I think Stan Williams should receive clemency.
His is the quintessential redemption story. As a nation we need to acknowledge redemption is possible.
Governor agrees to Williams hearing
Convicted killer gets closer to possible clemency
- Charles Burress, Chronicle Staff Writer
Saturday, November 26, 2005
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has decided to hold a clemency hearing Dec. 8 for Stanley Tookie Williams, the condemned killer who has attracted a number of high-profile backers calling for his life to be spared.
It is believed to be the first time a California governor has held such a hearing since 1992, when Gov. Pete Wilson considered the appeal of condemned killer Robert Alton Harris, Schwarzenegger's office said Friday. Wilson denied the appeal.
No California governor has granted clemency since Ronald Reagan in 1967.
"It's very positive, and we're very happy about that," said Williams' attorney, Verna Wefald of Pasadena. "We did ask for a personal meeting with the governor."
The district attorney's office in Los Angeles County, which prosecuted Williams in the four 1979 killings for which he was convicted, strongly opposes clemency. State offices were closed Friday, and prosecutors could not be reached for comment.
Williams, 51, was the co-founder of the Crips gang in South Central Los Angeles, but his defenders say he has become an anti-gang crusader behind bars. He is scheduled to be executed at 12:01 a.m. Dec. 13.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Newsvine
Furl
Google
Yahoo
Tookie William's own son is
Tookie William's own son is a convicted murderer, and he's supposed to get credit for writing children's books with an anti-gang message? I guess the Coalition of the Damned doesn't give up without a fight. I only hope they get their hopes up to be dashed.
Tookie William's own son is
The sins of the son are to be visited on the father, I guess.
He's supposed to get credit for being a different person. I don't approve of what he was. I approve of what he is.
Redemption, Cobb. Do you believe in redemption? Do you want to live in a world where there is no redemption?
Over on The Christian
Over on The Christian Prophet blog a message from the Holy Spirit today talks about forgiveness and says Schwarzenegger would find it easy to choose the right course.
I approve of what he is.We
I approve of what he is.
We don't know what he is.
We know what he wants us to think.
You don't know what he
You don't know what he is...but then you haven't looked.
So what would it take for
So what would it take for him to prove he's a different person? How can he show he's been redeemed?
Stan Tookie Williams, has
Stan Tookie Williams, has done his wrongs by starting the gang
yes he was wrong for doing that because yes he should have found a different solution to his problems, but thats the only way he knew
that's where he got love from, the streets. Tookie, has served his time and is regretting everything that he has done in the past, but because he started the crips everyone is out to get him, thats not cool at all.
he did what he had to do to survive in his community.
they want to kill Stan Tookie Williams, they have no reason to do so because they do not have any physical evidence against him and thats a main part of a case to convict someone.
now a lot of people been on trial that did not have physical evidence against them and they got sent off the case, so why not him, get let go.
I don't think that he should be killed, and their's not sufficient evidence against him.
everyone want to do away with lynching, but here it goes again.
yes he should be punished for starting the crips, but he should not die because no one has the right totake someones life
the money that is bing used to kill him, could be going to schools that need to be fixed to educate children so that they don't go through what tookie has went through in his life.
'he did what he had to do to
'he did what he had to do to survive in his community' is the biggest load of crap imaginable. I survived in his community, and anyone who grew up around crips or other bangers in LA know survival has nothing to do with it, especially not for Tookie.
Read the DA's report.
http://flapsblog.com/?p=1432
Of all the people in the world that clemency ought to go to, Tookie should be one of the last in line. I can't see how any self-respecting black person could stand up for this four time murderer and his gang.
Fortunately, no one has
Fortunately, no one has stood up for this four time murderer and his gang.
And the question remains
And the question remains unanswered.
What evidence would you accept that he's changed? Are you so merciless that you deny a person can change?
What evidence would you
What evidence would you accept that he's changed? Are you so merciless that you deny a person can change?
The real question isn't whether he has changed.
Everyone has changed. And everyone has remained the same.
The real question is whether he will reoffend.
If you evaluate that question on an individual basis, people will die. You have to evaluate it on a group basis. Williams is a member of a group, a group which could be titled "bully murderers". That group has historically been dangerous to other people when allowed the opportunity. Release 100 Williams', and twelve people will die because you released them. Whose lives are worth more, the 100 bully murderers or the twelve people left alive?
By this equation, life without parole and death yield the same result. But we know it's more complicated than that. Life without parole has frequently yielded parole, and more victims. Times change. People become convinced by words. People unlikely to personally be the victims. Other people die.
If you evaluate that
You have the most curious way of flipping between individual and group methods of judging people.
Not anymore.
What would it take to make you believe that? Are you capable of believing it?
I don't think so. I think you subscribe to the psychological equivalent of the one-drop rule...once tainted, always tainted. I don't think you believe in change or growth or redemption or forgiveness.
Williams is a member of a
Not anymore.
What would it take to make you believe that?
Evidence that he was mistakenly convicted.
Are you capable of believing it?
Sure. (but see later, I'm not being completely obtuse here)
You have the most curious way of flipping between individual and group methods of judging people.
There's other examples too.
Why should drunk driving be illegal? Shouldn't we give each individual drunk a chance to show that he can really drive, and only prosecute those who kill or injure someone?
And when the drunk kills someone, does his time, isn't the past in the past, we should presume he learned to drive drunk while in prison, so that he won't kill someone this time? After all, he says he learned a lot.
No, we know a lot about drunk drivers as a group. They're high enough risk that we're going to arrest them on the spot simply for being a member of that group.
But to your direct point: there are no words which can obscure some deeds. The deeds speek louder about projections of future behavior than do the words, and the consequences of being wrong are too high. Take a chance on burglers, fine. Even some kinds of murderers. But bully murderers are a high risk group.
What would it take to make
You don't believe in redemption. There's no point talking to you...about a LOT of things.
Of all the people in the
Matthew 25:40:
The "members of my family" in this chapter include the hungry, the thirsty, the naked, the sick, and the imprisoned.
"Christian nation" indeed.
You don't believe in
You don't believe in redemption.
Near as I can tell you're using redemption in a slightly different way than any of the dictionary definitions.
If by redemption, you mean that a high risk offender (high risk in terms of both likelihood of reoffense and consequences of reoffense) can, by prison behavior, demonstrate that he is no longer high risk, then no, I don't believe in that. I believe prisoners can focus on the goal, release, and stay focused until they are released, at which time they lose that focus.
Are there counter-examples? Of course. The problem is, we can't tell them apart while they're in prison.
If by redemption you mean that a prisoner could make peace with his victims, such that he is recalled after death as a good man who had a positive impact, sure.
And the king will answer
If we release a murderer, who then murders again, do we not bear some responsibility for the victim?
Have we not "done it" to the victim?
There's no point in talking
There's no point in talking to you.
If we release a
Was "releasing" Tookie Williams part of this discussion? I musta skipped over that part.
If we release a murderer,
I also musta missed the verse that instructs: "Do unto others, but hedge thy bets."
the drunk driver analogy has
the drunk driver analogy has to be among the worst to ever hit the sphere.
the drunk driver analogy has
the drunk driver analogy has to be among the worst to ever hit the sphere.
Go ahead and explain why you found it lacking, T3.
It's lacking because
It's lacking because this
...is the statement of a dick, not an argument.
Again, you just make assertions as though anyone but you must accept them.
"I can't see how any
"I can't see how any self-respecting black person could stand up for this four time murderer and his gang."
I don't see how any self-respecting black person can stand up for mass murderer Bush and his gang ... but you do.
From the Washington
From the Washington Post:
So can we dispense with the "what if he kills again" fantasies?
You know what the problem
You know what the problem is?
The problem is we're interrupting the blood ritual.
As far as I can see, American Christianity is an Old Testiment religion...I mean, pre-Job.
I don't know and don't
I don't know and don't really care whether Williams has reformed himself and atoned for his past behavior. Williams' claims of innocence doesn't resonate well with me. If you do enough wrong eventually you will go down for something even if you aren't guilty of what the authorities accuse you of having done. I am simply opposed to the use of the death penalty for any reason whatsoever given the racist, barbaric and class driven peculiarities of the practices of the American criminal justice system that always seems to entail the sacrifice of black bodies and poor people.
As far as I can see,
Quite right.
As a society, we're still in tune with the Code of Hammurabi which predates Jesus by about 1800 years.
Please correct me if I am
Please correct me if I am wrong but it is my understanding that in the entire pre-colonial and post-colonial history of this country that only five white people have ever been executed for killing a black person.
If clemency is granted,
nyet...,
Charles Manson and a buncha other devilish muhfuhs got automagic clemency in 1972 under People vs Anderson - which declared California's death penalty cruel and unusual punishment - I'da thunk you Killa Kali old heads woulda aired this one out waaaaaay up thread after Cobb's first hasnamussian bleats of impotent resentiment...,
Killa Kali old
Killa Kali old heads
Interesting phrase. What mean?
Means you and Ourstorian...,
Means you and Ourstorian...,
Means you and
Means you and Ourstorian...,
I got that from the jump but what does "Killa Kali" mean?
It's a fairly common lyric
It's a fairly common lyric used to describe Califor-nigh-ay. I remember hearing it nearly as far back as I've been listening to gangsta rap, and I been listening to gangsta rap ever since NWA proclaimed itself straight outta Compton. {more like straight out of the pipe dreams of Ted Fields, but that's another topic altogether}
In any event, it seemed apropos the topic of this thread...,
Hey ..... "old heads?" In
Hey ..... "old heads?"
In the immortal words of the Kingfish: I resemble that remark!
{...keeping a straight face
{...keeping a straight face while LMAO inside and pretending not to notice O quoting the Kingfish...haw!}
So can we dispense with the
So can we dispense with the "what if he kills again" fantasies?
It turns out we have some evidence. In 1972 all death sentences were commuted. Here's what happened in Texas.
47 death sentences commuted.
40 of these people were eventually released.
Three more murder victims that we know of (two more murder convictions, one murder-suicide)
(I'd put the link here, but it goes to a create account page unless, I guess, you're referred by google. You can find this page at the top by googling for 'commuted "killed again"'.
Death row cons could be free someday
Recent court-ordered commutations may go way of '72's Furman 47
07:39 AM CDT on Tuesday, July 26, 2005
By DIANE JENNINGS / The Dallas Morning News
The notion that 28 Texas death row inmates might ever walk the streets seemed far-fetched last month when Gov. Rick Perry commuted their sentences to life in prison.
'They'll have to do 40 [years], and after they do the 40, just as sure as the sun's coming up in the morning, they'll get out,' former death row inmate Calvin Sellars, part of 1972's mass commutation, said of inmates whose sentences were recently commuted.
But if history is any indication, most of them will indeed be freed one day.
Arthur Broussard was.
Mr. Broussard, 58, was part of the Furman 47, the last mass commutation of condemned Texas inmates. That was in 1972, after the Supreme Court decision Furman vs. Georgia, which halted the death penalty for four years.
Fourteen years after his commutation, Mr. Broussard was paroled. He had been condemned for killing a Houston grocery store clerk in 1969.
"I never thought I'd get out," he recalled in a telephone interview recently.
In fact, most of the Furman 47 were released. According to state prison records reviewed by The Dallas Morning News, 40 of the former death row inmates – 85 percent – have been released. Of the seven not released, two died in prison. Five others are still locked up.
At least two of the commuted inmates killed again, including Kenneth McDuff, who drew two more capital sentences in the 1990s for the murders of Melissa Ann Northrup and Colleen Reed. He was executed in 1998.
The collective fate of the Furman 47 contradicts the predictions of those who said inmates in the latest mass commutation probably would never again go free.
Mr. Perry had no choice but to commute the sentences after the Supreme Court ruled this year that the execution of offenders who were younger than 18 when they committed their crimes violated constitutional protections against cruel or unusual punishment.
Most of the 28 men whose sentences were commuted recently were sentenced after the early 1990s, when a life term for capital crimes in Texas meant a minimum of 40 years. Texas added a life-without-parole sentence in the recent legislative session.
These inmates were 17 at the time of their crimes, so most will be in their 50s when they first become eligible for parole.
Some criminal justice experts doubt that succeeding generations will want to foot the bill to keep these men and thousands of other elderly prisoners behind bars that long. And, experts note, Texas prisons are nearly full again after a decade of tough-on-crime sentencing.
"It's going to be an issue for the Legislature and the parole board, 20, 30 years from now, what they want to do with these people" said Shannon Edmonds, staff attorney for the Texas District and County Attorneys Association.
"But the reality is, those decisions are going to be guided more by the problems that those people are facing then, than what those people did back when they committed their offense," she said. "It's always been the way it's happened.
"I would probably expect at least some of them to be paroled."
Robert Black, spokesman for Mr. Perry said: "It's quite a stretch to try and predict what will happen 30 years from now, but in Texas we do have a system in place where the parole board will look at each case individually and make a recommendation. Gov. Perry has to put his faith in the system that's in place that it will work properly on behalf of the people of Texas."
Of those who were part of the 1972 mass commutation, 22 committed new offenses. They range from minor infractions such as trespassing to major crimes such as murder.
The most notorious reoffender was Mr. McDuff. He's "the one that scares everybody," said James Marquart, a criminologist who studied the commuted inmates in the mid-1980s.
Another inmate killed his girlfriend and himself shortly after he was released in 1985, Dr. Marquart said. He could not identify the inmate, and no records reflecting that crime are available.
Of the 22 who reoffended, about two-thirds involved major felonies. Crimes committed in other states might not appear in state records.
According to state records, one former condemned inmate was eventually pardoned, and two had their cases dismissed.
"That's the thing with the death penalty," said Dr. Marquart of the widely varying outcomes. "You don't know."
About half of those paroled returned to prison, either for new convictions or technical violations of their parole, but many of them returned to quiet lives in the community.
Mr. Broussard, for instance, has met with his parole officer regularly for 19 years. He has, he said, done all right – even though he wasn't sure he would. When first told about his parole after more than 15 years of incarceration, "I didn't want to go," he said. "I didn't know nothing but the penitentiary."
Despite his trepidation, Mr. Broussard found work, got married, has not been in trouble with the law again and doesn't expect to be. He said he prays daily for forgiveness. Relatives of his victim could not be located.
The sentencing laws under which Mr. Broussard and other inmates were imprisoned and released were far different from those now, even from when some of the current commutees were sentenced.
In the 1960s, a death sentence could be handed down not only for murder but for armed robbery or rape. But inmates could accrue "good time" – time off a sentence for good behavior – and if someone got life, it usually meant about 14 years behind bars. At some points in prison history, when overcrowding was an issue, a lifer could come up for parole after serving far less time.
Those commuted in 1972 spent an average of 10 additional years in prison. One got out six months later, when his case was overturned; that presumably could have happened even if he hadn't been commuted.
Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, said experience dictates that some of the recently commuted inmates will be paroled eventually.
"It'll depend on the crime and it'll depend on the individual," he said, "but sure, some of them will be certainly eligible, and some will be paroled."
By the time they are paroled, however, they will be different people, he said, because of the difference between ages 17 and 57.
Former death row inmate Calvin Sellars agreed that age is a factor in how well an ex-con will do in the free world.
"Time takes care of everything," Mr. Sellars said. "They straighten up, not because of choice but because of age. Time – it takes a toll on you."
Mr. Sellars, 62, spent more than six years on death row. His cell was 12 feet from the electric chair, and he came within 18 hours of execution.
Six years after his sentence was commuted by the Furman decision, Mr. Sellars was released, not paroled. Representing himself, he convinced a federal judge in 1977 that he had been wrongly convicted on perjured police testimony. His case was dismissed.
Mr. Sellars, who now works as a legal investigator, said he was not surprised to learn that most of the men he knew on death row had been paroled.
"Time goes by, life goes on," he said, adding that the public eventually forgets even horrific crimes.
He expects those recently removed from death row to walk free in the future.
"They'll have to do 40 [years], and after they do the 40, just as sure as the sun's coming up in the morning, they'll get out," he said.
Mr. Sellars returned to prison for three years in the mid-1990s for carrying a prohibited weapon.
"You would have thought this guy would never get in trouble again," he mused. But, he said, he had a problem with alcohol and got into a confrontation at a bar while carrying a gun. He has quit drinking and hasn't had any other problems, and like Mr. Broussard, he doesn't expect to. Neither Mr. Broussard nor Mr. Sellars keeps in touch with fellow death row inmates.
For Mr. Broussard, who is still on parole, it's against the rules. But Mr. Sellars said he has no desire to see the rest of the Furman 47.
"No," he said, adding wryly that on death row, "there's no 'band of brothers.' "
E-mail djennings@dallasnews.com
A look at what happened to the 47 men whose death sentences were commuted to life terms when the U.S. Supreme Court abolished capital punishment in 1972.
40 were paroled or released
23 are alive today
22 have died
2 have undetermined fates
10 years served, on average, after commutation and before parole or release
18 of those released later had their parole revoked
22 of those released later had new convictions
9 of the convictions were for violent or sexual offenses*
*The nature of one new conviction couldn't be determined.
What's your point?
What's your point?
What's your point?Dead men
What's your point?
Dead men don't murder.
Redeemed men do.
Redeemed men do. Â Then
Then there's no such thing as redemption, is there? Or are you choosing the word in an attempt to befoul it?
I think you're befouling it.
I think you're befouling
I think you're befouling it.
How do we know if someone is redeemed?
If we know by their prison behavior, then redeemed killers kill again.
So we're left to befoul "redeemed" (pointing out that they kill), or we're forced to agree that we can't detect actual redemption by observing prison behavior.
I'd be pleased to restate my entire point as the latter.
dw, you're arguing against
dw, you're arguing against release, not against commutation.
Offenders of all sorts get "time off" for good behavior in prison. Reduction of sentences provides an incentive for prisoners to be cooperative and productive.
So what incentive can we offer a death row inmate? Five years less of being dead?
Do the people that he
Do the people that he murdered recieve clemency? He did the crime, time to get what he deserves.
http://www.prometheus6.org/node/11668
I can see you're not a New Testiment Christian.
dw, you're arguing against
dw, you're arguing against release, not against commutation.
Here's what happened in Texas.
47 death sentences commuted.
40 of these people were eventually released.
Three people were murdered that we know of.
And did these people do all
And did these people do all that Mr. Williams did to address his errors?
Let me remind you of what someone who thinks he is wise said in this forum:
You refuse to accept the offer of peace, it's on you. Your stubbornness, your fault.
Should a man die because of YOUR stubbornness?
One of the several things
One of the several things that bothers me about you, DW, is the remarkable coincidence where you are all for treating people as individuals until YOU have you do it for someone outside your immediate circle.
Three people were murdered
And none were murdered by prisoners who were not released. QED, Jack.
One of the several things
One of the several things that bothers me about you, DW, is the remarkable coincidence where you are all for treating people as individuals until YOU have you do it for someone outside your immediate circle.
You yourself p6 don't live in California where a commuted Mr. Williams would eventualy be tested out on real people.
If someone from my immediate circle were to be commuted, I'd be the test. You can bet I'd oppose the commutation. It's a lot easier to focus the closer the test is to you.
You yourself p6 don't live
Has nothing to do with your hypocrasy. You don't live anywhere near where he'd be IF release was what we're talking about in the first place.
Besides which, I know a bag of people in Cali that support clemency for Mr. Williams.
No, you're just among the bloodthirsty.
I find the terms interesting
I find the terms interesting by which Tookie speaks of his so-called "redemption". For him to admit to the murders I suppose is too much to ask. Afterall, that would seal his execution. I wonder if he EVER executed anyone...hmm. ...and if so, does his redemption include all of his acts, or just the ones placing him in jail....hmmmm. That's some new math right there:
Redemption = freedom from the punishment for living a LIFESTYLE of thuggery.
If Tookie is "redeemed" as he puts it, let him man up and taste death from the same spoon he used to feed it to others.
You know P6, hassenpfeffer's
You know P6, hassenpfeffer's neverending claims of pervasive personal fear of the boogeyman images of muslims and bad negros suggests that he may simply be off his social anxiety meds...,
nah...,
You're right, he's just a stiff-necked vorpal bunny suffering from a preponderance of reptile brain mentation...,
Another one looking forward
Another one looking forward to the death ritual.
From http://www.prometheus6.org/node/11668
What do you gain from his death?
If I have a child that
If I have a child that steals and then repents I am obligated and willing to forgive them. However, they still must pay the price. Williams not only was found guilty of murdering 4 people but started a gang that is responsible for many more deaths and much suffering. Nothing he can do could ever make up for the suffering he has caused but I do applaud his efforts to make at least some amends. However, since the death penalty is the law, if anyone ever deserved it, he does.
From
From http://www.prometheus6.org/node/11668
Also
The death penalty is legal, not required. And you have put your finger on the problem: does anyone deserve the death penalty when equal crimes are known and go unpunished entirely?
However, since the death
However, since the death penalty is the law, if anyone ever deserved it, he does.
I've decided to be the broken record here. I once knew a man, in fact we became friends, who murdered 26 people and he did less than three years in jail for it and that was only for the 26th murder. He and his 26th murder victim burglarized a house and stole some negotiable securities. The guy I knew later decided not to give his partner the partner's share of the loot so one day he marched the guy into the woods at gunpoint and forced the guy to dig his own grave and then shot him to death. He then told the two women who were with them that he would kill them if they ever said anything to anybody about what they saw.
All of these facts came out in testimony during the subsequent trial. The FBI interceded on my friend's behalf and got the prosecutor to charge him with third degree manslaughter for which he served less than three years.
If we live in a country where the police agencies of the state regularly and routinely let some murderers walk, then we cannot sensibly talk about some people deserving to die while others get off easy.
I intend to keep repeating this story as long as people who are brain donors keep posting messages calling for Tookie Williams to be gassed. The death penalty is barbaric and cruel.
The death penalty is
The death penalty is barbaric and cruel.
How do you feel about experiments which sometimes have fatal consequences being run on living people who didn't agree to participate in the experiment and have no way to avoid it?
That's Black History.
That's Black History.
How do you feel about
How do you feel about experiments which sometimes have fatal consequences being run on living people who didn't agree to participate in the experiment and have no way to avoid it?
The same way I feel about people who knowingly gave Indians blankets that were infected with smallpox.
The same way I feel about
The same way I feel about people who knowingly gave Indians blankets that were infected with smallpox.
Leaving Mr. Williams alive will, with near certainty, result in such an experiment.
Leaving Mr. Williams alive
Leaving Mr. Williams alive will, with near certainty, result in such an experiment.
To paraphrase my late mother, you're going way 'round Rosie's house to make a point when you could have just walked up to the door.
I fail to see how not gassing Tookie Williams puts you and other upstanding, law abiding folks in danger. I'm not advocating that he be released from prison. I am opposed to gassing him or treating him and other people who are imprisoned as if they are animals or beyond redemption. If he has been convicted of killing four people he would have a tough mountain to climb in my book but, what the hey, our government knowingly did business after WWII with Nazis who were involved in killing and enslaving Jews. I don't read anything from you about wanting to overthrow the government.
My mother also used to say that sometimes some folks need to get their behinds off of their shoulders.
Americans are always seeking
Americans are always seeking to murder, and kill something, someone.
America is a OLD-Testament church: A eye for a eye.
Now there in Iraq murdering. The Iraquis did nothing to Americans, NOTHING!
All in the name of "justice".
Thats ok though, America is in her death throes, only Americans self-righteousness has blinded them to this fact.
PS: I was born in America.
 Leaving Mr. Williams
What part of "without parole" do you not understand? Or are you just that bloodthirsty?
No one say shit to him in
No one say shit to him in this thread until he explains how this "experiment" will take place while Mr. Williams is locked away without parole.
You people understand what you gain by his death, right? Tell me. How will your life be better if he's dead than if he's locked away or even released and law-abiding...don't focus on the likelihood of that third option because we will disagree.
No one say shit to him in
No one say shit to him in this thread until he explains how this "experiment" will take place while Mr. Williams is locked away without parole.
I'm with you, but his shit has becomes so ridiculously predictable and lame.
Tookie didn't just found the
Tookie didn't just found the Crips, he RAN the Crips, INSIDE the wall. He's president-for-life. Part of his rep for 'redemption' was that he helped negotiate the gang truce after the LA riots. If he wasn't a gang kingpin in 1991, while on death row, he wouldn't have had a seat at the table, OK?
So if Tookie got out of prison, which he won't, then Bloods would make their bones by taking him out. Death Row has proven to be the safest place in America for Tookie - so safe that he's had time and liberty to write children's books and become an international celebrity. It doesn't sound like the appropriate punishment for a murderer, or is that simply a bloodthirsty opinion?
Having had to deal with Crips through my youth in Los Angeles, and having met Tookie personally, I'm saying he's the kind who deserves to die by the sword. Like I said, there are certain things you simply cannot undo, like shooting a woman on her knees in front of her family.
Killing Tookie shows that the state is willing and able to protect people from the most dangerous criminals. If people loose faith that the law is even capable of doing that, then they will take the law into their own hands. Which in the specific case of gangbangers of the sort whose own fantasies are intimately wrapped in the fate of Tookie, is just horrible for society.
We already know their are scribbleheads out there who idolize Tupac and Biggie Smalls for all the wrong reasons. Tookie's case is self-evidently similar. He needs to serve this one example by accepting his death sentence and dying. We're all better off with him executed. Keep him on suicide watch too.
How exactly does Tookie
How exactly does Tookie redeem himself for four murders without ever acknowledging that he killed anyone and without ever issuing any sort of apology to the families of the people you harmed? Shouldn't those things be pre-requisities for any type of redemption. I know he apologized for the gang violence that resulted from the formation of the Crips, but he has never apologized for /acknowledged the crimes for which he is to be executed. I'm not a big fan of the death penalty in general, but this redemption-talk seems strange to me. The passage of time, a TV movie, the undying support of Snoop Dogg, and some nice children's books do not equal redemption.
 I know he apologized for
A-Dub, how much sense does it make to apologize for something you say you didn't do?
Every time I see someone fight going to jail, lose and apologize for their crime, I think "You're a lying hypocritical bastard! You should get more time for perjury!"
Cobb, I knew you were
Cobb, I knew you were capable of saying something sensible. You always come out the gate ass-first with me...you have no idea how annoying I find that to be.
from http://www.prometheus6.org/node/11668
And yeah
Not a legal point. But yeah, that's bloodthirsty.
You're not the only one that grew up on the edge of thug life. AND...
If you're a Christian there are no crimes that can't be forgiven.
Serious question: you yourself say he won't be released. He is already objective proof society can protect people by catching and punishing the most dangerous criminals. The case of the Gotti family proves it can be done as soon as society decides to, just like all the scary hip-hop will go away as soon as society stops selling it to little white
boysgirls.You gain nothing by his death. No one gains anything from his death at this point. While he was running the streets there was a point to killing him...the guy I knew who tried to be Tookish was killed by a guy who was homeless because he'd just got out of jail with no skills, and I smiled when I heard about it...but there just is none now.
What you gain from clemency is the spreading understanding that people who have done less ill than he can turn themselves around too, rather than the message that those who have gone less good are not saved by their change.
Be a Christian, Michael. Choose life.
The single rational reason you've given for believing that is already served by his permanent imprisonment.
uh, by the way, little white
uh, by the way, little white girls are really driving those sales. just thought i'd interject. can't hang around for the big silly stuff, but you're holding it down, P6 - however, the light lifting of cobb and d-dub is likely to lead to atrophy, not a trophy. LOL...you still the man. rock and roll
d-dubya wrote, and I
d-dubya wrote, and I quote:
"There's other examples too.
Why should drunk driving be illegal? Shouldn't we give each individual drunk a chance to show that he can really drive, and only prosecute those who kill or injure someone?
And when the drunk kills someone, does his time, isn't the past in the past, we should presume he learned to drive drunk while in prison, so that he won't kill someone this time? After all, he says he learned a lot.
No, we know a lot about drunk drivers as a group. They're high enough risk that we're going to arrest them on the spot simply for being a member of that group.
But to your direct point: there are no words which can obscure some deeds. The deeds speek louder about projections of future behavior than do the words, and the consequences of being wrong are too high. Take a chance on burglers, fine. Even some kinds of murderers. But bully murderers are a high risk group."
d-dubya asked for clarification as to why this analogy was so poor. it should be obvious, but in the event it is not - here goes...
_____________________________________________________
drunk driving is illegal because of the threat it poses to society. every individual drunk driver poses this threat - regardless of whether or not they hit someone. hitting someone is beside the point. the increased risk is the issue - and it has been deemed illegal by this society.
as to the second part of this woeful analogy, it would ludicrous to assume that prison would improve one's capacity to drive drunk - since alcohol consistently impairs one's ability to conduct the functions asociated with driving, etc. besides, unless the state opened up drunk driving training schools (with free booze and an obstacle course - complete with baby carriages and seniors) the question of training while incarcerated is moot.
murder is quite different. murder is not illegal because it poses a threat to society (in the temporal sense of a future event - like drunk driving). murder is illegal because it is antithetical to a civil society. unlike drunk drivers, you can't arrest a murderer until someone has been murdered...and unlike the immutable impact of alcohol on reflexes, the desire and will to kill can change over time.
the analogy does not hold because drunk driving and murder are categorically different crimes...the operative factors in one crime is immutable - in the second instance, it's mutable (the extent to which change has occurred is debatable - and that's the substance of this debate)...and thirdly, the analogy is poor because it's just damn lazy. if ya can't think of a better analogy than that, go muck up on Cobb's board - he goes for stuff like that. LOL
i could write more, but it ain't that deep...have a drink, and stay off the road...have a great weekend folks - some of us R startin' early, wooo hooo!!!!!
Thanks for the critique,
Thanks for the critique, T3.
I originally used the drunk driver analogy to illustrate the point that groups of people exist which are so dangerous that they need to be imprisoned simply for being a member of the group, rather than treating each member as an individual and hoping for the best. P6 observed that I usually focus on individuals (as in "the success of individual black men") and don't see much use for groups, particularly large groups which consist of people who are involuntarily members ("the success of Black America").
I believe that analogy holds; dangerous groups include drunk drivers, bully multiple murderers, and people who store explosives in their homes. We don't really care what they say, they can't convince us that they're not a danger to other people.
The ludicrous rehab embellishment to the drunk driver story, I should have left it off. Agreed, it was not analogous, and it ended up deflecting the real argument.
go muck up on Cobb's board
The problem is, Cobb writes so much better than me..
What part of "without
What part of "without parole" do you not understand?
Did you read the article I posted?
Here's a quick abstract.
Keeping people in prison is expensive. The older an inmate gets, the more harmless he looks. After some 40 years or so, a guy now in his sixties starts looking really expensive to keep around. Particularly if he's exhibited 30 years of good prison behavior. And the "system" is inclined to let such people out of prison, with near certainty.
If Williams is commuted, the only way he will remain imprisoned for life is if he dies before he's been in for 50 years. Somewhere between 40 and 50 years he'll be released.
It's true that we now have "without parole" sentencing whereas we largely did not have that in 1972. However, this is a burden placed on bureaucrats far in the future, bureaucrats who will be looking to save money, and there is nothing stopping the state government from the second commutation, from life without parole to parole. Nothing.
If Williams is allowed to live, and if he lives long enough, he will be experimentally released into an unwilling public. If he is executed, he will not kill again.
Then fix the prison system. We incarcerate far too many people, largest prison population in the world, second highest rate of imprisonment.
Everyone agrees Williams will not be released, so your fears are baseless. And your refusal to treat him as an individual case puts the lie to all your principled positions.
For instance, of the Texas killers you so fear, how many of the recidivists were over 60? How many were released for good behavior as opposed to over legal error?
For instance, of the Texas
...and how many were released by the California parole board?
If Williams is allowed to
Just like Charles Manson.
Wait! Bad example. He hasn't been released. Just like Sirhan...um,...
Really...how many folks are
Really...how many folks are in prison that will never see the light of day again? To try to claim you can't keep someone imprisoned forever is just bullshit, plain and simple.
I hear the logical next step
I hear the logical next step of this dialogue approaching - which goes to the question of narco-trafficking and territorial competition - as it relates to state policing of drug laws, the economics of vice, the economics of incarceration, the legality of narcotics, the policing of users and distributors, alliances between producers, information dissemination about narco-issues, operational efficiencies of gangs as distribution networks for products, force and information, etc. so many topics, so little time.
it seems like a logical place for a discussion - as well as the re-location of williams as an historical figure akin to luciano and/or carlo gambino or isaac sears (http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h635.html). it seems to me that the question of his personal reformation is beside the point - as is the question of his execution. the question is only operative because class and race combine to make him "eligible" for state-sanctioned termination. i don't mean to suggest, narrowly, that a white, wealthy orchestrator of narco-trafficking in cali or the american west would face similar charges. hardly, it could happen. it has escaped my radar, but it could happen. it seems to me that the individual case of mr. williams is quite the red herring.
i'll wait till friday for my fish.
inadvertent double paste.
inadvertent double paste.
I'd say non-voluntary
I'd say non-voluntary members..."involuntary" suggests a Jacksonian (Michael) ethos to eblackuate or a lack of volition (expressed as cultural continuity - not the same as uniformity).
i don't mean to suggest,
i don't mean to suggest, narrowly, that a white, wealthy orchestrator of narco-trafficking in cali or the american west would face similar charges. hardly, it could happen.
Not exactly what you're asking for, but I have one name for you T3: Scott Peterson.
Only those who oppose the death penalty in all cases seek clemency for Peterson. I see himas pretty much equally a threat as I do Williams.
It's got to do with the crime, not race or class.
I have to say that cobb's
I have to say that cobb's post about tookie's kid being a killer got me to thinking about cheney's kid being a thespian - and how he (Dick) probably should not be allowed to act anymore. you just can't make this stuff up.
please, no posts outlining the distinction between homosexuality and murder. according to dick and his crew, both are sins before god, but one is deductible before taxes, if done on a grand enough scale.
I agree with you. And more,
I agree with you. And more, Snoop Dogg is speaking on his behalf? Snoop Dogg? He is a Crip himself. Let's assume he's still feels some sense of loyalty to his gang. If that's the case, he's trying to save one of his own. What if Tookie were a Blood and not a Crip? Snoop would be at home smoking weed and watching the execution on T.V., drinking gin and juice.
We incarcerate far too many
We incarcerate far too many people, largest prison population in the world, second highest rate of imprisonment.
At the very least P6 you should engage the obvious relationship between executions vs life without parole while asserting that we incarcerate far too many people.
The problem is, it follows from your analysis of the two questions that we SHOULD eventually release people like Williams. If we can't execute them and we need to incarcerate fewer people, what's left?
If we can't execute them and
If we can't execute them and we need to incarcerate fewer people, what's left?
You're putting us on right? Right? You do know don't you that the overwhelming majority of people in prison have not been sentenced to death. Were you aware of this fact?
Temple: both are sins before
Temple:
Haw! and Haw! again.
ptc (and dw):
and have not been convicted of crimes of violence.
 At the very least P6 you
That's a discussion of a response to a diversion. I may engage the topic at some point in the future.
For the record, I'm not approving any more anonymous comments that just amount to "he was a bad, scary man." I want someone seeking his death to tell me how they benefit from that death.
...and how many were
...and how many were released by the California parole board?
Check into the case of Robert Lee Massie, QB.
Another Furman commutee who went on to murder again. Paroled in California.
Snoop D-O-double G sips his
Snoop D-O-double G sips his gin and juice, laid back, with his mind on his money and his money on his mind.
Killing Tookie shows that
Killing Tookie shows that the state is willing and able to protect people from the most dangerous criminals. If people loose faith that the law is even capable of doing that, then they will take the law into their own hands.
Let's see if I got a handle on Br. Cobb's argument. The way to restore the alleged lost faith of African Americans in the commitment of the LAPD, in particular, and the California criminal justice system, in general, to combat evildoers in their community is by gassing Tookie Williams.
I would have thought that the black community's feelings of antipathy toward the LAPD might have been lessened to some measurable extent if, for example, the four cops who were videotaped beating an unarmed and drug intoxicated Rodney King like an unwanted stepchild had been convicted. Or, if the sheriff's deputies who shot multiple times a mentally disturbed naked older black woman who was brandishing a paring knife while standing on the front lawn of her home had not allowed to skate free.
But, no, no, nothing short of gassing Tookie will do here or folks, other than the LAPD who apparently do it more frequently than others, will take the law into their own hands. Do you think that it has ever occurred to people like Br. Cobb that the most that most black people ever expect from the police is that they will not shoot them when the orders to do so are actually given.?
Check into the case of
No thank you.
YOU were the one who brought up a study performed in Texas to explain the inevitability of specific behavior by a California parole board.
I don't need to look up anything to recognize that your argument is phony.
He's talking about white
He's talking about white people.
No thank you.You're willing
No thank you.
You're willing to hold an opinion which is directly refuted by a case you decline to even look at?
an opinion which is directly
You shouldn't abuse the word "directly" that way. It never did anything to you.
There's nothing "direct" about predicting the future behavior of a California parole board by looking at the past behavior of a Texas parole board operating under entirely different circumstances.
If you want directness, then take up the challenge P6 put to you way back up yonder. Stop telling us why you don't think Williams should be released. Instead, address the question in front of us: how does killing him make us better?
pookie and ray-ray are still
pookie and ray-ray are still slingin' rocks and cobbs buyin'. pookie and ray-ray are modern-day synonyms for american values of truth, justice and fairness (ie. free markets vs. equity)...it seems these rocks fit in most any pipe, and don't cost much at all...the first hit is always better than the second, but as you know, folks keep coming back...C to the O to the dubble, bubble B is no different. i will say that since he's met tookie, he probably knows the type of cat he is - deep down in side...in fact, it's why i compared him to luciano, gambino and sears (these folks have an ideal - and murder is usually part of their acceptable calculus). do you want someone who feels that way living in your neighborhood? maybe, maybe not...do you want someone like that consuming tax dollars in your state prison? maybe, maybe not. do you want someone like that consuming tax dollars on death row and consuming limited legal resources? maybe, maybe not. in any case, this is hardly a public safety question. this is even less a question of the fairness of the death penalty. c-o-double b wants to keep the convo there because it suits his broader point - and that's cool - it's based on an appeal to morality and an appeal to fear...something few folks need concern themselves with in cyberspace...
i think cobb may simply be saying that any society that relies on intellectual competition (ie. capitalism meets information society) and home mortgages (democratic wealth building through real estate ownership) must terminate those who would 1) break the social contract in any domestic setting, 2)undermine the influence of the legitimate use of force and 3) strip the state of its power over life and death. the priorities of that state (as defined by its laws and its people) are supreme and warrant the right to take life. moreso than this is about faith in the LAPD, it's about faith in your banker and your internet connection and your high-speed downloads of kirk franklin approved porn and your access to well-stocked supermarkets...it's about the social/commercial contract. the same measure of justice, then, would be applied to an interrupter like timothy mcveigh.
tookie williams broke the social contract in the same way that luciano, gambino and sears broke their contracts. sears was eventually victorious and luciano and gambino have been redeemed in popular memory, but in each instance, the trail of blood and tears was filled with innocents caught in the crossfire. tookie may or may not be a bad guy, but, it's beside the point.
There's nothing "direct"
There's nothing "direct" about predicting the future behavior of a California parole board by looking at the past behavior of a Texas parole board operating under entirely different circumstances.
There's something very direct about the California parole of a murderer who had his death sentence commuted, resulting in a new murder within a year.
You're grasping at straws here QB. Most contrite, well behaved prisoners are eventually released, regardless of their past. In California as well as other states. The likelihood ebbs and flows, but eventually a combination of advanced age and lack of money results in their release. To claim that the past is not a predictor of the future in this regard is just silly.
And once released, some of them kill again.
You're grasping at straws
I'm grasping at nothing other than a straight answer, something you consistently avoid.
Where did this little fact come from? Also from your Texas study? Or some other source?
You're assuming the conditional on the flimsiest of evidence. If Williams' sentence is commuted; AND if he is granted a parole hearing; AND if he wins release; AND if his change of heart is not genuine; THEN he might commit another murder.
And you say I'm grasping at straws?
Why not take your argument
Why not take your argument to its putatively logical conclusion, dw:
Some people convicted of murder aren't sentenced to death. Some of those people, upon their release commit additional crimes. Some people sentenced to death escape from prison before their execution date. Some people convicted of murder commit acts of violence against other prison inmates. Some file appeals and win, even though they're guilty.
Therefore, all persons convicted of murder should be executed immediately.
"Killing Tookie shows that
"Killing Tookie shows that the state is willing and able to protect people from the most dangerous criminals. If people loose faith that the law is even capable of doing that, then they will take the law into their own hands."
Tookie Williams is not merely a "most dangerous criminal." At some point, he must be viewed as a master organizer and leader. There are implications to his death beyond four murders. Sure life is important - it's precious and irreplaceable...and wasted everyday. 73,000 (minimum) died during the last natural disaster in Pakistan. Four times that many perished in the tsunami. So murder and death are a part of life. Thounsands of Iraqis have died in a war not of their own choosing, nor wrought by the intelligent hand of benign leadership. Is Dubya "the most dangerous criminal," or simply a well-placed organizer and leader with access to WMD (destruction) and WMD (distraction)?
Williams established the foundation and core principles for one of the largest, most viable criminal networks in the history of the world. Wanna kill him now? Start with Dubya? Why not? Some convoluted political answer predicated on recognizing the "legality" of the united states? that same definition would have resulted in isaac sears being hung by the brits three centuries ago. there are no rules or laws except what you can impose or cause to be imposed...tookie made his own rules and may die by someone else's, but not because he is the "most dangerous criminal." That's simply preposterous. What could be farther from the truth?
- Maybe, the notion that some evil dictaker in a land far away has evil designs (as part of his axis of evil) to undertake an evil plan to attack this land...maybe, the leaders of this land sponsored and supported this man long ago when he was good, but now he is evil and so we must remake him and his land to prevent them from doing evil things...maybe we should do this thing because we are good and he is evil and we know he is evil because we said he is evil and we would not say he is evil if he were not really evil...right??
cobb probably liked nursery school alot more than the rest of us, and has simply decided not to leave. it's time for my nap.
T3 runnin' the mojo down
T3 runnin' the mojo down about pookie and ray ray and dem. They could run a fortune five, given half the chance. When you think about it, their business ethics or lack thereof differ little from the corporate dons Cobb genuflects to everyday.
I'm all for capital punishment the minute it applies to white collar crimes like looting saving and loans, ripping off pension funds, war profiteering, or lying the country into war. Make Kenny-boy Lay's pillaging of Enron a capital offense. Then fry the bitch for wrecking the lives of thousands of innocent people. He deserves it far more than Tookie.
Duke Cunningham's facing ten years in the joint for taking two million in bribes while sitting in Congress. Bubba and Skillet in the joint serving 25 to 30 for slinging rock on the corner at ten cents a hit. They call that justice in America. No wonder the Supreme Court's facade is cracking.
but why is it a
but why is it a basketball-sized piece?? DC?? it's racial!! LOL.
Therefore, all persons
Therefore, all persons convicted of murder should be executed immediately.
Ok.
I'd make exceptions depending on the reason for the murder, and I'd investigate cases where doubt exists until doubt ceases to exist. But I wouldn't have any problem with all "murder with malice" convictions resuting in a quick execution.
For exactly the reasoning you provided, QB.
I'd make exceptions
But that means you'll run the risk that some of these people might get released and commit another murder. Better to just kill 'em, the sooner the better.
Now that we've got all the
Now that we've got all the convicted murderers out of the way, let's move on and see who else represents a risk of possible future murder, shall we?
We can kill all them next.
it could be like old
it could be like old Rome...get 'em all in the coliseum - make 'em fight each other to the death, charge admission...sign me up for the pay per view.
sign me up for the pay per
Hey! There's our shot at the big money. We'll put executions on the teevee at $49.95. What good is bloodlust if you can't turn a profit on it?
Now that we've got all the
Now that we've got all the convicted murderers out of the way, let's move on and see who else represents a risk of possible future murder, shall we?
Everyone represents a risk of possible future murder, but:
1. Very few people do murder, on the order of 1 per 1,500 people, or less, depending on what you count as "murder". Even those who exhibit anti-social behavior remain highly unlikely to murder, so we can't act in a way which punishes someone who never has murdered.
2. The rate of reoffense is dramatically higher than the rate at which non-offenders murder (more like 1 per 15, would be far higher if not for long prison terms for murder conviction). A murderer has placed himself in a high risk group, a group which, when released, will go on to commit more murders.
OK, then let's limit it to
OK, then let's limit it to serial murder.
So there it is. If we don't kill 'em, some of them will commit murder. It's too risky to experiment.
charge admission...sign me
Oh, hell yes, T3, you are an entertainment genius. We can pop off two or three during halftime at the Super Bowl. We'll let Miss America throw the switch right after a roaring flyover by our newest and most expensive fighter jets. After that, the winner of the PowerBall drawing chooses whether to yank the costume offa Janet Jackson or launch some illegal Meskin immigrants out of a catapult into the shark-filled waters off of beautiful, sunny San Diego.
Make it $54.95.
but why is it a
Because a "hockey-puck-sized piece" just doesn't sound right, does it?
no, besides we all know that
no, besides we all know that pucks are black. LOL i think we may be about 15 years ahead of our time, but there will be a demand for this stuff again - somewhere...maybe europe.
i think we may be about 15
That's OK. I'm betting Ms. Jackson will still be looking pretty good, even then.
They are also fascinated
Say, YOU seem to be kinda "fascinated with authority" there yourself, dw. You know what we gotta do. No hard feelings.
If Cobb is talking about
If Cobb is talking about white people's faith in the police agencies of the state we all know that it means little with regard to a black person having been accused of a crime. The town of Coatesville (Detroit Piston's guard Ray Hamilton's home town for all you roundball junkies) is within relatively short driving distance from where I live. Coatesville was the site of Pennsylvania's last recognized lynching which took place in 1913.
A black man who had recently arrived from Virginia got into an argument with a white security guard at Lukens Steel Company. Their verbal tiff escalated into a full blown, knock down, drag out fight. The black man, who was known to have a taste for liquor and a bad temper, won the fight. In fact, the white security guard who was a well known and beloved local figure died as a result of the injuries he suffered during the fight.
A white mob came into the hospital where the black man had been admitted because of his injuries and dragged him while he was still chained to a hospital bed out into the streets and to a local wooded area. The police had mysteriously disappeared from the hospital minutes before the crowd arrived. The black man was thrown into a pit and doused with a flammable liquid and set afire. The black man somehow managed to get out of that burning hell three separate times before being forced back by the crowd. He was literally roasted alive.
White folks don't need much provocation or justification to take the law into their own hands when they feel that justice needs to be meted out to a black person.
White folks don't need much
White folks don't need much provocation or justification to take the law into their own hands when they feel that justice needs to be meted out to a black person.
Doesn't it seem important that that was 92 years ago PT, and it hasn't happened since?
oh, how soon we forget...the
oh, how soon we forget...the bombing of the Greenwood district in Tulsa was after 1913...so was the case of the Scottsboro Boys...and so were the assassinations of King and others...the case of Pennsylvania hardly stands as the last such national case of significance with respect to white folks transgressing their own laws. After all, in Rome, the "freedmen" and the slaves were in much the same category. Same thing here. So, I'd rather not dig it all up...head over to skip gates or lerone bennett and catch yo' sef up on all the latest happenings since 1913. It's not pretty...
by the way, pt, i went to high school near coatesville - in pottstown, at the hill school...and don't say it!!
You know it would be very
You know it would be very cool to have Kody Scott in on this conversation. In many ways, he's just like Tookie, except Scott doesn't hide behind the facade of Nobel nominees. I happen to think that Scott, aka Sanyika Shakur had reformed, but I also did so placing a certain amount of faith in the system that put him away. Since he was released, and was never sentenced to death, in my eyes he had paid his debt to society. There was a certain leap of faith that he had to prove his right to be free in society again by never crossing over the line, but for all intents and purposes I saw him as redeemed.
Scott recognized the entire dynamic of leadership in young boys and all that. I can imagine very well that Tookie understands the same thing, but Scott was smart enough to demonstrate that he had no desire to step back into that role. I am no convinced that Tookie has any such sense. Aside from his not paying his debt to society, which the jury has decided is death, Tookie hasn't even been forthcoming enough to admit to the killings. He won't man up, and what slimy supporter would blame him? He shot civilians in the back, a low crime in any society in any era.
I don't see whites and blacks as any different in their proclivities to go wilding, and while it's an interesting inkblot to watch you guess what I'm trying to say, that's a non-starter. I see all people as peasants until they demonstrate their ability and willingness to work in the context of higher standards for themselves and for the commons. Most people are selfish, lawless rabble, period. Those of us with something to lose need to stand by fair laws and law enforcement. Further we should by noblesse encourage all rabble to put down their pitchforks from time to time. I have no problem putting down cops who defy their code of honor, but that has no bearing on the politics of the Coalition of the Damned. They don't care if its Fuhrman or Bratton, all they see are the billy clubs upside the heads of their lawless, peasant rabble cousins. They look for Robin Hood and end up with Tookie. Too bad, but also shame on us who are more capable of real heroics.
On more point I'd like to
On more point I'd like to make with regard to redemption, heroism and forgiveness. I'll keep it simple.
Consider for a moment the moral standing of anyone here who has never been involved in criminal organizations and the murder of innocents. The same balance sheet that gives any of us the right to forgive Tookie for his ruthless killings, should tally up well in our favor were we to break into his prison and slash his throat.
If I'm bloodthirsty in writing, I'm still an order of magnitude better man than Tookie. So are you.
What do you believe hasn't
What do you believe hasn't happened since 1913?
Most people are selfish,
Most people are selfish, lawless rabble, period.
Well, you can take black folks out of liberalism but you can't take away the effects of a liberal education. How many times did you read "Lord of the Flies'?
The same balance sheet that
The same balance sheet that gives any of us the right to forgive Tookie for his ruthless killings, should tally up well in our favor were we to break into his prison and slash his throat.
I don't want to forgive Tookie for murdering people. My complaint, my good brother, is simple: I don't believe in putting people to death for their crimes. I believe that folks who can't control their behavior need to be placed in environments where their behavior can be controlled to some extent and monitored. Tookie has given ample proof that he can't control or finds it extremely difficult to control his behavior. I am not willing to risk my life or the lives of others by putting him back on the street but I don't understand your lust for his blood. You keep trying to teach what you need to learn.
Your faith is misplaced. Prison is for punishment.
Okay, he renounced the gangs and thug life, accepted responsibility for creating the Crips and took action to cool them out. Writes childrens books, but only after being convinced to go public by a researcher that became convinced he'd changed. Behaved as well as Shakur did. There's nothing else he can do...but you've already said that.
No matter how you justify it verbally, you just want him dead and nothing will change that.
The whole "debt to society" angle is bullshit because no reparations are paid. This is about vengeance...which the Lord says is His.
Boring. Repetition. Responded to about three times...
(Silly rant ignored - on to the next comment)
If you really believe that, you're of the same material as Tookie, just poured into a different mold.
God's not in the revenge
God's not in the revenge business. That's the job of the people. If God didn't want us to have revenge, he would have made us incapable of comprehending it. You're damn right it's about vengeance, and the proper context of that is The People vs Stanley Williams.
It's interesting to speak of the 'debt to society' as bullshit with regard to reparations. What Tookie took in lives, he paid back with children's books and fluffy pronouncements of redemption. How does this square in your mind? The people of the jury and every lawyer under the sun he could get in 25 years under all possible circumstances the system allows have not been able to repay the debt or even show that the death sentence was not appropriate to the case. He has met absolutely none of the criteria society has set out for legal recourse except this last one - which he certainly has a right to. I am not convinced that he deserves clemency. It's a subjective matter, but we're all giving subjective arguments.
What is objective is that the People of the State of California have decided as well as they could that Tookie deserved capital punishment. None have been able to undo that decision. Tookie is as dead a man walking as the law is real. Whether I personally want him dead is beside the point. I want the system to work, and I believe it will.
God's not in the revenge
That's not what The Book says.
Now ptc and Cobb both said something similar, but using different words.
ptc:I don't want to forgive Tookie for murdering people. My complaint, my good brother, is simple: I don't believe in putting people to death for their crimes.
Cobb: Whether I personally want him dead is beside the point. I want the system to work, and I believe it will.
Let's get over the idea that this argument is about what anyone wants for Mr. Williams. This fight is about what we want for the rest of us.
I want the system to work,
I've remained conspicuously quiet about Tookie because he's stank and frankly, I don't give a damn about him. It's really only your unquestioning and uncritical allegiance to the stank system and the extreme example of Tookie that you've milked for all it's worth to justify the same - that is worthy of scrutiny in this whole mix. Your enthusiasm for this one example, while understandable, greatly diminishes you.
Enjoy it while you can Cobb. Once Tookie is gone, you'll have lost perhaps the single best anomaly you'll have ever had for justifying what are otherwise mainly uncritical and unworthy apologetics for a system by no means less stank than Tookie's damn self.
This fight is about what we
Gawd I love it when the Internet demonstrates the reality of quantum entanglement and orchestrated objective reduction at a distance...,
that's what i said...hey
that's what i said...hey today's friday...serve up the red herring.
I've taken the trouble to