PDA

View Full Version : Live or Die?



JLTucker
12-09-2005, 04:31 AM
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/12/09/BAGTAG51KH38.DTL

Here's the deal. He founded the gang "Crips". He was convicted of murder back in the 80s.

Williams, 51, co-founded the Crips gang in south Los Angeles in 1971. Ten years later, he was convicted of committing four murders during two robberies in the Los Angeles area that netted a total of less than $200.

Albert Owens, 26, a night clerk at a 7-Eleven, was sweeping the store's parking lot when Williams and three accomplices drove up at 4 a.m. on Feb. 27, 1979. Williams, high on PCP at the time, ordered the young clerk into a back storage room, had him lie face down on the floor and shot him twice in the back with a shotgun, according to prosecutors.

Source (http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/state/20051209-9999-1n9execute.html)


He was a rebellious inmate until 1993. He was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. Should he be executed? What sickens me most is the fact that people are calling his execution a "lynching".


His case has become a cause célèbre among many African-Americans, some of whom have called his impending execution a "lynching." The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People has waged a high-profile campaign to spare Williams' life, conducting news conferences around California and lending its name to newspaper ads touting his efforts to warn kids about the dangers of gangs.

Source (http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/state/20051209-9999-1n9execute.html)

How is executing a convicted murderer on death row a "lynching"? He warned kids about the dangers of gangs, so his life should be spared? Please tell me what you think about this situation.

edit: I cannot believe Arnold is even thinking about granting this idiot clemency.

banana_sam
12-09-2005, 07:47 PM
I'm for the death penalty in extreme cases, but what was it this man did? Anything besides the four murders? (Which is no small thing either.)

JLTucker
12-09-2005, 08:36 PM
He founded the gang "Crips".

banana_sam
12-09-2005, 08:38 PM
Hm. The death penalty is always tricky, because where do you draw the line? What are your thoughts, not about this case, but about the penalty in general?

JLTucker
12-09-2005, 08:46 PM
I say we should keep the death penalty. Get rid of the gas chamber and lethal injection. If they did something horrible enough to be put on Death Row, they should be made to suffer. Lethal injection. Give me a break.

Akazukin
12-09-2005, 08:47 PM
Since we're born, we're given a birth certificate, a local identity card. In short, a number.

From a court's view, number 242 have commited murders, setup a gang to commit various crimes and numbers ranged from 003 to 842 suffered. Numbers 048, 817, 162 and 712 died becasue of 242. Why not get rid of number 242?

If I'm a leader of 10 million men, I will definately give a death penalty to 242. However, if I'm a teenager, I will argue that life has a purpose, and no crimes or mistakes deserve death. Nobody can judge life.

To support death penalty or not, it depends on your level of responsibility. You might want him dead if he is in your area to protect your children.

Ultimately, anyone who does not feel ashame of his mistakes, turns mistakes into crimes.

JLTucker
12-09-2005, 08:54 PM
What are you talking about, Aka? What's with these numbers?

banana_sam
12-09-2005, 09:28 PM
Lethal Injection is cleaner and cheaper. In the end, it's all a matter of money. It's less expensive to kill the criminal than pay for life in prison.

llafnwod
12-09-2005, 09:54 PM
The whole damn prison system is wrong. It costs millions of taxpayer dollars, and for what? For pay for a bunch of criminals not to work? The whole point of the prison system is the change the criminal for the better (and to discourage crime). When someone actually does change, you execute him? Christ, people, a public flogging does more for a person than 20 years in prison ever could. More humiliation, more shame, less chance of long-term bitterness against society, less time away from his duties as a citizen. Life-sentencing is possibly the dumbest thing the judiciary branch have ever excreted out of their collective mouths.

banana_sam
12-09-2005, 10:18 PM
I agree with everything you said except for flogging. Let's be humane please.

Though I still back the death penalty in extreme circumstances, I still believe that the goal of our criminal justice system should be rehabilitation rather than retribution. Only in situations where the criminal seems unable to reform should extreme measures such as life in prison or the death penalty be taken.

Akazukin
12-09-2005, 10:39 PM
edit : confused.

banana_sam
12-09-2005, 10:59 PM
?

Akazukin
12-10-2005, 12:24 AM
I have a concern for Downfall's reply regarding the money spent for life-sentenced criminals.

I always believe that we pay tax for a safe and secure country. Be it firefighters, police, army or prisons. Thus, the prison's primary objective is to ensure a safe enviroment by keeping the bad guys to one corner, while a secondary objective to convert evil into good. In Singapore, there are jobs in prisons, like cleaning large amount of bed sheets or assemble parts of machines. Therefore, life-time sentence isnt actually a waste of money.

Regarding death penalty, my view is that it depends on your level of responsibility. If you're the government, you will sentence a drug trafficker to death. If you're a teenager, you might not support death penalty.

However, death penalty is just a rule. Hitler murdered his oppositions, but as he is the man who set the rules, he is free. I believe that some tribes or countries does not have any death penalty rules.

I arrived at a certain confusion because we kill a criminal in our country, while a similiar criminal is free in another country.

JLTucker
12-10-2005, 03:52 AM
When someone actually does change, you execute him?
So you believe that he should not be executed?

BloodyBlade
12-10-2005, 01:14 PM
Whether or not he has "changed", he killed 4 people (that they know of) and started a group that has killed hundreds if not thousands more. I support the death penalty in this particular case.

llafnwod
12-10-2005, 02:16 PM
I agree with everything you said except for flogging. Let's be humane please.And why not? A two day process of starving and flogging is a FAR less severe punishment than life (or most of it) in prison. Almost invariably, people who serve their sentences go back to their old ways. Why? Because prison is one long, tough journey, but with no real pinnacle of pain, no sting. The memory of being repeatedly flogged and starved is going to make the criminal cringe at the mere thought of that crime. I also believe rehabilitation should be the primary goal of the justice system, and flogging a person is far more effective than prison sentences in this regard, but I also believe it should be used to avert others from crime. Prison is a looming threat to the would-be criminal, but it is unclear; he doesn't know exactly what happens there, he can't comprehend that amount of time being locked up. What he can comprehend is a public flogging.
Whether or not he has "changed", he killed 4 people (that they know of) and started a group that has killed hundreds if not thousands more. I support the death penalty in this particular case.No, he did not kill them. The ******* who he used to be killed him. He is not the same person. Just because he shares he same body as the founder of the Crips doesn't mean that if his system of thought is fundamentaly altered, which it has been, he should still be executed.

JLTucker
12-10-2005, 02:27 PM
He should die. That's the bottom line.

llafnwod
12-10-2005, 03:17 PM
He should die. That's the bottom line.The general idea behind opinions is that they be backed by some sort of argument; if there be an opposing opinion, that argument should address that opinion. Saying "That's the bottom line" is no better than "'Nuff said", except that my urge to kill you is somewhat less violent.
I arrived at a certain confusion because we kill a criminal in our country, while a similiar criminal is free in another country.What? Intercultural difference in the judgement of the non-trivial subjects of crime and punishment? Oh God!!!

BloodyBlade
12-10-2005, 03:28 PM
llafnwod, I can go rape 20 little girls and get off freely if I realize what I did was wrong and change my ways?

Bull****, people need to take responsibility for what they have done, and since in this particular case the man is beyond the point of taking responsibility he should get the death penalty. How do you take responsibility for killing 4 people and starting one of the most violent, well-known gangs ever?

Life in prison is an absolute waste of the government's money, the death penalty is a more cost-friendly option when it comes to extremely severe cases.

JLTucker
12-10-2005, 03:29 PM
Just because he supposedly "changed" does not mean he should be spared.He killed four people. How would the victim's families feel if Arnold granted him clemency?

BloodyBlade
12-10-2005, 03:33 PM
How would the 20 little girls who were scarred for life along with their families feel if I got off without the death penalty or life in prison?

*I don't think rape is a crime that is worth the death penalty in US law, but I am using it as an example.*

llafnwod
12-10-2005, 04:09 PM
How do you take responsibility for killing 4 people and starting one of the most violent, well-known gangs ever?By writing countless books encouraging youth to avoid gang life, by devoting every "free" minute that you have to helping them, and by making that gang kill those ****ing Bloods. If you have actually permanantely repented (not even a trace of your former personality), no-one should be able to hold you accountable for previous misdeeds, and the families who want the criminal's blood shouldn't get it. Anyone who seeks consolation by killing a changed wrongdoer is himself a criminal.

JLTucker
12-10-2005, 06:27 PM
How do we know for sure writing those childrens books wasn't an act? Ok. Jeffrey Dahmer was a serial killer turned Christian. He was on death row. If he had lived long enough to actually reach his execution date, should he be granted clemency?

BloodyBlade
12-10-2005, 06:42 PM
llafnwod, that is still not enough. Maybe if he single-handedly disassembled the Crips and did all good things that he has done ten times over, only then would he deserve to be taken off death row.

Murder and more importantly causing more murder is such an unforgivable crime.

llafnwod
12-10-2005, 07:06 PM
llafnwod, that is still not enough. Maybe if he single-handedly disassembled the Crips and did all good things that he has done ten times over, only then would he deserve to be taken off death row.

Murder and more importantly causing more murder is such an unforgivable crime.It's not a matter a "enough". A personality change of that magnitude is redemption so complete that had he personally disembowled a billion people, it should not be held against him.

JLTucker
12-10-2005, 07:32 PM
How do you know he didn't have the idea of being granted clemency from the get go? It could all be an act.

llafnwod
12-10-2005, 08:22 PM
How do you know he didn't have the idea of being granted clemency from the get go? It could all be an act.So? To keep up his image, he'll have to keep writing anti-gang books and reaching out to youth. I'd rather have an evil criminal in jail for life drawing children away from lives of crime than a dead evil criminal.

I thought you people would be supportive now that I'm actually condoning someone stay alive.

hba
12-10-2005, 08:57 PM
It's all about people's morals and how they view justice when it comes to choice and consequence.

llafnwod
12-10-2005, 09:21 PM
It's all about people's morals and how they view justice when it comes to choice and consequence.Not at all. He was guilty. He is no longer so. See my previous posts.

hba
12-10-2005, 09:27 PM
Not at all. He was guilty. He is no longer so. See my previous posts.
I'd rather not look, I already read up on this case earlier at work while we had downtime.

I don't think he's the same person he was either and doesn't deserve the penalty of death.

JLTucker
12-10-2005, 09:28 PM
Why havent you answered the question I directed towards you llafnwod about Jeffrey Dahmer? He became a Christian. If he had lived longer, would you agree to execute him?

You have your views, and I have mine. With all due respect, llafnwod, I am dumbfounded by your argument. You stated that he is two people. He has two identites. He killed four people when he was younger. He is still a murderer. He may have written children's books, he may have been nominated for the Nobel Peace Priize. That does not change the fact that he is still a murderer. F*ck his childrens books.

Also, how the hell can you say he is no longer guilty? Since when has a law been written that says if a prisoner changes he is no longer guilty? If he were released, his records will still indicate that he was convicted

Akazukin
12-10-2005, 09:29 PM
We dont need a criminal to publish books in order to stop gangs/crimes. Its not very convincing. A dead criminal will make everyone learn from his example of cause and consequence.

Although we dont like to see life meeting its end because of government rules, we must be fair for both sides. What if the person is a gangster who has murdered our love ones? He gets food in jail, but you can never see your love ones again.

hba
12-10-2005, 09:31 PM
We dont need a criminal to publish books in order to stop gangs/crimes. Its not very convincing. A dead criminal will make everyone learn from his example of cause and consequence.
Not if his death is controlled. Unless he died for the game he played while playing it, he sets no example.

BloodyBlade
12-10-2005, 11:41 PM
The sad truth is, llafnwod, people don't change.

han_han
12-11-2005, 01:26 AM
The sad truth is, llafnwod, people don't change.
So basically you can compare your 2 year-old self to your current self?

JLTucker
12-12-2005, 04:59 PM
YES!!! ARNOLD PULLED THROUGH!!!

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=1399297


But Schwarzenegger suggested Monday that Williams' supposed change of heart was not genuine, noting that the inmate had not owned up to his crimes or shown any real remorse for the countless killings committed by the Crips.

"Is Williams' redemption complete and sincere, or is it just a hollow promise?" Schwarzenegger wrote less than 12 hours before the execution. "Without an apology and atonement for these senseless and brutal killings, there can be no redemption."

llafnwod
12-12-2005, 07:40 PM
Twenty-five years ago when I created the Crips youth gang with Raymond Lee Washington in South Central Los Angeles, I never imagined Crips membership would one day spread throughout California, would spread to much of the rest of the nation and to cities in South Africa, where Crips copycat gangs have formed. I also didn't expect the Crips to end up ruining the lives of so many young people, especially young black men who have hurt other young black men.

Raymond was murdered in 1979. But if he were here, I believe he would be as troubled as I am by the Crips legacy.

So today I apologize to you all -- the children of America and South Africa -- who must cope every day with dangerous street gangs. I no longer participate in the so-called gangster lifestyle, and I deeply regret that I ever did. Yeah, no remorse.

JLTucker
12-13-2005, 01:08 AM
http://today.reuters.com/investing/financeArticle.aspx?type=bondsNews&storyID=URI:urn:newsml:reuters.com:20051213:MTFH22 178_2005-12-13_08-39-12_N1217603:1

EyeOfFire
12-13-2005, 06:25 AM
Rehabilitation is definately not the answer. You say life sentences in jail costs taxpayers money. Then you go ahead to say that the judicial system's primary goal should be rehabilitation. Would anyone like a glass of contradiction?

Rehab doesn't work, because it is only human nature to want or to do what we cant have or do. The grass is greener on the other side - it's a very old and very simple principle, but it is extremely valid. Jail doesn't work because all it does is prevent people from doing criminal activity for a period of time - and when they get out, the urge to do what was forbidden becomes strong and they break the law again. Rehab does not work, because it simply paints an extremely intense picture into people's heads that what they did was wrong. And they shouldn't do it. But they are going to do it again because it is forbidden. The grass is greener on the other side.

What's the answer then? To administer the death penalty to every person who commits a substantial enough crime? I'm actually all for it. It's harsh and inhumane, but at least it will create an extremely clean judicial system. God knows the world is already overpopulated enough...

My own country is against the death penalty. But then, my country is run by an evil smurf.

Akazukin
12-13-2005, 07:05 AM
But they are going to do it again because it is forbidden

The purpose of Justice is to keep people away for a period of time, and release them when they feel they are safe. Like the way you put a 10 meter-high jumping bug into a box, and 3 days later, when you open the box, the bug will only jump 2cm.

If they never learn from their mistakes, the officers will check his past records and determine a longer sentence. If 5 years cannot change him, they will try 10 years, 20 years. At the same time, the criminal was kept away, like how firefighters prevent fires from spreading. All these are protection measures.

When a protection system announce death for a criminal, it means they feel that he should die in order to :
1) have a safe and secure country
2) prevent others from following his examples
3) stop the cunning and dangerous man.

Thats why a drug trafficker will be facing Death on my country while the same drug trafficker only face a few years jail in your country. I was having some confusion a while back, now I've realise the true meaning of Justice.

It is a defence, not an attack. As such, to kill criminals due to over-population makes no sense.

BloodyBlade
12-13-2005, 07:16 PM
3) stop the cunning and dangerous man.Cunning? I'm sorry, but I refuse to let anyone call somone cunning if they are cowardly enough to murder a person.


It is a defence, not an attack. As such, to kill criminals due to over-population makes no sense.He never said they should die because of overpopulation. He said that if we killed them, it would help out overpopulation. While we're still on the same topic, overpopulation is not a problem at all (infact it is doing quite well) in the United States and other countries like Australia and Europe compared to developing contries. Growth rates are usually very low in countries like them. But, in places like Africa, Indonesia, Latin America, and poor parts of Asia it is an increasing problem.

llafnwod
12-13-2005, 07:21 PM
Rehabilitation is definately not the answer. You say life sentences in jail costs taxpayers money. Then you go ahead to say that the judicial system's primary goal should be rehabilitation.I never said that rehabilitation should be achieved through prison, read my ****ing post. The other things I was saying, which you seemed to have merged into my former statement, was that when the prison system actually managed to reform someone, they execute him anyway.
Would anyone like a glass of contradiction?Jesus Christ you're unwitty.

EyeOfFire
12-15-2005, 06:23 AM
I never said that rehabilitation should be achieved through prison
Nor did I. Read MY ***ing post.

Somehow you seem to get the idea that my post was directed towards yours. Don't consider yourself so special, downfall, for there ARE other people in the forum. I read the pages and recall someone talking about how prison is a waste of taxpayers money, then went on to see people agreeing that rehab is the answer. Rehab costs as much, if not more, of taxpayers money. That was the contradiction.

And so what if I'm not witty. Deal with it. If it's really the only thing you can pick up on in my ravings, I'm inclined to think you're nothing but a stupid arrogant idiot who's forced to flame other people in a vain attempt to make himself look intelligent. Well, more than usual.

llafnwod
12-15-2005, 03:22 PM
Nor did I. Read MY ***ing post.Sweet jesus, you're retarded! I never said you said that, you dim-witted bufoon.
I read the pages and recall someone talking about how prison is a waste of taxpayers money, then went on to see people agreeing that rehab is the answer. Rehab costs as much, if not more, of taxpayers money. That was the contradiction.Since when is rehabilitation neccessarily expensive? My suggestion was a public flogging.

EyeOfFire
12-16-2005, 01:01 AM
And when did I ever say I was addressing your comments! If you read my post, you'd see that I was addressing other people who posted that they were for rehabilitation. Not you. And i quite clearly expressed that. I honestly think you're smoking something horrible.


Sweet jesus, you're retarded! I never said you said that, you dim-witted bufoon. Well where did you get the idea that rehab should be achieved through prison? And if, as you say, I didn't say it, why did you argue it?