was a "Hitler experiment."
Which, hey, is fine by me. I'm down for a hangin'.

actually, dumbass, organ transplants have nothing to do with the inhumane act of killing someone with chemical injections. you're trying to tell ME about logic?

again, you haven't pointed out that my argument has no logic because you can't.

 

[Leper Messiah]

Originally posted by: AnthroAndStargate

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: AnthroAndStargate
I guess the best point would be, lets hope none of you are ever accidently put on death row, be it in America or Iran.

Whereupon you imply that America's legal system of an impartial trial by jury, proof beyond reasonable doubt, and a lengthy appeals process is no more fair than Iran's system of religous trial by mullah, no evidence required, confess to Allah, and off with your head that very same day.

To which I say: fsck the hell off, asshole.

Our system is better, but it is not perfect.

But I suppose you dont care about that if the system works most of the time and as long as we 'git r dun' for most of those that have murdered, right?

....nvm

 

[Lurknomore]

To anyone who's trying to inject "morality" into the equation, i.e., killing him is somehow the"wrong" way to teach others that killing is wrong - PLEASE, STOP trying to impose morality upon this purely legal matter. The death penalty is part of California Law. If you want to impose your own morality, then try to change the law.

Hmm, I have some reservations about abortion- yet the Supreme Court has made it law even though it's not constitutionally protected. Still, I will not question that abortion does has practical value and is protected by law. I try to keep "morality" out of the debate.

Let's face it- we are a vengeful society that demands retribution when horrible crimes are committed. But we can't have mob rule, thus we impose a death penalty, state by state. Some have it, others don't. If Tookie was smart, he'd have killed those people here in NY, where, even if the DP is legal, it's impossible to get the DAs to prosecute. But he didn't. Tough cookies for Tookie. So quit yer whining about this worthless trash who will breathe no more.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: AnthroAndStargate

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: AnthroAndStargate
I guess the best point would be, lets hope none of you are ever accidently put on death row, be it in America or Iran.

Whereupon you imply that America's legal system of an impartial trial by jury, proof beyond reasonable doubt, and a lengthy appeals process is no more fair than Iran's system of religous trial by mullah, no evidence required, confess to Allah, and off with your head that very same day.

To which I say: fsck the hell off, asshole.

Our system is better, but it is not perfect.

But I suppose you dont care about that if the system works most of the time and as long as we execute (atleast in some states - cause remember the DP is not equal in all states) for most of those that have murdered, right?

All I did was point our your obvious disprespect for our legal system. My position on capital punishment is irrelevent to that fact.

 

[AznAnarchy99]

Hes worth more alive than dead.

 

[eits]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose

Originally posted by: eits
because it isn't right to kill people. if we are living by that golden rule, what makes the killer any worse than the killer with a syringe?

BTW, for someone advocating calmness & appropriate responses to murder, you sure are getting worked over an internet forum.

it's because i'm angry about how short-sighted we americans have become. things aren't black and white.

 

[KarenMarie]

Originally posted by: Lurknomore
To anyone who's trying to inject "morality" into the equation, i.e., killing him is somehow the"wrong" way to teach others that killing is wrong - PLEASE, STOP trying to impose morality upon this purely legal matter. The death penalty is part of California Law. If you want to impose your own morality, then try to change the law.

Hmm, I have some reservations about abortion- yet the Supreme Court has made it law even though it's not constitutionally protected. Still, I will not question that abortion does has practical value and is protected by law. I try to keep "morality" out of the debate.

Let's face it- we are a vengeful society that demands retribution when horrible crimes are committed. But we can't have mob rule, thus we impose a death penalty, state by state. Some have it, others don't. If Tookie was smart, he'd have killed those people here in NY, where, even if the DP is legal, it's impossible to get the DAs to prosecute. But he didn't. Tough cookies for Tookie. So quit yer whining about this worthless trash who will breathe no more.

Death penalty is not legal in NY since sept 2004.
Now all the murderers know where to go if they want to just get life in prison.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: eits

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: eits
you truly are delusional.

how in the hell am i changing my argument? my argument is that executing the murderer is the wrong move to make. you can't "call me out" on anything because i haven't said anything that can be "call out"-able.

the argument i've made (and that i've been consistent in making) is that tookie williams does not deserve to die. why? because of a few things.... 1, he's helping society... 2, he's writing books, which help kids learn that gangs are bad (no matter what his motivation is, that's what he's doing with favorable outcome from the community).... 3, because the death penalty hasn't slowed down crime.... 4, because forfeiting one's life for the lives they took by sitting alone in a jail cell for the rest of his life is the proper punishment.... 5, because a quick and painless death is not fitting for a murderer and a cruel and unusual practice of executing is not becoming of "the greatest nation on earth".... 6, because killing someone doesn't teach anyone that it's wrong to kill.

You want this to be personal? Sure...

crack is bad, mmm'kay.

:roll:

1) Wrong. No one would know who he is if he wasn't go to the chair.
2) 400 copies sold!!!
3) Deterrence is irrelevant to punishment. We remove murderers from our society because we don't want to get murderered AND because no society could claim to protect its citizens if it did not do so. Claiming that punishment should prevent crime is simply idiotic. Crime cannot (and should not, as attempting to is unjust) be prevented, only punished.
4) So is forfeiting his life on the chair. Either way he dies in prison. Why wait?
5) The first part of this is simply your opinion and second part is an abuse of the constitution on your part, as I pointed out (and you even quoted) several posts back.
6) This is essentially the same argument as #3, and also irrelevent.

1, doesn't matter. he's still doing it. think about it.... say he's a good guy and does it out of the kindness of his heart and betterment of society; ok, he did it. now, let's say that he's a bad guy, but he does it because he wants off of death row; ok, he STILL did it. people STILL benefitted from it, regardless of his motivation.
2, read above, numbnuts.
3, i make that case because there are some idiots who believe that capital punishment will deter crime. seeing how you're an idiot, i assumed you were one of those idiots. i apologize for the assumption.
4, because it isn't right to kill people. if we are living by that golden rule, what makes the killer any worse than the killer with a syringe?
5, the first part is fact. the second part is fact. you don't know dick.
6, you're still essentially an idiot.

You have lost it entirely.

 

[AnthroAndStargate]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: AnthroAndStargate

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: AnthroAndStargate
I guess the best point would be, lets hope none of you are ever accidently put on death row, be it in America or Iran.

Whereupon you imply that America's legal system of an impartial trial by jury, proof beyond reasonable doubt, and a lengthy appeals process is no more fair than Iran's system of religous trial by mullah, no evidence required, confess to Allah, and off with your head that very same day.

To which I say: fsck the hell off, asshole.

Our system is better, but it is not perfect.

But I suppose you dont care about that if the system works most of the time and as long as we execute (atleast in some states - cause remember the DP is not equal in all states) for most of those that have murdered, right?

All I did was point our your obvious disprespect for our legal system. My position on capital punishment is irrelevent to that fact.

Obvious disrespect? Excuse me, but you dont know me.
I am pointing out a FLAW in our legal system. I desire it to be a 'perfect' system or near as possible to it. Ignoring the flaws is blind, and foolish. (I am not saying you are ignoring, because I dont know you!)

 

[SmoochyTX]

Originally posted by: AznAnarchy99
Hes worth more alive than dead.

How do figure? And worth more to who?

 

[eits]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: eits

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: eits
you truly are delusional.

how in the hell am i changing my argument? my argument is that executing the murderer is the wrong move to make. you can't "call me out" on anything because i haven't said anything that can be "call out"-able.

the argument i've made (and that i've been consistent in making) is that tookie williams does not deserve to die. why? because of a few things.... 1, he's helping society... 2, he's writing books, which help kids learn that gangs are bad (no matter what his motivation is, that's what he's doing with favorable outcome from the community).... 3, because the death penalty hasn't slowed down crime.... 4, because forfeiting one's life for the lives they took by sitting alone in a jail cell for the rest of his life is the proper punishment.... 5, because a quick and painless death is not fitting for a murderer and a cruel and unusual practice of executing is not becoming of "the greatest nation on earth".... 6, because killing someone doesn't teach anyone that it's wrong to kill.

You want this to be personal? Sure...

crack is bad, mmm'kay.

:roll:

1) Wrong. No one would know who he is if he wasn't go to the chair.
2) 400 copies sold!!!
3) Deterrence is irrelevant to punishment. We remove murderers from our society because we don't want to get murderered AND because no society could claim to protect its citizens if it did not do so. Claiming that punishment should prevent crime is simply idiotic. Crime cannot (and should not, as attempting to is unjust) be prevented, only punished.
4) So is forfeiting his life on the chair. Either way he dies in prison. Why wait?
5) The first part of this is simply your opinion and second part is an abuse of the constitution on your part, as I pointed out (and you even quoted) several posts back.
6) This is essentially the same argument as #3, and also irrelevent.

1, doesn't matter. he's still doing it. think about it.... say he's a good guy and does it out of the kindness of his heart and betterment of society; ok, he did it. now, let's say that he's a bad guy, but he does it because he wants off of death row; ok, he STILL did it. people STILL benefitted from it, regardless of his motivation.
2, read above, numbnuts.
3, i make that case because there are some idiots who believe that capital punishment will deter crime. seeing how you're an idiot, i assumed you were one of those idiots. i apologize for the assumption.
4, because it isn't right to kill people. if we are living by that golden rule, what makes the killer any worse than the killer with a syringe?
5, the first part is fact. the second part is fact. you don't know dick.
6, you're still essentially an idiot.

You have lost it entirely.

you're right... i've lost it. "it" being desire to talk to someone who doesn't get common sense.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Originally posted by: eits

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose

Originally posted by: eits
because it isn't right to kill people. if we are living by that golden rule, what makes the killer any worse than the killer with a syringe?

BTW, for someone advocating calmness & appropriate responses to murder, you sure are getting worked over an internet forum.

it's because i'm angry about how short-sighted we americans have become. things aren't black and white.

We've always been short sighted. And Kalifornia is getting more conservative, it's about time.

 

[Lurknomore]

Originally posted by: KarenMarie

Originally posted by: Lurknomore
To anyone who's trying to inject "morality" into the equation, i.e., killing him is somehow the"wrong" way to teach others that killing is wrong - PLEASE, STOP trying to impose morality upon this purely legal matter. The death penalty is part of California Law. If you want to impose your own morality, then try to change the law.

Hmm, I have some reservations about abortion- yet the Supreme Court has made it law even though it's not constitutionally protected. Still, I will not question that abortion does has practical value and is protected by law. I try to keep "morality" out of the debate.

Let's face it- we are a vengeful society that demands retribution when horrible crimes are committed. But we can't have mob rule, thus we impose a death penalty, state by state. Some have it, others don't. If Tookie was smart, he'd have killed those people here in NY, where, even if the DP is legal, it's impossible to get the DAs to prosecute. But he didn't. Tough cookies for Tookie. So quit yer whining about this worthless trash who will breathe no more.

Death penalty is not legal in NY since sept 2004.
Now all the murderers know where to go if they want to just get life in prison.

Oh, I forgot about the state ruling in June 2004 that ruled it unconstitutional.
Or was it Sept.???

 

[AznAnarchy99]

Originally posted by: SmoochyTX

Originally posted by: AznAnarchy99
Hes worth more alive than dead.

How do figure? And worth more to who?

I personally believe that every human being is worth more alive than dead. If he dies, his knowledge of his past, his life, all of the things he hasnt written down is gone. He is worth more to society as long as he continues writing and spreading his message. You learn from the past to not repeat history. You cant learn if the past is lost.

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: AznAnarchy99

Originally posted by: SmoochyTX

Originally posted by: AznAnarchy99
Hes worth more alive than dead.

How do figure? And worth more to who?

I personally believe that every human being is worth more alive than dead. If he dies, his knowledge of his past, his life, all of the things he hasnt written down is gone. He is worth more to society as long as he continues writing and spreading his message. You learn from the past to not repeat history. You cant learn if the past is lost.

you are sugarcoating reality.

 

[SmoochyTX]

Originally posted by: AznAnarchy99

Originally posted by: SmoochyTX

Originally posted by: AznAnarchy99
Hes worth more alive than dead.

How do figure? And worth more to who?

I personally believe that every human being is worth more alive than dead. If he dies, his knowledge of his past, his life, all of the things he hasnt written down is gone. He is worth more to society as long as he continues writing and spreading his message. You learn from the past to not repeat history. You cant learn if the past is lost.

And what of the four people he murdered? Their lives meant nothing? It's amazing how you don't seem to think about them and what more they may have accomplished if they had lived longer.

 

[Mill]

Final Appeal denied.

Bye Bye Tookie.