Good-bye Tookie
 

After 25 years of appeals and manipulation, the end is near.

My sympathy is with the families of his four victims, and all the other victims of his legacy - the Crips.

Proud of you, Arnold.

While I don't deny that he deserved what he got, I don't support the death penalty.

As long as we're giving it out though -- Tookie seems like a prime candidate.

I fail to see the purpose of executing him; well other than satisifying some need for revenge... the death penalty is a barbaric practice - I hope one day the US joins the rest of the civilized world in condemning it.

If he has reformed, then what harm would sentencing him to a life in prison do? Worst case scenario he would just rot away - best case he could continue on his path writing and teaching.

Ditto on everything you said.

Well, g'bye Tookie, glad that you're gone.


On the death penalty, I figure it's cheaper to off them early than to continue to feed them. Much cheaper that way.

So why put anyone in jail? It's like revenge really.

I mean the guy stole money from Enron and he won't work anywhere else probably so why throw him in jail?


The logic doesn't flow. I don't believe in the death penalty, but I think what he has done is pretty bad.

I think guys like this should be sent to fight in Iraq. People think that's a joke, but it's not. If they die, it won't be at our hands and they'll alleviate the troop shortage.

-Rudey

Actually the opposite.

It is much more expensive.

Prove it. I want to see how a one time lethal injection and burial to a killer is more expensive than the food and the space he's occupying.

Fine, its revenge. Its revenge for the lives of the people he ended. Why should he be allowed to grow old, write, teach when he ensured that 4 other members of society won't get to? I'm sorry, someone that shoots another human being, then later laughs and mocks the gurgling noises they make when they die obviously doesn't respect life enough to deserve one. And nothing he's done in the subsequent 25 years changes that fact.

China does it often because they've been rich since Mao turned communist.

-Rudey

Here, here RA Cooper - well said. People have the ability to change and reform, I mean for God's sake he's been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in the past. At least life in prison would mean he would still be able to do some good in the world. When will the US government wake up and realise that this whole "an eye for an eye" thing (in relation to the death penalty) really doesn't solve any problems?

Ummm seriously the logic doesn't work. Open up the prisons. because you're against punishment

The Nobel prize means nothing. There are terrorists that have won it while committee members resigned in protest.

-Rudey

I'm not using it as logic - if you'll notice, I'm not actually arguing anything, rather stating my opinion.
While you may hold the Peace Prize in no regard, others do, and for different reasons. Peace to one is not the same to someone else - likewise the degree of impact a person's contribution has made to the peace of a situation varies between nominees and winners. I'm not debating the fact that the NPP has had some controversial winners/nominees, he's just another one.

Prison Inmates have been know to become some of the best leagal Minds! They have the time, the librarys, and lawyers to advise them.

Let God Sort Them Out!

No one told Him to start The Crips who were one of the most blood thirsty gangs in America! How many People did He or his gang kill?

It cost a Ton of Money to keep a prisoners in Jail. Who do You think pays for that? You and I do!:mad:

How about a guy who runs over and Kills a Police Officer who I knew, had a family and said if He had a chance, He would kill more!

Up for Parole 3 times! I along with many others have fought our rears off to keep in in.

No Death Penality in Ks. at the time. Oh!!!


BTK, of Witchata, Ks. cannot get the Death Penality as was committeed befor one. 11 People known!

The Congress of The USA changed the burial terms to be placed in National Cemetrys because of this!

Don't make too much of the above.

For example:

Dear Nobel Committee:

I hereby nominate ShyViolet for the Nobel Peace Prize.

Love,

Friends of ShyViolet


Now you and Tookie share something.

He committed the ultimate crime four times. He does not deserve any more chances.

The average time from conviction/sentencing to carrying out the death penalty is twenty-five years.

So, we feed them for that long and then kill them. What difference does it make financially?

We're doing both.

Oh yes, that puts him right up there with Yasser Arafat. That is TRULY a distinguished award.

He died of AIDS. Go easy on him.

-Rudey

Wow, I feel sorry for the 70 virgins he gets. Well, will that be their hell? Instead of going to hell, 70 virgins have to sleep with an AIDS infected terrorist for eternity?

Other than a Cliff Notes version of Mr. Williams founding the Crips (which was a new facet of American society at the time), and that he killed four people, I will admit that I do not know enough about this particular case to comment. As this has been a discussion on the death penalty, though, I'd like to say something.

Several years ago, I saw a documentary on the death penalty on HBO. They followed several men on death row, how they got there, and what they feel now that they are there. One of these men made such an impression on me, I went from being against the death penalty (except in cases where the condemned requested it, like Gary Gilmore) to being very much in favor of it. This man said what several others said, only in a more eloquent way.

He had robbed a convenience store in the Midwest, kidnapped the pregnant clerk, and crossed the state line in a several hour police chase. He said, "If she hadn't screamed about her baby, I wouldn't have had to kidnap her.... Why the police chased me for so long, I don't know, but they forced me to go into Oklahoma.... If (the woman's name) hadn't started screaming again when the police got close, I wouldn't have had to get rid of her.... Now the State wants to murder me."

No remorse. No admitting that, had he not robbed the store in the first place, he wouldn't be on Death Row. He didn't kill anyone, the State wanted to murder him.

This was one man of many interviewed, all of whom (but one) used the State wanting to murder them line. The racial make up was even among the prisoners, but it was all basically the same.

There was also an indepth description of lethal injection, and how it works. They interviewed the prison employees, and how they felt about the death penalty, and the show did its best to give a balanced point of view. I wish they would show it again, for others to see.

I don't believe in the death penalty ever. I don't see how taking another life fixes or changes anything. We have the capability of keeping society safe from dangerous people without killing the dangerous people. There are times that the dangerous people truly become reformed in thought and heart and can actually do good. It has been proven that it is not a deterrant to crime. There is no reason for it. It is barbaric. I don't think we should be playing God. It doesn't bring the victims back.

The cost becomes more for the death penalty because of all the court costs of appeals, etc.

In this particular case, I believe that this man truly reformed in his heart and was trying to do everything he could to help prevent people from acting as he did. I don't see the point in murdering him.

Only he and God know what is truly in his heart now...

By whom?

If Tookie goes tonight, he will never harm another living soul or commit another crime (even against another inmate or a guard).

Tookie gets the ultimate deterrent.

If there actually was a death penalty carried out in a reasonable time, it would be a deterrent. As it is today, with appeals dragging it out for 25 years, it's not a deterrent.

If Tookie's Crips had seen him fry about six months after his trial, they would be deterred.

Personally I couldn't give a flying f**k if he was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize - I just object to the messed up logic behind the death penalty... as evidenced by hoosier's comment.

"He commited the ultimate crime four times" - By this I assume that the murder or taking of a human life is the ultimate crime (seems to be according to the Torah and Bible too)... so how is taking his life not the same damned "ultimate crime"? The freak'in hypocracy is disgusting...

I don't think that the thought that murder is the ultimate crime really flows from the Bible. It seems more to flow from natural law. I don't know of any society that tolerates the murder of [what it perceives are] innocents. In fact, many societys where the Bible or Torah are nowhere even close to their contemplation have exactly the punishment for murder. It's heinous, and if you intrude on someone's right to exist, the state will take the same privilege with you. It's not really hippocrisy of you admit that the state plays on a different field and by a different set of rules.

-- now as to whether in an imperfect world we have the right to arbitrarily deal out that sentence as a society while we choose not to give it to some others is beyond my understanding.

For example, here in Oklahoma, where we tend to be VERY happy to give people the needle, one of the most astonishingly horrible murderers in our nation's history, Terry Nichols was sentenced to life. He had the full weight and force of the most expensive state investigation against him, it was proved beyond a reasonable doubt that he murdered over 100 people, about 1/5 of those children, while maiming hundreds more.. yet he gets life while we give the needle to some Doctor's wife that killed her hubbie for money.

The hippocrisy is not in the act itself, it's how it is dealt out. Justice should at least make the attempt at being equal to all. In this case, where we leave life and death in the hands of a jury (12 people who are usually chosen based on their LACK of experience and education) and saying that they represent what the 'reasonable man' would do is simply laughable.

I agree with you, but for different reasons...

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/arti...did=108&scid=7

There, plenty of scientific based articles on costs of the death penalty.

I personally think that the death penalty is barbarous. It says exactly the opposite thing that society is preaching.

Except in this case, if the family gave the go-ahead, they'd be in for a great deal of public scrutiny, and probably threats. Would you feel safe in your home if you gave your okay to have Tookie executed? I sure as hell wouldn't.

You're arguing semantics. I asked for proof that the carrying out of the death penalty was more expensive than life inprisionment. All that website discusses and acknowledges is the cost of death penalty trials. This douchebag's already been committed and exhausted his appeals. Give it to him.

From your site:
The solution is not to get rid of the death penalty, it is to speed up the trial process and reduce the amount of appeals.

Well..it looks like he's been executed.

So they don't deserve their due process?

Also, many appelate courts have overturned rulings, found new (exonerating) evidence, and/or found bias or procedural misconduct in the earlier trial.

There are still cases being found where people that have already been put to death are innocent. I know of one case where a state had to pay millions of dollars to a victim's (yes, they are a victim in this case, as they were innocent) family, when the family brought a wrongful death suit against the state.

Also, the goal of the penal system is rehabilitation. The death penalty was originally intended for those that could not be rehabilitated. Now, unfortunately it is all about vengence.

Did you know that we're the last major industrialized nation that performs the death penalty and we have the highest crime rate?

I guess my mom's teachings over the years sunk in.

Two wrongs don't make a right. Killing someone because they killed someone else (or 2 people, 4 people or 100 people) doesn't make it right. If it is self defense at the time, that's a protective, survival instinct (although I don't think I could do it under any circumstance).

It is well known that states who implemented the death penalty saw no difference in crime rate. That is what is meant by deterrant. Tookie wasn't going to kill anybody else and he may have been preventing others from doing it in the future. Even in cases where the inmate is still a violent person, keeping them in isolation would prevent the possibility of them killing again.

Take away due process from this and then we kill even more innocent people. If it is found that someone is innocent after they were executed, who do we execute then? The executioner? The jury? The prosecuting attorney?

No the goal is not just for rehabiliation. Where do you get this stuff???

You keep throwing wrong facts out there. Incredible.

-Rudey

Execute all of them. I don't believe in the death penalty because people make mistakes. If their own lives are on the line, they will be absolutely sure.

-Rudey

I have to agree with Rudey on this.

It's not just to rehabilitate, it's to PENALize you (get it?) when you do something wrong. Rehabilitation is a very recent development. The founding fathers didn't give a crap about it, that's for sure.

The people that supported Tookie, including all the celebrities, made me actually want his execution. The same with Mumia.

-Rudey

Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc?

-RC
--not to pile on, but sheesh

I hear Scott Peterson is available for promotional opportunities. Maybe the celebrity leftists can take up his cause next?

Oprah interviewed him prior to his book release by Harper Collins.

-Rudey
--He's just misunderstood and can help women in the future.

Which celebrities that made statements also happen to have movies coming out very soon?

(I can't think of any who don't)

This may be an urban legend, but I don't think it's true.

If there actually was a single case, Mike Farrell and Snoop Dog would have made sure we heard about it (repeatedly)

Does Farrell have a movie coming out?