Actually I kind of like the way it's set up right now, cost aside. You get to spend 20-30 years on death row, and every now and then they take the guy in the cell next to yours, kicking and screaming, never to be seen again. I like that quite a bit.
He's a murderer.
He should pay for his crimes.
His nomination shouldn't excuse him from the death penalty.
He should pay for his crimes.
His nomination shouldn't excuse him from the death penalty.
jail for life is bad enough...some people should be killed, but i don't think he's one of them.
That's laughable. 12 jurors reviewed the evidence and found him guilty, yet your unique insight shows otherwise.
Armchair jurors.
Squisher
Lifer
- Aug 17, 2000
- 21,204
- 66
- 91
It is not vengeance I seek, but justice.
Every person alive should know that when you take another's life with malice and forethought you have now forfeited your life.
When you show compassion to the criminal you show contempt for their victims.
Took, took, tookie goodbye, took, took, tookie don't cry........
Every person alive should know that when you take another's life with malice and forethought you have now forfeited your life.
When you show compassion to the criminal you show contempt for their victims.
Took, took, tookie goodbye, took, took, tookie don't cry........
eits
Lifer
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.
i wonder why they sentence someone to death and wait like decades later to kill him. is it just in case there's new evidence to clear the killer's name?
eits
Lifer
Originally posted by: iwearnosox
That's laughable. 12 jurors reviewed the evidence and found him guilty, yet your unique insight shows otherwise.
Armchair jurors.
haha yeah, no kidding. silly xenocyd... jurors are NEVER wrong. the american legal system is 100% fool-proof.
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,422
- 14,337
- 136
Like I said, they have no respect for the law. 25 years of appeals of that trial of those 12 jurors who reviewed the evidence and found him guilty, and still he's going to the chair.Originally posted by: iwearnosox
That's laughable. 12 jurors reviewed the evidence and found him guilty, yet your unique insight shows otherwise.
Armchair jurors.
Yep, "no hard proof." :roll:
Ugh... see, I'd rather we just sent them across the Bridge of Sighs as soon as possible. To me, that would be the least cruel method.
Heh. I liked that guy calling the lethal injection a cruel "Hitler experiment." Too funny. Clearly he has never seen an animal get put down. It's absolutely instantaneous. Speaking of "Hitler experiments," where do you all think the better part of modern medicine was developed? Pre-WWII medicine was completely different than post-WWII. Those 6 million Jews paid with their lives to give us the modern healthcare that some people think should be a "right."
I am not arguing that Tookie should be pardoned or that he is a good man. I am merely saying that the death penalty will often not bring closure, and never deliver justice.
Who in the world has the 'moral' authority to kill another person, and please dont resort back with the "What if it was Hitler" or he "killed people so he deserves to die."
There are many groups out there made up of victim's families that agree the death penalty does not work, and it did not bring them closure. The taking of one of their loved ones is something that is with them forever.
As to the fairness of the system, it fails, often. Not all the time. Maybe not in Tookies case. If you support a system you should support it 100%.
Also look at the stats on each state (you can be put to death in certian US States but not others, that is an illogical argument when stating it is 'fair').
Lethal injection is not all that is used. (It is also not humane, look at http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=8&did=478 for just some info on botched electrocution and lethal injections).The use of Zyklon-B (the same agent the Nazis used), hanging by rope, firing squad, and electric chair have been used (albeit rarely) in our modern day.
Also look at the cases of Jesse Tefaero (who was killed horrifically when his eyes burst, blood shot out from his ears, and his body was so hot that the doctor could not take his pulse for 17 min, and they had to do this exact ordeal 3 times before he died. He was later found innocent, after it came forward that the prosecutors withheld evidence. (his wife was later pardoned.) (They were put on death row because the real criminal made a plea-deal with cops.
Jury of peers + the system = does it work? is it fair?
Most cases are not funded well enough to have acc. to DNA test. The court appointed lawyer (because remember they are usually poor and have no acc. to hard hitting legal defense) usually only has 30 days to get his info, witnesses, and arguments ready before the 'trial before his peers' that you tote so highly. This is a system that has to fail, atleast sometimes. That is also not to mention the court appointed lawyers that happen to be Sports Attorneys, etc. etc. who dont want or care to be a part of the case.
If frankly you dont care about the moral argument (or the fact we are the last western nation to have this - we are currently in the same list as our favorite Axis of Evil countries) maybe the monetary argument is a better suited one for the economic conservatives of the crowd. Logically, a system that costs more than life, has flaws, and will not ALWAYS (not arguing that it sometimes does) make victims families feel better is a flawed waste of tax payers dollars.
Just some scattered points. For up to date stats on the death penalty check out: http://people.smu.edu/rhalperi/
Yes, what kind of example would that set for other people thinking about joining/starting gangs or killing/robbing people?
eits
Lifer
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.
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.
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.
eits
Lifer
as if the death penalty has done SOOOOO well thus far
(here's a secret: it hasn't... i was just being really, really sarcastic. only idiots think that killing a criminal would deter crime)
Originally posted by: eits
Originally posted by: iwearnosox
That's laughable. 12 jurors reviewed the evidence and found him guilty, yet your unique insight shows otherwise.
Armchair jurors.
haha yeah, no kidding. silly xenocyd... jurors are NEVER wrong. the american legal system is 100% fool-proof.
He did not only have 12 jurors... he also had about 40 judges look over the same evidence ... again and again... during his decades of appeals.
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,422
- 14,337
- 136
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.
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.
I for one am happy for him. I think he got what he deserved. Twenty-five years of waiting and the big date is finally here. Think anyone got him a cake? "Happy Execution Day!"
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,422
- 14,337
- 136
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'.
I really like this quote:
"If we execute murderers and there is in fact no deterrent effect, we have killed a bunch of murderers. If we fail to execute murderers, and doing so would in fact have deterred other murders, we have allowed the killing of a bunch of innocent victims. I would much rather risk the former. This, to me, is not a tough call."
John McAdams - Marquette University/Department of Political Science, on deterrence
"If we execute murderers and there is in fact no deterrent effect, we have killed a bunch of murderers. If we fail to execute murderers, and doing so would in fact have deterred other murders, we have allowed the killing of a bunch of innocent victims. I would much rather risk the former. This, to me, is not a tough call."
John McAdams - Marquette University/Department of Political Science, on deterrence
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter