Community archive

Ask something
Discussion Locked

Lie or Die?

0 helpful
25 replies

by jkaras

Closed to new repliesThis discussion is closed. It stays readable, but it takes no new replies.

Well Tookie Williams was put to death the other day. He was a man that caused all sorts of violence and crime thoughout his young life. Justice finally caught up with him and he was taken off the streets being imprisoned. He was credited with starting the gang, the Crips.

It is my opinion that he was deserving of the death penalty for the crimes and the legacy he promoted. I am not sure whether the "specific crime he was accused of was accurate or not in light of so many over turned cases of mistaken identity through DNA results or what have you. Our justice system also uses trumped up charges to further the prosecutor's career at the expanse of another's future. Sure people who break the law should be punished, but punished accordingly, fairness is not in our justice's equation.

Basically what I am pondering about is whether a person who attempted to atone for past crimes still deserves death. Tookie wrote children's books to help curb the desire to make the same mistakes that he made in his youth believing that gangs were the way to go. What example is it to others that remain criminals? I feel that many criminals continue to do bad things because they feel once they went down a path, made on bad decision that they are forever damned and never try to be a better person spirialing downward into a path of destruction because the our world doesnt forgive or forget, even after the debt to society is paid.

Do I believe in the death penalty? Yes, I do unfortunately because certain people deserve the ultimate price to be paid for the harm they have commited. Is it more revenge, than practical? Yes, I admit that and the treat of the ultimate price helps curb most of the populace to behave. I am curious though is his example of death better or worse? Gang members seeing a dominate figure who tried to atone still got put to death. Would they increase violence seeing no hope in life rather than turn their lives around increasing their downward spiral? Do politican's look better by no showing compassion? This doesnt fix any problems and might increase them giving politicans more fuel to their fire of need? I see more to this situation than a simple verdict, what do you see? Any opinion is welcome.

25 replies

by dr dij

does nothing for the victims. finding god in your heart (or any other redemption) is very subjective. if we let people go 'because they've been re-deemed' there will spring up a shyster industry in prison that will bring a convincing 'redemption' to anyone who wants to get out. I do however think we should try to rehabilitate people in prison, and maybe separate them to some degree from the other criminals.

did he kill those people? maybe (in addition to being convicted of the killings and withstanding appeals). as founder of a street gang, it was probably just scratching the surface with what he was convicted of.

did he actually do anything else horrible not mentioned? probably, as founder of the crips. they generally do many killings and other horrible things, and are only convicted of a few, due to codes of silence.

how about black people, instead of losing sleep over him dying, tell their kids: this is what happens to you when you take up a life of crime.

some white person executed by state? I'm not going to protest. get over the permanent victim complex and improve your lives and keep your kids out of gangs.

I can't get over the stupidity of sticking up for these A** criminals. there was some motorcycle guy in tampa I think, years ago, on stolen bike, doing 120 in police chase and crowd riots to support this lame brain?

by tryten

I believe that the redemption that these people find is for themselves. They are basically staring down the barrel of a gun and will have to answer for what they have done and dont like the idea of possibly having to spend eternety in Hell. So they try to absolve their sins by finding God and trying to tell others that they are truly sorry for what they have done and that others shouldnt follow in their footsteps.

Well, if they were truly sorry they would have turned themselves in, which happens on occasion, but not often enough to be considered seriously in this comment. The fact is someone had to take the time to stop you from what you were doing because you had no remorse and no guilt for what you have done. This covers 95% of the cases out there.

As for Tookie, finding God and writing childrens books still doesnt give back to the victims what was taken away from them. It doesnt stop the hundreds of kids that already followed in his footsteps and are causing the same pain that Tookie caused to others.

Honestly, if he had not of gotten the death penalty the only other suitable punishment would be to serve consecutive life sentences for every man, every woman, and every child thats lives were ruined or taken away by a member of a Crip. With no contanct to the outside world in solitary confinement to make him feel the emptyness and how alone these mothers and father feel when they are told their son/daughter was killed by gang violence or that when their son/daughter tell their parents they are joining a gang and will be home when they feel like it.

I have no pity for gang members and their lifestyles. They chose the life, let them deal with it. If mommy and daddy dont love you enough, deal with it. If you feel like you need to protect yourself, join the military, hey the army and marines will take just about anything they can get. If you are not old enough to join the military I hear McDonalds is hiring.

This may be a little extreme but I belive that of you join a gang you should automatically get the death penalty no matter what crime you commit.

by jdclyde

much tamer than in the other discussion. Did you find a nice sunbeam and it has you feeling all mellow?

I think people hung on the wall in shackless should become fashionable.

by tryten

Yes, I have found my "happy" place.
Oh, wait.... nevermind just got a call.
It seems that someone cant figure out how to send multiple attachments, hmmm this will only be their 5th lesson.
OHHHH the inky shroud of hatered falls over me again.

Think I am gonna send them seperate pictures of a boot and an a$$ and let them figure it out.

by cactus pete

I don't ever support the death penalty. I will never kill another person unless it saves others' lives - immediately. I'm sure that can be parsed quite a bit, but I'll stand behind the general idea of it.

Killing a criminal, for anything, is not the best answer. It is pretty easy, and it gives some satisfaction to a few people. But the easiest and best-feeling way isn't always the right way.

When does the death penalty kick in? When you kill 4 people? How about just 1? What about why or how brutally you committed the crime. Maybe just execute them if they really liked the feel of murdering. I don't buy into that. It's all too arbitrary.

Along those lines, what if you just wanted to kill 5 people, but you failed. Why is it different if you were just too unlucky or too incompetent to carry it out?

And what happens when the system gets it wrong? At what percentage of wrongly convicted innocents do we say, "Oops, maybe we should think about this again..."?

And what if the person you execute wanted to be executed? Are you really punishing them? So if a terminally ill patient who knows they are about to face an agonizing end of life for possibly many years goes on a rampage, they can die. But if they are good people, we force them to a cruel existence? Again, it doesn't sit well with me.

The criminals, or those convicted as such, should be forced to make the world (or community) a better place. Pick your method. Perhaps breaking rocks all day... Perhaps stamping license plates. Perhaps sifting through refuse for recyclable goods. Maybe as genetic test sites... I don't know. But they are of more good alive than dead, and killing them doesn't make the world better or safer than it was.

Yes, many people point to the idea that the death penalty is a deterrent towards future crimes. Someone show me how this has helped anywhere. We're still killing people and crimes are still being committed.

Why wouldn't 100 years of grueling work be more of a deterrent than death? When you're dead, life is easy...

And as for "Tookie"... He was worth more to society alive than dead. I didn't hear the Governor address that issue. So what if he never admitted guilt, and therefore never showed remorse? He was activily trying to prevent others from committing crimes like he had done. Let him write books, make speaches, whatever. Tack on to that a 1000 license plate quota and two weekends of highway cleanup per month until death and let humanity benefit.

Death lets people off too easy when they are guilty. And it's far too harsh for any possibly wrongly convicted innocents.

by puppybreath

doing as you suggest would just bring more charges of "cruel and unusual" punishment from the bleeding hearts. Those poor misguided murderers shouldn't be forced to work, after all they're locked in prison for the rest of their lives.

And what about those that refuse to work? Are you going to add more years to their life sentence?

Sorry, but I believe that you are responsible for your own actions and you have to pay the price for your crimes. It's bad enough that we taxpayers had to pay for this killer to live for 20+ years. I don't want to have to pay for his room and board for his entire life. If he's convicted, give a fixed amount of time for appeals (2 years, 5 years, who knows?) and then fry him.

They don't deserve to live. They made their choice, their victims didn't.

by cactus pete

Death or forced labor?

Fine, they don't want to work, now they're lab rats.

What is more cruel than Death? Torture? OK, so don't torture them. But they can be of use, in SOME way, to society. Death is too easy.

And how many innocent people do you suppose have been put to death? How many guilty people have been over-sentenced with the death penalty?

Is even one ever OK? If so, would two be fine? Where is the line, and why do you place it there?

by jkaras

I get what you are saying. I do support the death penalty but I wish it wasnt necessary, but unfortunately certain people need the fear of the ultimate price to keep in line.

People always argue that it isnt 100% effective, what about crazy people they dont fear consequences. Truth is serial killers want death and openly challenge getting caught, no matter what the penalty is they will do that because they are wired wrong. You or I might contimplate murder to get ahead in life, get out of a bad marriage, or revenge to another. The threat of a horrible death makes sure we will never act on the absurd notion of murder. Yes our morality is a strong conviction that also keeps us in check. As for any law being 100% compliance there is no such law. Look at speeding. No matter how expensive the ticket and inflated insurance or even getting a recent ticket doesnt keep us from re-endangering our and others lives by speeding. You are willing to take that risk, but most of the times you tend to abide the speed limit, not because its teh right thing to do but more about you cant afford another ticket. Same is the issue of drunk driving. I cant count how many times I have driven under the influence whether it was one or two beers in my system or my stupidity when I was a teenager. I like others didnt think I would get cuaght or anyone else get hurt. Well I was always lucky and I mean lucky. My brother got a DUI and it ruined his life. He lost his job, lost his license for a temporary time, it costed him major dough and courts, it was humiliating, and he had to go to many hours of mandatory counseling/driving school. He hadnt gotten in a wreak or a ticket in over twenty years, this was a big deal. Me? Ever since that incident I drive no where if I drink alcohol. If I go out I only social drink for an hour and dont leave until I absolutely positive that I cant possibly be busted. We are talking about having 3 beers while out for 5 hours. I dont even drink a beer during holidays with the family, only soda. Why do I act like this? Because I never want to have his scenario or like anyone who has killed another in an accident, its fear the same most of us never will act out and kill because the consequences. Do some people continue to make the same mistakes over and over ? Yeah, and it's their fault. We are supposed to learn from our mistakes as well as seeing others make them to teach us to behave.

Now I do agree 100% that our system isnt what it should be. We are seeing that more and more learning about trumpted up charges and poor investigation practices, especially getting innocent people to admit to a crime for a lessor sentence. The authorities tend to bully the accused with throwing the book unless they play ball and plea bargin because their supposed evidence is cut and dry. If I was in that situation I dont know if I would fight it or take a bargin to play safe. I pray I never have to make that decision.

Do I think many people have been unfairly executed/wrong guy? Yes and the addage you cant have an omlette without breaking a few eggs doesnt make it right, but if it helps curb most people fomr committing heneous crimes then I might be willing to make that trade. I feel that way because their is no other viable option. I pray that modern science can correct proper investigation to ensure a high percentage of accuracy for the wrong guy, but nothing can ever be 100% because man is flawed not perfect and so will the system.

At times I find life imprisonment far more cruel than death. Their life is over anyway we cant give the truly innocent their life back. When they are released they are messed up over the atrocities, and our society doesnt even compensate them financially that reflects the damages and wasted life. No people held accountable for hte wrong accusation. People in car wreacks get a better settlement. Also solitary confinement is cruel. Caged like an animal is cruel. I also dont like giving these people better medical benefits than hard working law abiding people, so what's the answer? I honestly dont know, but I hope for a better tomorrow and a better solution.

The only way it is safer is if they dont get re-released like certain killers have only to kill again taking more innocent lives. I think to kill is far different than other crimes and needs equal force.

by jkaras

I get what you are saying. I do support the death penalty but I wish it wasnt necessary, but unfortunately certain people need the fear of the ultimate price to keep in line.

People always argue that it isnt 100% effective, what about crazy people they dont fear consequences. Truth is serial killers want death and openly challenge getting caught, no matter what the penalty is they will do that because they are wired wrong. You or I might contimplate murder to get ahead in life, get out of a bad marriage, or revenge to another. The threat of a horrible death makes sure we will never act on the absurd notion of murder. Yes our morality is a strong conviction that also keeps us in check. As for any law being 100% compliance there is no such law. Look at speeding. No matter how expensive the ticket and inflated insurance or even getting a recent ticket doesnt keep us from re-endangering our and others lives by speeding. You are willing to take that risk, but most of the times you tend to abide the speed limit, not because its teh right thing to do but more about you cant afford another ticket. Same is the issue of drunk driving. I cant count how many times I have driven under the influence whether it was one or two beers in my system or my stupidity when I was a teenager. I like others didnt think I would get cuaght or anyone else get hurt. Well I was always lucky and I mean lucky. My brother got a DUI and it ruined his life. He lost his job, lost his license for a temporary time, it costed him major dough and courts, it was humiliating, and he had to go to many hours of mandatory counseling/driving school. He hadnt gotten in a wreak or a ticket in over twenty years, this was a big deal. Me? Ever since that incident I drive no where if I drink alcohol. If I go out I only social drink for an hour and dont leave until I absolutely positive that I cant possibly be busted. We are talking about having 3 beers while out for 5 hours. I dont even drink a beer during holidays with the family, only soda. Why do I act like this? Because I never want to have his scenario or like anyone who has killed another in an accident, its fear the same most of us never will act out and kill because the consequences. Do some people continue to make the same mistakes over and over ? Yeah, and it's their fault. We are supposed to learn from our mistakes as well as seeing others make them to teach us to behave.

Now I do agree 100% that our system isnt what it should be. We are seeing that more and more learning about trumpted up charges and poor investigation practices, especially getting innocent people to admit to a crime for a lessor sentence. The authorities tend to bully the accused with throwing the book unless they play ball and plea bargin because their supposed evidence is cut and dry. If I was in that situation I dont know if I would fight it or take a bargin to play safe. I pray I never have to make that decision.

Do I think many people have been unfairly executed/wrong guy? Yes and the addage you cant have an omlette without breaking a few eggs doesnt make it right, but if it helps curb most people fomr committing heneous crimes then I might be willing to make that trade. I feel that way because their is no other viable option. I pray that modern science can correct proper investigation to ensure a high percentage of accuracy for the wrong guy, but nothing can ever be 100% because man is flawed not perfect and so will the system.

At times I find life imprisonment far more cruel than death. Their life is over anyway we cant give the truly innocent their life back. When they are released they are messed up over the atrocities, and our society doesnt even compensate them financially that reflects the damages and wasted life. No people held accountable for hte wrong accusation. People in car wreacks get a better settlement. Also solitary confinement is cruel. Caged like an animal is cruel. I also dont like giving these people better medical benefits than hard working law abiding people, so what's the answer? I honestly dont know, but I hope for a better tomorrow and a better solution.

The only way it is safer is if they dont get re-released like certain killers have only to kill again taking more innocent lives. I think to kill is far different than other crimes and needs equal force.

by jdmercha

These are made up numbers just to get the idea accross.

Let's say you have 10 crimals sentenced to die. One may actually be innocent. So the price society pays for killing 9 criminals is the loss of one inocent life.

Now take those same 10 criminals and give them life in prison. I'd venture to say that during the rest of their lives they would be probably be responsable for the death of at least one other inmate.

So either way one innocent life is lost. I'd like to see some reael numbers. I'd bet there are more innocent lives lost at the hands of "lifers" than there are wrongfully put to death.

by jdclyde

that their are more underdeveloped fetuses executed every month than their are overdeveloped fetuses executed in a year.

Where is the protest for the innocent lives lost due to using abortion as birthcontol?

Oh yeah, the womans "choice" is more important than life.

by road-dog

There are a couple of things that make me question his change of heart.

1) Tookie was his gang name. He never renounced it, even at the end.
2) He never assisted the police with catching his "former" compratiots, nor did he ever extend any forgiveness to his gang's enemies. At least that the media is talking about...
3) It is alleged that he has threatened to have Corrections Officers killed through his connections.
4) He has been disciplined for numerous assaults and sexual attacks on fellow inmates.
5) His killings did not occur all at once, but in two separate incidents. His time for redemption was after the first. The second was his second chance. He chose wrongly.
6) The evidence linking him with the crimes was very solid, standing through multiple subsequent hearings. The efforts to spare his wasted life were based on "redemption" not on the facts of the case or any dispute as to their interpretation. In spite of this, he has never acknowledged guilt, nor ever apologized that I am aware of.

I'm not going to opine on these children's books he supposedly wrote BUT,were they compelling or unquestionably evidence of a changed heart, CNN would have Larry King reading them to us nightly. I wonder if the books are dedicated to his victims and the legions of victims of his gang.

Mercy is for the penitent. He does not qualify. At least in any certain way. His biggest protectors are those who would protest the execution of Satan himself, not out of any particular concern with the case, but upon their own distaste for the type of justice that is the law of the land.

The anti-death penalty types are going about this all wrong. They should try to influence voters to question the value of the death penalty itself, separate from any individual case. If they tie their cause to the condemned, there is not a lot of sympathy. They poison any consideration by association with monsters. You cannot personify the problem by basing your argument upon the fates of those that many don't consider to be human, more like a dangerous animal needing to be put down.

my $.02

by jdclyde

and as has been pointed out before, it is funny the inconsistancy of the pro/anti's.

Why is it someone that is pro-life only believe it is OVER developed fetusis that deserver to die.(in general).

And people that are pro-choice only believe it in UNDER developed fetusis that deserve to die. (in general)

Funny not in a HA HA sort of way.

by road-dog

An aborted fetus is denied the opportunity to have their life at all, good or bad. Condemned men have had an opportunity to make of their lives what they will. That is fundamental to the argument.

I realize that this concept opens up yet another set of arguments as relates to which lives are worth being allowed to unfold and which are not.

A key component in the execution of dangerous criminals is the issue of self-defense, this time on a larger scale as relates to society in general. The death penalty is really a prevention of further crimes.

An issue not really explored in this and similar threads is that a predatory criminal can be released or escape in the future. There are examples of criminals committing more crimes after being released from decades-long sentences.

Pendulums swing. As the "hot issue" crimes change and mandatory sentences are created for additional crimes, the penal system faces external pressures to release convicts. Back in the 80's when mandatory sentencing was created in the ridiculous war on drugs; violent felons, child molesters and the like were released to make room for the legions of drug runners entering the system to serve 20 years or more.

An executed murderer has a 0.0 chance of repeating his crimes and destroying additional lives. If the chance of a murderer being released increases to even 1.0 percent, that is a lot of bad guys hitting the bricks, to possibly inflict more damage.

Perhaps we should keep this in mind when asking for centuries at hard labor for the Kenneth Lays of the world. Every white collar criminal placed in the prison system could force the release of a murderer or child molester. Call it an untended consequence of short-term anger over crimes that our politicians are more than happy to exploit to make themselves look like heroes.

by puppybreath

I can see the protests now if you tried to force lab experiments on them. They can only be of use to society if they want to be and they've already proven that they're anti-social.

Let's assume that we go with your plan. I'm wrongly convicted of murder and sentenced to life. I refuse to work since I'm innocent. Now I'm used for lab experiments even though I've done nothing wrong. Your system is no better than mine.

Each system has flaws and no system will ever be perfect, but I would rather execute them and resolve the issue rather than putting them in prison for 40 years. Their victims didn't get that 40 years, why should they?

by cactus pete

You terminate someone's life by sending them to the chair, or the chamber, whatever. It doesn't really help anything.

I demonstrated that there are alternatives. Once there is agreement that people should not be put to death, we can argue exactly what else to do with them and how to handle them.

by puppybreath

There won't be an agreement that people should not be put to death. Your "demonstration" regarding alternatives just shows your sympathy for the criminals and none for the victims or the victim's family. You say it doesn't really help anything to execute these people. But why should they live? They are nothing more than a burden on society and nothing you try can force them to magically start to be productive citizens.

I believe that people should be responsible for their actions. And I believe that the victims deserve justice. The point is not whether or not a person can be rehabilitated, it's whether or not they should pay for their crimes. Why should they be allowed to live when they took someone else's life? Why should taxpayers be forced to pay for their room and board for decades?

You kill someone, you die yourself. Seems simple enough to me. It won't bring the person back, but you won't being doing any more harm to someone else's family.

It's all about accepting responsibility for your actions.

by jdclyde

but I agree with you whole heartedly.

If he did get religion, the we was allowed to die knowing he can still be saved.

This, his last rites, and a Vin Diesel flick would make a good night.

Rest in peace? Not for me to decide.
Forgive? Not my place either.
Spare his life? Not a chance.

by jdclyde

You do a crime, you get a punishment for that crime.

Behaving yourself in prision does not bring back the lives of the people he is CONVICTED of killing.

Writting kids books does not undo the damage done by the crips.

Having movie "stars" cry for him does not undo ANY of the harm he has done.

As stated in the other discussion on this topic, if Jeffery Dalmer or Ted Bundy had pleaded for forgiveness, would or should they get it as well?

Convicted by a jury of your peers should not be over ruled by a Governor trying to get brownie points.

by cactus pete

Killing the accused and convicted killer doesn't accomplish anything. And I never mentioned trying to rehabilitate any of them.

There are so many facets to when it should be OK to kill someone, and when it shouldn't. Self defense, accidents, etc. Who has the right to determine when someone dies?

The victims (the dead) don't care for your justice. The survivors might, but what does more killing do for them? Not much.

Perhaps you can just leave the convict to rot in a cell and pull power from the body like something from the Matrix. I don't know, I don't claim to have all the answers. But I know that killing is wrong. More killing doesn't make it right.

And as pointed out before, if the goal was to get the death penalty, in what way are you actually punishing the crime?

by puppybreath

I just don't agree with it. If you kill another human being, you don't deserve to live yourself. Call it "an eye for an eye" or "let the punishment fit the crime" or whatever else you can think of, but murderers deserve whatever punishment the jury deems appropriate.

You make it seem like you're doing someone a favor if you execute them instead of giving them a life sentence. I'm just saying why not do them that small favor?

The problem with the current system is that even after they're convicted and the appeals process is complete, they stay on death row for decades.

They were judged by a jury of their peers.
They were found guilty.
They were allowed to appeal.

The law should be carried out and they should be executed. Otherwise they're just a burden on society with little or no hope of ever contributing anything useful.

If you want to change the law because killing is wrong in your opinion, it's your right to try. But I'm from the old school that says you kill a mad dog, you don't lock it in a pen until it dies a natural death.

by jdclyde

the way they should handle people like Ley is to take everything he owns, sell it in auction and start to re-emburse the people that he cheated.

Then put him in a teather, and ten years of community services while living in a half-way house.

Take away all investments and pensions as well.

But instead because the poor poor have been conditioned to HATE the rich and big business so they will be out for blood. It is now a pavlaw reaction, and I see them salivating.

Oh, lay should also get the pleasure of being someone or a bunch of someones girlfriend for a while. nothing says humility like a bleeding a$$.

by road-dog

As relates to prison, sodomy is a side effect, perhaps one conclude that it is an intrinsic portion of the penalty, perhaps a just one, perhaps not.

In either event, it doesn't say humility, but it could indeed cause it! Nothing says "I no longer have control over my destiny" than the invasion of one's corporal interior without invitation!

I am in agreement with you that ALL of his ill-gotten gains (present and future) should be stripped from him and he should never again be trusted with the financial fortunes of others, as he simply cannot be trusted. The corporate environment and stock market are both based upon trust between shareholders and those who run the company.

I think he should be wearing an ankle bracelet and living in a home no more opulent than those who he cheated. His lifestyle should not be the pseudo-probation such as Martha Stewart's, where she still attends galas and other jet-set events. He should be shunned by corporate America and those who would continue to associate with him should be shunned as well.

Personally, I wouldn't hire the man to fill any position more important than the third shift crew lead at a small McDonald's franchise. Even then, I'd watch him closely and check the books with great regularity due to his larcenous proclivities.

This discussion is closed to new replies.