Stay of execution denied for Stanley "Tookie" Williams

[Special K 0]

If someone leads a good life before they go out and kill 4 people, would that protect them from the death penalty?

 

As I said, anyone who spends that long in prison, guilty over their crimes, is going to be a changed person by the time their sentence is up, unless they're Ted Bundy.

 

He never apologized for his crimes, or gave up fellow Crips, (something that would have been a LOT more effective than a children's book) in terms of stopping gang warfare.

[Dangerous A 0]

A lot of Tookie supporters should've gotten on the same page. You had a part of them saying he didn't do the murders and they have the wrong guy, including Tookie, yet the other part of the supporters are playing the redemption card.

 

If he didn't do it, what is he redeemed from? He either didn't do it, and you're argument is they are potentially executing an innocent man or he did do it, and his anti-gang work since he's been incarcerated should hold weight for him not being executed.

 

I wonder, if Tookie wasn't caught for the 4 murders, would he have written children's books against gang life later on in life or would he have continued to live wrong? Guess it doesn't really matter anymore because they've already put him out.

[Sass 0]

If Tookie would have "helped" (see: snitch) out to any law enforcement folks, he'd have one of the biggest targets drawn on his back the following day. Plus, he was locked up in the hole for 6 years and it would have been difficult to gauge just how much relevent knowledge he had in order to curve the Crypts gang. That would have just been a crap shoot that Tookie could have possibly milked for another 20 + years.

 

I also still find it funny that scrwany little Jamie Fox played jaaaaaaccckkked up Tookie in a movie. Ving Rhames would have been a better casting choice than that little shit.

[Failed Bridge 0]

Ving Rhames is a terrible actor though. Maybe Michael Clarke Duncan, but not Ving Rhames.

[Stephen Joseph 0]

Just FYI, the death sentence, until appeals began lengthing the process, did serve as a deterrent.

 

Now it doesnt

 

thats what economics tells ya

[cbacon 0]

I don't agree with the death penalty. I think with the issue of the death penalty you either have to say yay or nay, and not be gray about it. Sure I won't be crying when some are executed, nor will I hold rallies to oppose it, but I don't think the death penalty accomplishes anything it is "supposed" to.

 

Are there some people that just won't change or should just eb put to death? Yep.

 

 

And what does putting them to death achieve exactly, other than some primitive form of "justice"?

Edited December 14, 2005 by C-Bacon

[CanadianGuitarist 0]

I don't agree with the death penalty. I think with the issue of the death penalty you either have to say yay or nay, and not be gray about it. Sure I won't be crying when some are executed, nor will I hold rallies to oppose it, but I don't think the death penalty accomplishes anything it is "supposed" to.

 

Are there some people that just won't change or should just eb put to death? Yep.

 

 

And what does putting them to death achieve exactly, other than some primitive form of "justice"?

 

A prevention of violent crimes happening agan, maybe?

 

Gonna tell me Bernardo wouldn't kill or rape again?

[Special K 0]

And what does putting them to death achieve exactly, other than some primitive form of "justice"?

 

You just answered your own question. It's a primitive form of justice, because we don't have the techonology to kill him four times.

 

If Tookie would have "helped" (see: snitch) out to any law enforcement folks, he'd have one of the biggest targets drawn on his back the following day. Plus, he was locked up in the hole for 6 years and it would have been difficult to gauge just how much relevent knowledge he had in order to curve the Crypts gang.

 

Crips, dude, Crips. And if he really gave a shit about stopping gang violence, whatever it takes helps. Plus having a target on you is slightly mitigated by the fact that he was on DEATH ROW.

Edited December 14, 2005 by Special K

[2GOLD 0]

And what does putting them to death achieve exactly, other than some primitive form of "justice"?

 

You just answered your own question. It's a primitive form of justice, because we don't have the techonology to kill him four times.

 

If Tookie would have "helped" (see: snitch) out to any law enforcement folks, he'd have one of the biggest targets drawn on his back the following day. Plus, he was locked up in the hole for 6 years and it would have been difficult to gauge just how much relevent knowledge he had in order to curve the Crypts gang.

 

Crips, dude, Crips. And if he really gave a shit about stopping gang violence, whatever it takes helps. Plus having a target on you is slightly mitigated by the fact that he was on DEATH ROW.

 

Plus what exactly would be the worse they could do to him? Kill him?

He never admitted he did anything wrong and a guy needs to show even the slightest amount of remorse to get a stay or new evidence has to come up. If Arnie got none of that, then children's books don't exactly sit as a reason to stop an execution...they are an add on if something more to show reason to give a stay. There was no reason cause Took didn't give one.

Edited December 14, 2005 by 2GOLD

[Failed Bridge 0]

Plus having a target on you is slightly mitigated by the fact that he was on DEATH ROW.

As soon as he's put in Gen Pop he's dead. If he's put in solitary then its even worse than being on Death Row. He didn't cooperate and ended up being executed.

 

He sure did have alot of great options to work with.

[Special K 0]

Nothing less than what he deserved, sorry to say. Point being, if he's going to die, he could do something a little bit more meaningful than writing a kid's book with an author.

[Failed Bridge 0]

He did. You just haven't done your homework on the matter and thus don't know of the other things he did.

[The Czech Republic 0]

Since then he helped save countless lives. He's dead now so it doesn't really matter either way, but I think it was stupid for them to kill their most effective tool against gang warfare.

It's still effective: "gang warware will get you killed"

 

I just don't think what he did was enough to strike his crimes off the books.

[Special K 0]

He did. You just haven't done your homework on the matter and thus don't know of the other things he did.

 

Why don't you enlighten me instead of being a pompous jackass?

 

Unless he saved a family from a burning building, it's probably not going to change that he ended four people's lives prematurely. Or that he didn't ever atone for his crimes.

[Failed Bridge 0]

I didn't say give him a pardon and a trip to Disney Land. They just could have let him continue to do positive work for the community while slowly rotting away in his cell. At least you know your tax dollars to keep him alive are coming around in a positive way with what he was doing for the community, rather than with throwing Cocaine Bob the Neighborhood Dealer behind bars where he'll probably make more connections and then help the decline of the community further when he finally gets out.

[Failed Bridge 0]

He did. You just haven't done your homework on the matter and thus don't know of the other things he did.

 

Why don't you enlighten me instead of being a pompous jackass?

 

Unless he saved a family from a burning building, it's probably not going to change that he ended four people's lives prematurely. Or that he didn't ever atone for his crimes.

Didn't mean to come off as a "pompous jackass", but really, he did more than that. As was said earlier in this thread he helped make peace between the Bloods and Crips which probably saved numerous innocent lives. I mean alot of the tactics used by each gang were drive-by shootings or rigging things with explosives, along with the occasional home invasion. For them to no longer be at war like they once were potentially saved countless lives.

He also allowed the juvenile courts to bring young children who were headed down the same path as he did to view him on Death Row where he could go about "scaring them straight" so to say. I'm sure he didn't get through to all of them but some had to have been affected and said "This isn't what I want", thus changing their attitude and becoming a productive member of society.

The last thing I know he did was speak to kids in the lower class schools about Gang Violence via satellite feed, and how they should avoid joining a gang or looking to drugs and alcohol. He did all that without recieving anything in return when alot of different Anti-Gang and Anti-Drug programs wouldn't touch those schools since they deemed those schools as "not worth the time". Like the kids were predestined to go down that path no matter what.

 

He spent his time on Death Row in a very productive manner. They could have just let all of that continue while keeping him in a shitty jail cell.

[Special K 0]

Good to know. Sorry, 'pompous jackass' was too strong.

[Guest Brian]

And the truce went a lot further than any ratting out would have done. I think that is the first big gang truce since the Panthers.

[cbacon 0]

I don't agree with the death penalty. I think with the issue of the death penalty you either have to say yay or nay, and not be gray about it. Sure I won't be crying when some are executed, nor will I hold rallies to oppose it, but I don't think the death penalty accomplishes anything it is "supposed" to.

 

Are there some people that just won't change or should just eb put to death? Yep.

 

 

And what does putting them to death achieve exactly, other than some primitive form of "justice"?

 

A prevention of violent crimes happening agan, maybe?

 

Gonna tell me Bernardo wouldn't kill or rape again?

 

Well, we don't know that. For all we know he could be rehabilitated. And that agrument strays away from the topic since Bernardo isn't even on death row, he's in jail for (presumably) life, which would be the case for Tookie had he not been killed.

 

The death penalty is not a proven deterrent, it costs less to keep them in prison and Tookie can't be commiting violent crimes if he's behind bars.

Edited December 15, 2005 by C-Bacon

[bob_barron 0]

Tookie had his chance to show own up to the crimes he committed and he never did.

 

Fuck him, he got what he deserved

[Guest Bazzil]

Well Tookie's dead, so I won't bother voicing my opinion on that matter, but as for that Maye dude, well that's just fucked up.

[snuffbox 0]

He did. You just haven't done your homework on the matter and thus don't know of the other things he did.

 

Why don't you enlighten me instead of being a pompous jackass?

 

Unless he saved a family from a burning building, it's probably not going to change that he ended four people's lives prematurely. Or that he didn't ever atone for his crimes.

 

Tookie Williams returned his messages.

[2GOLD 0]

He did. You just haven't done your homework on the matter and thus don't know of the other things he did.

 

Why don't you enlighten me instead of being a pompous jackass?

 

Unless he saved a family from a burning building, it's probably not going to change that he ended four people's lives prematurely. Or that he didn't ever atone for his crimes.

 

Tookie Williams returned his messages.

 

Tookie gave him a cookie and then arranged for him to get some good nookie with someone who didn't look like a wookie.

[MrRant 0]

I don't agree with the death penalty. I think with the issue of the death penalty you either have to say yay or nay, and not be gray about it. Sure I won't be crying when some are executed, nor will I hold rallies to oppose it, but I don't think the death penalty accomplishes anything it is "supposed" to.

 

Are there some people that just won't change or should just eb put to death? Yep.

 

 

And what does putting them to death achieve exactly, other than some primitive form of "justice"?

 

A prevention of violent crimes happening agan, maybe?

 

Gonna tell me Bernardo wouldn't kill or rape again?

 

Well, we don't know that. For all we know he could be rehabilitated. And that agrument strays away from the topic since Bernardo isn't even on death row, he's in jail for (presumably) life, which would be the case for Tookie had he not been killed.

 

The death penalty is not a proven deterrent, it costs less to keep them in prison and Tookie can't be commiting violent crimes if he's behind bars.

 

Not if we just put a bullet in the back of their heads.

[cbacon 0]

Well, besides the fact that it would be quite barbaric and inhumane, it'd make you no worse than the criminal.

[Art Sandusky 0]

Isn't it a better deterrent if you can be reminded of the consequences by actually seeing someone locked up for the rest of their lives? If someone's dead, they're gone. Out of sight, out of mind. That's why it doesn't work. I mean, if the death penalty really did work in the thousands and thousands of years we as humans have used it, don't you think criminals would have gotten the message around year 1,000 or so of the idea? Just lock up the ones who would be worthy of execution under current statutes in the deepest, darkest parts of prisons where they can be living (instead of static, non-existent) reminders.

[MrRant 0]

Well, besides the fact that it would be quite barbaric and inhumane, it'd make you no worse than the criminal.

 

A bullet would be a relatively quick death.

[Lord of The Curry 0]

I don't consider myself a sadist nor an animal but if Paul Bernardo were to get one between the eyes I highly doubt I'd shed a tear.