Tookie Williams & the death penalty

[roadhog]

Evidence suggests it doesn't prevent crime. The U.S. has higher crime than other countries that don't have the death penalty.
Also, execution is pre-mediated murder. Criminal murder may not be premeditated.

Gonna have to provide more detailed analysis than that to convince anybody of anything. People who rob a bank know that they aren't subject to death penalty, so of course it has no deterrent on bank robbers (who don't kill). Same for hundreds of other crime categories. Also, many other things play into crime rates as well, not ONLY the deterrent of the punishment.

 

[jhuskey]

Also, execution is pre-mediated murder. Criminal murder may not be premeditated.[/QUOTE]

I am curious under what laws, standards or moral values you use to arrive at this conclusion.
What is the accepted definition of murder?

 

[DiabloScott]

Also, execution is pre-mediated murder. Criminal murder may not be premeditated.

I am curious under what laws, standards or moral values you use to arrive at this conclusion.
What is the accepted definition of murder?

Killing someone is always classified legally as homocide.

The legal definition of murder includes intent to kill - premeditated or not, the intent was to kill the person. Capital punishment in USA is only imposed on convictions of multiple counts of murder, or in some cases murder of a police officer or other official.

Manslaughter is unintentional murder but may include intent to do great harm. Justifiable homocide would include self-defense or defense of another person.

I think it a much bigger tragedy that our prisons are filled with non-violent drug offenders than that we execute extremely violent subhuman scum.

 

[Dondare]

Evidence suggests it doesn't prevent crime. The U.S. has higher crime than other countries that don't have the death penalty.
Also, execution is pre-mediated murder. Criminal murder may not be premeditated.

Prevents reoffending.

 

[Chance3290]

Prevents reoffending.

Quite true. I can't think of one crime committed after someone has been executed. Now, I could be wrong.

 

[Carrera]

Crime in the U.S. is far higher than in Europe. The death penalty hasn't prevented such high levels of crime. Moreoever, crime in some U.S. states is unacceptable to the point there is a problem.
Look at crime in Japan. It's very low. But the U.S. has had more nutty serial killers than nearly anywhere else.
The death penalty has made little difference and crime is even higher in capital punishment states.
Also, murder is wrong and murder is murder. I would never take part in the apparently legal murder of another individual (i.e. in a jury or as a governer) and set myself up as judge and jury. It goes against my beliefs (not being religious).
I do take the point there are evil people out there who can cause untold misery to the victim. If your father, mother or brother was a victim of such a crime, it's human nature you would want to take revenge.
But really nobody has the right to decide who lives or dies. Violent killers should be isolated from society instead to ensure the safety of other people.

 

[DiabloScott]

Crime in the U.S. is far higher than in Europe. The death penalty hasn't prevented such high levels of crime. Moreoever, crime in some U.S. states is unacceptable to the point there is a problem..

If we could change something about the death penalty (whatever it may be) that would MAKE it a deterrent - you still wouldn't be in favor of it, would you? So why do you keep bringing up the deterrent issue?

And unless your contention is that the death penalty actually increases the crime rate then you don't have any point at all.

It's a penalty, it's the appropriate punishment. I feel more sorry for the rats I kill in my shed than vermin like Tookie Williams.

 

[roadhog]

Crime in the U.S. is far higher than in Europe. The death penalty hasn't prevented such high levels of crime.

Again, citing a higher crime rate overall doesn't speak to the death penalty issue per say, and many social issues play into crime rate, not just the deterence.

Moreoever, crime in some U.S. states is unacceptable to the point there is a problem.

What level of crime is considered "not a problem"? My guess is zero. Which crime is "acceptable"? Which states have you been dodging bullets in lately? I've lived in 8 states so far for extended periods, and I've always felt very safe. Of course there are areas of cities to avoid, but I felt that way when I lived in Bavaria, Germany as well.

 

[MountainPro]

like i said, i dont give a **** about this case or what he did or if he was reformed. Killing people is wrong. It is morally wrong and if you are religious.... 'Thou shalt not kill'. Christ preached forgiveness.
Two wrongs dont make a right. His victims are still dead and the death sentence didnt deter him.
Face facts, the death sentence as a form of punishment doesnt work.

The people he shot in the back of the head with a shotgun were also in utter anguish.

 

[MountainPro]

Are you suggesting that the jury that found him guilty and applied the death penalty should be put to death?

Tookie killed people so you advocate killing him for punishment. A jury condemns an innocent man to death. Whats the difference?

 

[limerickman]

Crime in the U.S. is far higher than in Europe. The death penalty hasn't prevented such high levels of crime. Moreoever, crime in some U.S. states is unacceptable to the point there is a problem.
Look at crime in Japan. It's very low. But the U.S. has had more nutty serial killers than nearly anywhere else.
The death penalty has made little difference and crime is even higher in capital punishment states.
Also, murder is wrong and murder is murder. I would never take part in the apparently legal murder of another individual (i.e. in a jury or as a governer) and set myself up as judge and jury. It goes against my beliefs (not being religious).
I do take the point there are evil people out there who can cause untold misery to the victim. If your father, mother or brother was a victim of such a crime, it's human nature you would want to take revenge.
But really nobody has the right to decide who lives or dies. Violent killers should be isolated from society instead to ensure the safety of other people.

Agreed !

I too can well understand people wishing to seek revenge but it's not the relatives of the victims who terminate the life of the convicted, it is the State
that executes the perpetrator.
And that is one reason I object to capital punishement because "the State" is by definition open to human error.

Also i object to executions on moral grounds.
I don't accept that it is morally right to execute another human being - even if that human being is found to have done the most despicable acts.
I do believe in punishment for crimes and - hearing what some folks say about three hot meals and accomodation for life - I wonder how many people have ever visited a prison?

 

[jhuskey]

Killing someone is always classified legally as homocide.

The legal definition of murder includes intent to kill - premeditated or not, the intent was to kill the person. Capital punishment in USA is only imposed on convictions of multiple counts of murder, or in some cases murder of a police officer or other official.

Manslaughter is unintentional murder but may include intent to do great harm. Justifiable homocide would include self-defense or defense of another person.

I think it a much bigger tragedy that our prisons are filled with non-violent drug offenders than that we execute extremely violent subhuman scum.

I understand the US legal definition,I was trying to draw someone out to give me their definition between,war deaths,self defense,car wrecks involving alcohol or negligence etc.
The fact is we all rationalize these scenarios differently .
I use the story of the $20 bill laying in a bank teller to illustrate rationalization.
Would you take it? Most say no. Why? Because it's not mine.
Would you take it from the floor under the window?
Most say no. Why? Same reason.
How about out in the adjoining parking lot?
Many say yes, found money, but only the location has changed not the fact that it is not your money.

If actors and celebrities want to use their influnce let them campaign for cancer research,safer cars,safer neighborhoods etc. not some low life gang member.
Just my opinion.

 

[Felt_Rider]

If actors and celebrities want to use their influnce let them campaign for cancer research,safer cars,safer neighborhoods etc. not some low life gang member.
Just my opinion.

Ann Coulter helped me put the actor/politician agenda issue in perspective.

Her comment towards the George Clooney's and Barbra Streisand's of Hollywood, "Shut up and entertain me."

 

[limerickman]

I understand the US legal definition,I was trying to draw someone out to give me their definition between,war deaths,self defense,car wrecks involving alcohol or negligence etc.
The fact is we all rationalize these scenarios differently .
I use the story of the $20 bill laying in a bank teller to illustrate rationalization.
Would you take it? Most say no. Why? Because it's not mine.
Would you take it from the floor under the window?
Most say no. Why? Same reason.
How about out in the adjoining parking lot?
Many say yes, found money, but only the location has changed not the fact that it is not your money.

If actors and celebrities want to use their influnce let them campaign for cancer research,safer cars,safer neighborhoods etc. not some low life gang member.
Just my opinion.

That's a very good analogy, JH.
Well put.

 

[cheapie]

The state should never have the power of life an death over anyone. If you commit murder then you will be locked up.

Watching the news report on this guys death was harrowing. It took him 20 minutes to die and several 'lethal' injections and he was exasperated as to why he wasnt dead yet. Some news reports say he was peaceful durin gthe operation...he was in utter anguish.

you are wrong. it took 20 minutes to find the vein and administer the toxin. once the needle was placed his death came quickly.

however, your version does make for a more sympathic story so feel free to go with it.

 

[jhuskey]

That's a very good analogy, JH.
Well put.

Sometimes I get lucky.
thanks

 

[MountainPro]

well, personally i wasnt there in the room with them when the lethal doses were administered, i suspect you were nowhere near the scene either. All i have to go on are BBC news reports. You on the other hand seem to have insider knowledge.

you are wrong. it took 20 minutes to find the vein and administer the toxin. once the needle was placed his death came quickly.

however, your version does make for a more sympathic story so feel free to go with it.

 

[MountainPro]

listen up folks, if it isnt too much trouble i would like to see everyones avatar jazzed up for the festive season...

blame huskey. (and meehs)

 

[jhuskey]

listen up folks, if it isnt too much trouble i would like to see everyones avatar jazzed up for the festive season...

blame huskey. (and meehs)

Cool stuff Pro,how do you like this one for holiday spirit.

 

[cheapie]

well, personally i wasnt there in the room with them when the lethal doses were administered, i suspect you were nowhere near the scene either. All i have to go on are BBC news reports. You on the other hand seem to have insider knowledge.

please show one, just ONE source that said it took several doses to kill him, or that it took 20 minutes to die, or that was exasperated that he wasn't dead yet, or that he was in agony. i'll bet you can't do that, let alone find one that supports your full statement.

every single news source said the same thing, including BBC...

They said he became frustrated at a delay of several minutes as prison staff struggled to insert the needle.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4523502.stm



i'm NOT a fan of the death penalty. i just don't like people spouting things that aren't true in order to support their support/opposition for capital punishment.