Tookie Williams execution... What do you think??

[eXo]

I was just wondering where my fellow PSO world goers stand on this issue and what re your opinions about Arnold.

[rena-ko]

its barbaric and medieval to use execution as method to punish crime.

[eXo]

Yes i agree and regaurdless of what he did or didnt do 21 years ago,he has since written multiple childrens books been a standout convict in the scared stright program and has also been a nobel peace prize finalist 5 times.

[Jehosaphaty]

On 2005-12-13 15:10, rena-ko wrote:
its barbaric and medieval to use execution as method to punish crime.



you do the crime, you pay the price. cliche yes. but its always been an eye for an eye since the beginning of time. hell, in some cultures you grab the death penalty for something such as stealing. can we, though, as humans justify the taking of said life? my biggest beef is that arnold was even given the opportunity to pardon the man. if the court system found him guilty in fair process, who is arnold to go back against their decision?



On 2005-12-13 15:16, eXo wrote:
Yes i agree and regaurdless of what he did or didnt do 21 years ago,he has since written multiple childrens books been a standout convict in the scared stright program and has also been a nobel peace prize finalist 5 times.


whoopdeedo. he wrote some books, said hes sorry. noble peace prize finalist or not, does that all add up enough for him to have been pardoned?



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Jehosaphaty on 2005-12-13 15:24 ]</font>

[ABDUR101]

My stance on murder, you take someone's life in cold blood and without remorse, you lose your rights as a person.

However, in the time he's been in prison, he's changed to a voice of reason. He's written books, he's spoken against what he's done and encouraged youth to learn from his mistakes.

You don't silence a voice of reason, someone who's been down the path and is trying to protect and stop what they started. The family's that lost loved ones, they got their revenge, and thats all it came down to. However, getting revenge is no different than what the Crips and opposing gangs do every day.

Someone fires a shot, then there's a shot of vengeance, and back and forth it goes. The families got their revenge, at the cost of any and all good Tookie could have done to persuade others from going down the same path.

[eXo]

Yea i agree with you on the eye for an eye theory but we must remember that he was convicted on word of mouth, there was no DNA or fingerprints just thats the guy arrest him although we all kinda know he did it http://pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_lol.gif

[Blitzkommando]

He caused more harm than anything, what with starting one of the worst gangs in California's history. He killed, he got what he deserved.

[Parn]

On 2005-12-13 15:26, ABDUR101 wrote:
However, getting revenge is no different than what the Crips and opposing gangs do every day.
Indeed! And when someone downloads MP3s, they committed a crime and thus are just as horrible a person as say, Adolf Hitler, who also committed crimes!

Isn't oversimplifying things great? I mean, we could have a sample scenario, like say... this guy named Billy. Billy is stronger than everyone else in the village! We could have Billy maul your entire family's skulls into pulp, but he doesn't deserve death for that. Why, just two days ago, he walked an old lady across the street! And what about all the driveways he shoveled all the snow off of during the last two winters? Man, his strength came in handy that time! For real. He should totally live.

[Solstis]

Let us all decide what the limits of redemption are.

[ABDUR101]

On 2005-12-13 17:08, Parn wrote:
Indeed! And when someone downloads MP3s, they committed a crime and thus are just as horrible a person as say, Adolf Hitler, who also committed crimes!

Isn't oversimplifying things great? I mean, we could have a sample scenario, like say... this guy named Billy. Billy is stronger than everyone else in the village! We could have Billy maul your entire family's skulls into pulp, but he doesn't deserve death for that. Why, just two days ago, he walked an old lady across the street! And what about all the driveways he shoveled all the snow off of during the last two winters? Man, his strength came in handy that time! For real. He should totally live.


Except this came down to a 'tit for tat' game. More so to please people that needed pleasing.

Prison is a form of rehabilitation, not just to 'keep the bad people away'. Atleast he acknowledged what he did, and the path he led, and made steps to speak against it, to inform youths to not make the same mistakes he did.

Seriously, you have one bad son of a bitch, with a record, with a name for himself, and he's saying, look, all of that, it was wrong, learn from me, learn from my wrongs and lead a better life.

And honestly, if Hitler weren't such a fucking nut-case and had actually been incarcerated for his crimes, and if eventually turned around and said, 'My God, what I did was so wrong.' and became a voice for tolerance, yes, he'd still be a bad motherfucker that would spend the rest of his life in an extremely heavily guarded prison, but he'd atleast be a voice of reason, and that is a tool to be used against everything he stood for prior.

It's not about letting people off the hook for what they did, just because they turned over a new leaf. It's about letting them speak, when the voice they are trying to use, is a voice for bettering society, to stop the wrongs that they started, from causing more ripples.

Effectively, the moment he stopped beleiving that what he did was right, the people he killed, the disorder he caused, when he realised that all of that was wrong, and started speaking against it, thats when he became a benefit to society.

But whats it matter right? He's dead. So all we can do is hope the good he did do, comes to fruition in some youths from now on.

[Dre_o]

My problem with the death penalty is that, cliche or not, it's not equivilent exchange. You can't bring a life back by taking a life. It doesn't work like that. He would do more good in jail and writing books, than dead, you don't get time to try as hard as you can to make up for your mistakes if you are dead..

[Uncle_bob]

He killed four people, he got what he worked for. What really makes me giggle is that he's gone and there's nothing anyone can do about it.

[Parn]

On 2005-12-13 17:39, ABDUR101 wrote:
Atleast he acknowledged what he did
Except that he... didn't? That was why Arnold rejected the pleas for clemency.

Of course, this leads to another debate entirely, that being his innocence to begin with.

[VioletSkye]

So long, farewell, auf Wiedersehen, goodbye.

I'm 100% for the death penalty. If you brutally murder someone/s, then I say it's checkout time at World Hotel. It doesn't matter to me that their execution won't bring the victims back to life (DUH, that's a given.) It doesn't matter that they "find Jesus/God/Jehovah/Buddha/Allah/insert deity here" and claim to have changed their ways. It doesn't matter that they did some "good" while incarcerated (although it's nice that they weren't total pricks the entire time they were locked up.) What matters is that they will no longer have the chance to kill again. I'm not against rehabiliation for certain crimes, but murder isn't one of them. To tookie I say, goodbye and good riddance. That's one less cancer cell that our infected planet has to deal with.

[Madzozs]

Remember he wasn't going to be pardoned. He was hoping for a stay of execution. Very big difference.

Also, he never took "credit" for the murders. He never did say he was innocent, but he did say he wanted to testify to prove his innocence in one of the murders at least. He wasn't allowed to do this, but since when does "Innocent until Proven Guilty" hold water these days?

If you think about it, he wasn't even mentioned as a murderer nearly as much as he was mentioned as the founder of the Crips. It is almost as if he was killed for this and not for the crime which he was tried.

I'm not going to read anything anyone replies to this seeing as I don't expect many logical replies. No that is not an insult, it's the truth. People have a hard time looking at the whole picture.

[Parn]

Indeed, because anyone not seeing the world in Madzozs' perspective is clearly an illogical person, incapable of seeing the whole picture!

It's amazing that the entirety of academia hasn't been swayed already.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Parn on 2005-12-13 19:50 ]</font>

[Madzozs]

Well I sometimes can't help myself. I just want to thank the above poster for proving me right.

If you read what I wrote you would've seen that I made no such claims. Your entire message was simply nothing more than a trolling statement or a mild flame.

Once again, I did not intend to insult anyone, I just merely stated my opinion, followed by a fact which has been proven already.

[Parn]

On 2005-12-13 19:44, Madzozs wrote:
I'm not going to read anything anyone replies to this seeing as I don't expect many logical replies.
Not only are you pretentious, you're also a liar.

By the way, I meant that in a totally non-insulting manner. You know, because it's "just my opinion". It's neat how these two-way streets work!

[Jehosaphaty]

before things descend to hell, did anyone notice the naacp stuck their nose into the situation?



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Jehosaphaty on 2005-12-13 20:13 ]</font>

[PJ]

Because I'm ignorant on the whole case, I've only got one thing to say.


An eye for an eye, and we'd all go blind.

[Parn]

Because the guy's black.

I seriously can't stand how people are making this guy out to be some kind of proponent of peace. An interesting fact: his topselling book "Gangs and Violence" sold 330 copies. 330. That's it. No one is reading this stuff, certainly not the target audience, and especially not his own two sons whom are in trouble with the law as well.

How's that for "looking at the whole picture"?

[Rion772]

Murder is inhumane no matter what way and for whatever reason you do it. Murdering another man for murdering others is doing unjust acts unto fellow man, it's wrong. What's going on in Iraq is very wrong, there's murder everywhere and even though we're killing them because they're killing us it's not right. Can you imagine the hundreds of thousands of affected family members, families are crying right now for american and iraqis losses. War anywhere is morally wrong, but without it there's no doubt hitlers saga based upon discrimination would be ran by his son and the world would be pwned.

I don't think punishing someone by killing them is proper, if you want someone to suffer leave them to rot away in prison, it must be painful during the holidays for them. Murdering him was wrong, it was an act of mercy. What would you prefer? Dying of old age in a prison, being alone, without your family, being sad, getting beaten up sometimes or having someone put you out of your misery. People just don't understand that living in prison, being locked away from your loved ones is worse than getting put down like a dog. People just think things like "This guy killed 4 people, now his happy life will come to an end! That's so awful! HAHAHA! Serves him right" but it's actually more like "This guy lives everyday, away from safety, away from his family. There's no good coming from that, he's probably miserable and if we left him be miserable he'll suffer more and be punished at the maximum". I think that if they really wanted him to suffer they should have left him to die in his cell, his life doesn't make up for the 4 that he took.

[Parn]

Murder by definition is unlawful killing. Tookie was killed under the laws of the United States, and thus it was not murder.

[Rion772]

On 2005-12-13 20:29, Parn wrote:
Murder by definition is unlawful killing. Tookie was killed under the laws of the United States, and thus it was not murder.


So, just because the government said it was ok to kill him, it's not murder? Yeah that's bullshit. Murder is murder, no law can really say that if you kill someone it's not murder. So, if you believe in God, and you kill someone but it's not murder by definition do you honestly think God won't care? "Oh yay! I fuc!<ed up and made that guy a killer so this guy killed that guy! It's perfectly fine, it's ok to kill!" If someone kills people and you kill them to justify their crime that doesn't make any sense. Like I said, 1 life cannot make up for 4, if you honestly believe it does you've got some real bad problems. That's the same thing as you getting bored and go kill 20,000 people then after you're killed that makes up for the thousands that you killed, it doesn't work that way at all.

Also, murder and killing are the same partially. If I kill you, you're dead. If I murder you, you're dead. You still took the life of another, it's STILL wrong.

[KodiaX987]

Waaah waaaah he doesnt think like i do ban him waaaah waaaah.

Sorry to interrupt your boner party, boys, but hey, someone had to fit that in.

If ya got a problem with how justice is dealt in your area, phone the governor and tell him your mindless drivel. It may do zero difference in the world, but it's still a thousand times more than the difference you'll make on a forum throwing shit at each other like this was the latest jihad bandwagon.

[Parn]

Let me break this down into simple terms: All murders are killing, but all killings are not murders. Crack open a dictionary. Seriously.

Besides that, your one-size-fits-all policy regarding killing is ridiculous. If your family was held at gunpoint and you had to make the choice between his life or your family's, you'd be insane to not take his life. By your logic, not killing him is OK with you, but him killing your family is A-OK.

It's a good thing you have your priorities straight!

[Rion772]

On 2005-12-13 20:42, Parn wrote:
Let me break this down into simple terms: All murders are killing, but all killings are not murders. Crack open a dictionary. Seriously.

Besides that, your one-size-fits-all policy regarding killing is ridiculous. If your family was held at gunpoint and you had to make the choice between his life or your family's, you'd be insane to not take his life. By your logic, not killing him is OK with you, but him killing your family is A-OK.

It's a good thing you have your priorities straight!


If I had to, if anyone had to, killing someone to save several others makes sense. But the people this guy killed are dead, not at risk so it's over. We killed some dude because he killed 4 people 20 years ago or whatever, not because it'll save lives. What do you think we do with ebola? It's HIGHLY contagious and when (this is an example) monkeys got Ebola you would kill that monkey and any other monkey it come in contact with. To sacrifice a person or people to save many more has nothing to do with killing a guy who did something that's over and done with.

[Saiffy]

I'd like to believe the people that run the world we live in always do the right thing, and they were right in giving him the death penalty, even if we do or don't think so.

Can't we pretend that's true and move on?

[geewj]

On 2005-12-13 21:00, Saiffy wrote:
I'd like to believe the people that run the world we live in always do the right thing, and they were right in giving him the death penalty, even if we do or don't think so.

Can't we pretend that's true and move on?



I think the people do run the world, and that everyone needs to remember that.

[eXo]

Ok i understand where everyone is coming from but i have one quick questiuon... do you think that the person who is ordered to pull the swith on the chair or the one who delivers the leathal injection, will go to hell when his/her time comes because lets face it. What that person did was murder no different from what tookie or any other killer has done?
Last a checked murder was a sin punishable by a ticket on the highway to hell?

[Parn]

Did I slip into an alternate dimension or something? You know, where dictionaries don't exist? Tookie was not murdered, he was executed. They are not synonymous, just like apples and oranges are not synonymous. They may both be fruits, but that doesn't make them the same.

Good grief.

[eXo]

Ok good point but maybe i missed my point, what i am trying to get across is that the bible says that god deals with everyone in his own way and that no one should attempt to play god. And thats exactly what execution is someone taking life or death into there on hands, and as far as titles are concerned when it comes to death execution and murder are just like comparing assassination and murder.No matter how you slice it the person killed someone, because someone told them to.

[eXo]

hmm maybe i shouldnt have refrenced the bible this is not a topic about religion, so lets stick to the topic sorry once again about that =D

[geewj]

On 2005-12-14 09:39, eXo wrote:
hmm maybe i shouldnt have refrenced the bible this is not a topic about religion, so lets stick to the topic sorry once again about that =D



Especially since the bible is pro death penalty.

[Madzozs]

ex·e·cu·tion - 1.
1. The act of executing something.
2. The state of being executed.
2. The manner, style, or result of performance: The plan was sound; its execution, faulty.
3. The act or an instance of putting to death or being put to death as a lawful penalty.
4. Law.
1. The carrying into effect of a court judgment.
2. A writ empowering an officer to enforce a judgment.
3. Validation of a legal document by the performance of all necessary formalities.
5. Archaic. Effective, punitive, or destructive action.


Copied from dictionary.com.

Now here is the thing, when people are killed in hostage situations, they are executed(but at the same time murdered).

In prisons, people are executed for what is considered a lawful penalty.

This is all in reference to the religious question mentioned by someone above this post(sorry I forgot the name). It would seem that by definition the killing would be considered lawful, but as far as the man who throws the switch it is kind of open ended. The definition at least doesn't spare that person, nor does it condemn them. I think that instead of hell, they have to go home at night knowing that a person had died because of what they did. Doesn't matter if it was done in a just manner, it still probably wears on you.

[Eihwaz]

It's a real shame that this guy didn't write childrens books against violence until after he started one of the most vicious gangs in the US and murdered four innocent people. It seems that people like this don't care about what happens to those around them, but as soon as they get in trouble - BAM! They've found Jesus and written a bunch of children's books. http://pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_nono.gif

What's even more obscene is how there are all these people going around saying "He's innocent! Arnold Schwarzenegger killed an innocent man!" I seriously do not think that Schwarzenegger would have given the order to execute unless he was 100% sure that this guy was guilty. He looked at the evidence, realized he was guilty, and denied clemency.

From what I've heard, Williams did not sound like he had admitted to doing wrong, only that he wrote some books in prison that were anti-violence. And going off of what Parn said, it doesn't sound like they were too popular. Personally, considering the crimes he's committed (starting a bloody gang and murdering four people), and the fact he, as far as I know, never said "I was wrong", I don't think he deserved clemency.

Like Abdur said, maybe some of his books will help out some kids, and that would be the best thing this guy ever did.

[Blitzkommando]

Apparently people don't know the process, so I shall elaborate how lethal injection is done. It is not just one man that does it. It is multiple, at (essentially) the same time so that no one person is responsible for the execution. That is how firing squads worked as well, so nobody knew exactly who fired the bullet that did it. It is for the sake of legality and for the sake of peace of mind. Nobody knows for sure who is responsible so no one person can be brought to blame. Basically it requires more than one person to push the button / throw the switch / pull the trigger to do an execution.

[Madzozs]

On 2005-12-14 12:33, Norvekh wrote:
Apparently people don't know the process, so I shall elaborate how lethal injection is done. It is not just one man that does it. It is multiple, at (essentially) the same time so that no one person is responsible for the execution. That is how firing squads worked as well, so nobody knew exactly who fired the bullet that did it. It is for the sake of legality and for the sake of peace of mind. Nobody knows for sure who is responsible so no one person can be brought to blame. Basically it requires more than one person to push the button / throw the switch / pull the trigger to do an execution.





Firing squads I knew of, that is why I did not mention them in my post. I was unaware of this for the injections/electrocution. I will have to look into it.

[eXo]

I was aware that it requires multiple people to perform an state execution, but i thought that they switch was pulled in a specific order.

[InfinityXXX]

Well, I have mixed feelings about Tookie Williams.

Part of me says that he deserved his execution and part of me says he don't.

When I first heard about Tookie WIlliams about 5 or 8 years ago I felt that his death should be decided by the family of those he murdered. But there was some anger in me too for he is the co-founder of the crips....a gang that,in my town, gets on my damn nerves.

But then I saw him potrayed by Jamie Foxx in the movie, Redemption and I learned of all the good he done like children's book. Though I don't think this is good enough but I REALLY got mixed feelings when I heard that there was no physical evidence, no fingerprints, the footprints at the scene of one of the crimes wasn't even his size and that the sole reason he was sent to jail was for the testimonies by crackheads or people that benefitted by testifying.

Then I started questioning his execution.

I don't really have a solid opinion becase I'm fighting within myself on whether or not he should've been executed but I do wanna say...

that he was human, and theres some good in every human, so I hope Jah have mercy on him.
-----------------------
I do want to say something on a much more lighter note.....I found myself laughing everytime the News showed the old picture of Tookie Williams all buffed up with the tight clothes and Afro.

[eXo]

On 2005-12-14 20:12, InfinityXXX wrote:
Well, I have mixed feelings about Tookie Williams.

Part of me says that he deserved his execution and part of me says he don't.

When I first heard about Tookie WIlliams about 5 or 8 years ago I felt that his death should be decided by the family of those he murdered. But there was some anger in me too for he is the co-founder of the crips....a gang that,in my town, gets on my damn nerves.

But then I saw him potrayed by Jamie Foxx in the movie, Redemption and I learned of all the good he done like children's book. Though I don't think this is good enough but I REALLY got mixed feelings when I heard that there was no physical evidence, no fingerprints, the footprints at the scene of one of the crimes wasn't even his size and that the sole reason he was sent to jail was for the testimonies by crackheads or people that benefitted by testifying.

Then I started questioning his execution.

I don't really have a solid opinion becase I'm fighting within myself on whether or not he should've been executed but I do wanna say...

that he was human, and theres some good in every human, so I hope Jah have mercy on him.
-----------------------
I do want to say something on a much more lighter note.....I found myself laughing everytime the News showed the old picture of Tookie Williams all buffed up with the tight clothes and Afro.



well said

[Niki]

I am against the death penalty. Period.

[space_butler]

On 2005-12-14 21:41, Niki wrote:
I am against the death penalty. Period.


as am I.

[fronebullare]

I say..too bad. He should have realized that his past was going to catch up to him sooner or later.

[Kent]

I've never heard of a "Tookie Williams" until yesterday, but here's what I have to say about justice...

If you think saying you're sorry, writing some children's books, or whatever, is going to make people forgive you for killing people, thou art a fool. :/

You can't undo killing someone. You still killed someone, and there should be no way you can relieve yourself of any of the punishment you deserve for it.

There are some other things that, yeah, you could possibly make up for. But killing someone, murder or not, is something I will look down on someone for, to no end; be it "murder," "execution," or otherwise.

[EphekZ]

What wazzy said was very true. It will always be true.
Criminals like him get caught doing bad stuff and suddenly have a change of heart. Has any ever heard of "you're only sorry becuase you got caught"? yea same principle.

Death penalty I'm for it you know why? Becuase its better then people living their lives in death row. Also you know where our money goes like taxes? OMG no way, its to keeping them alive. we pay for their food and everything. America is very weird, mainly it's a capitalistic society but when it comes to the government it has to be socialist, woot?

[HUnewearl_Meira]

On 2005-12-13 20:38, Rion772 wrote:
So, if you believe in God, and you kill someone but it's not murder by definition do you honestly think God won't care?


In religious terms, you are absolutely wrong. There is an inherent difference between an Execution and a Murder. Consider the laws the Hebrews lived under, which, as the story goes, were sanctioned by God.



The Book of Numbers 35:16

If a man strikes someone with an iron object so that he dies, he is a murderer; the murderer shall be put to death.
(Emphasis added)


So if you're looking to religiously justify any sort of argument for or against the lawful execution of murderers, then it's apparent that God is in favor of the death penalty.

In case there's any other question on whether God is in favor of today's more violent political topics, I would refer you to Ecclesiastes 3 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=25&chapter=3&version=31&context=chapter).


Now to justify the execution non-religiously, consider this: Had Tookie not been faced with the hard reality that his crimes had severe consequences, would he have become the "voice of reason" he is described as having become? I submit that without the enforcement of such consequences, a hardened man would not be likely to change his ways. Had the decision been made to not execute him, then the reality of the Death Penalty as a consequence would lose significance.


What I find people don't understand is that there must be a balance of all things for anything to run smoothly. Perhaps if only "bad" things happened, then surely we would all die, but on the other hand, if only "good" things happened, then we would be unmotivated and we would never improve-- everything would be too easy. So really, the only time something "bad" happens, is when a general balance is thrown off, and it doesn't matter whether that act of unbalancing was committed toward what we normally consider a "good" cause or what we normally consider a "bad" cause. Regardless of what anyone may believe, I believe that one way or another, the Universe knows what it's doing, and will find its own way to its end in whatever the proper manner may turn out to be, regardless of what we do to try to stay or advance it.

So in short, the most basic rule of the universe can be summed up in an anacronism: What happens, happens.

[space_butler]

On 2005-12-15 20:36, darkgunner wrote:
Death penalty I'm for it you know why? Becuase its better then people living their lives in death row. Also you know where our money goes like taxes? OMG no way, its to keeping them alive. we pay for their food and everything. America is very weird, mainly it's a capitalistic society but when it comes to the government it has to be socialist, woot?



theres one thing that annoys me about the 'omfg mi tax iz keeping bad d00dz alive' argument, its how little value americans seem to have for a human life. (just generalising here, its normally americans or pensioners in favour of executions) its perfectly fine for your tax dollars to fund wars, nukes and other fun things like that, but its bad to use them to keep people in prison? seems like a bit of a stupid argument to me.

[KodiaX987]

Actually, (devil's advocate alert!), a death sentence is usually more expensive than a lifetime jail sentence, because those faced with a death sentence must first use any and all means to defend themselves before being put to death. Therefore, expect much higher court times than the norm from those guys. They can be on death row for at least a dozen years before finally exhausting their means of defence, and those years are far more expensive than just a plate of food everyday 'till your natural death.

[Kent]

...Wasn't there some discussion going on a while back, about making prisoners pay for their own staying in a prison, before using government money?

[InfinityXXX]

I personally know an inmate, and he said that those that are executed(especially by lethal injection) get it easier than those that serve or life.