should stanley tookie williams be executed?

[Rybo 0]

I'm not going to read all of the responses to this thread, because I can only imagine the responses it's gotten. Williams should not have been executed. I'm against the Death Penalty as is, but that aside...... how retarded is it to base your penal system on the idea that criminals can be rehabilitated, and then execute one of the best examples of rehabilitation? I'm not saying free the man, I'm just saying he shouldn't be executed.

BWAHAHAHAHA I can't believe that no one said anything about this statement. Hell even some of the anti-DP debaters on here HAVE to have something to say about this.

I'm not sure what you're saying here..... Are you saying that the co-founder of the Crips becoming an anti-gang advocate, and author of children's books as well as recieving a nobel peace prize nomination for 5 straight years isn't proof that he had been rehabilitated?

That's exactly what i am saying. The guards have said, without a doubt, that he is still connected to the gang. Nobel Prize nominations? Hell, I can get one of those if I wanted, all you have to do is know the right people. On top of that, only one person has to nominate you in order to be considered. Give me a break. Lets wait the 50 years to see who nominated him, then we can argue. He has beaten guards and inmates senseless and as for those 'children's books,' first of all if you let your child read them you are a crazy fuck, second he dedicates these and other books to known murderers. When asked about gang related activity he says, "I don't want to be a snitch." Sounds like gang thinking to me. Reformed? You sir, should understand the definition before making one of the biggest sweeping generalizations that I have heard for awhile.So I reiterate, "you have GOT to be kidding"

[LongLiveYorke 38]

You said that we must measure how much the death penalty benefits society, correct? Ignoring the morality of the issue, economics CAN be brought into the issue, and we have strived to ignore the morality of the issue, for the most part, because we look to examine this issue as it pertains to law, the state, etc.

If we agree that there is no monetary equivalent to a life, then we can only begin to discuss economics when the economic strain of keeping a prisoner alive causes others within society to die. If keeping prisoners off of death row were to cost the state so much that it could no longer support its people and innocents started dying, economics would then become an issue. Of course, this line of reasoning is pretty hypothetical and, in my opinion, somewhat idiotic. If it really does cost less to keep them alive, then the whole point is moot anyway.

On a side note, how serious of an issue is this? I know the hypocrisy of government sounds bad, but at the end of the day I don't really think it affects any of us. And it's not like we're executing our best friends or Mother Theresa, these people are garbage.

I know I won't lose any sleep over these people. I'm just here because debating is fun.

[thrope 0]

i would like to applaud bmwguy for his entry into the "most ludicrous string of posts in message board history" contest.hes a lock for at least first runner-up

[mb5322 0]

Thank god they executed this murdering starter of the C.R.I.P.S street gang, society will be much better off without this piece of shit contaminating it.

[SuM827 0]

I'm not going to read all of the responses to this thread, because I can only imagine the responses it's gotten. Williams should not have been executed. I'm against the Death Penalty as is, but that aside...... how retarded is it to base your penal system on the idea that criminals can be rehabilitated, and then execute one of the best examples of rehabilitation? I'm not saying free the man, I'm just saying he shouldn't be executed.

BWAHAHAHAHA I can't believe that no one said anything about this statement. Hell even some of the anti-DP debaters on here HAVE to have something to say about this.

I'm not sure what you're saying here..... Are you saying that the co-founder of the Crips becoming an anti-gang advocate, and author of children's books as well as recieving a nobel peace prize nomination for 5 straight years isn't proof that he had been rehabilitated?

That's exactly what i am saying. The guards have said, without a doubt, that he is still connected to the gang. Nobel Prize nominations? Hell, I can get one of those if I wanted, all you have to do is know the right people. On top of that, only one person has to nominate you in order to be considered. Give me a break. Lets wait the 50 years to see who nominated him, then we can argue. He has beaten guards and inmates senseless and as for those 'children's books,' first of all if you let your child read them you are a crazy fuck, second he dedicates these and other books to known murderers. When asked about gang related activity he says, "I don't want to be a snitch." Sounds like gang thinking to me. Reformed? You sir, should understand the definition before making one of the biggest sweeping generalizations that I have heard for awhile.So I reiterate, "you have GOT to be kidding"

"The guards have said, without a doubt, that he is still connected to the gang........ He has beaten guards and inmates senseless"Very compelling argument. "On top of that, only one person has to nominate you in order to be considered. Give me a break. Lets wait the 50 years to see who nominated him, then we can argue."You don't have to wait, the info is out there..... http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-to...1765,full.storyfirst of all if you let your child read them you are a crazy fuckVery well argued. :? When asked about gang related activity he says, "I don't want to be a snitch." Sounds like gang thinking to me.Sounds like Talking points on "The O'reilly Factor" to me. :roll: Reformed? You sir, should understand the definition before making one of the biggest sweeping generalizations that I have heard for awhileWhat? The guy they sentenced to death was the cold-blooded murdering founder of the CRIPS. The guy they executed was an anti-gang activist, and author of children's books. If you don't believe it, then fine, but where was the sweeping generalization? Where? I was talking about one specific case/example. I hate it when people misuse cliches for the sake of pretention.

[Rybo 0]

I'm not going to read all of the responses to this thread, because I can only imagine the responses it's gotten. Williams should not have been executed. I'm against the Death Penalty as is, but that aside...... how retarded is it to base your penal system on the idea that criminals can be rehabilitated, and then execute one of the best examples of rehabilitation? I'm not saying free the man, I'm just saying he shouldn't be executed.

"The guards have said, without a doubt, that he is still connected to the gang........ He has beaten guards and inmates senseless"Very compelling argument.

I assume you mean, "of course the guards are going to lie if he beats them"...well I'll tell you what, you decide whether he beats guards and inmates OR he is still involved in the gang and then we will discuss.

"On top of that, only one person has to nominate you in order to be considered. Give me a break. Lets wait the 50 years to see who nominated him, then we can argue."You don't have to wait, the info is out there..... http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-to...1765,full.story

Thanks for giving me the link that supports my point. Here is a quote from YOUR link..." Death penalty opponents also took up his cause, pushing him into the limelight by nominating him for the Nobel Peace Prize and the Nobel Prize for literature, prestigious nominations that are surprisingly easy to make." And they say death penalty opponents...NOT 'people who think he's reformed' so don't quote Philip Gasper who is the guy who apparently nominated him 4 years in a row because he is and I quote, "an anti-death penalty activist" so you'd just be supporting my point.

first of all if you let your child read them you are a crazy fuckVery well argued. :?

You too...

how retarded is it...

:roll:

When asked about gang related activity he says, "I don't want to be a snitch." Sounds like gang thinking to me.Sounds like Talking points on "The O'reilly Factor" to me. :roll:

you confused me with this because A: I have never watched "The O'reilly Factor" and B: Why would a man who says he is 100% against gang violence hold information back that would stop it? So again I say, sounds like gang thinking to me.

Reformed? You sir, should understand the definition before making one of the biggest sweeping generalizations that I have heard for awhileWhat? The guy they sentenced to death was the cold-blooded murdering founder of the CRIPS. The guy they executed was an anti-gang activist, and author of children's books. If you don't believe it, then fine, but where was the sweeping generalization? Where? I was talking about one specific case/example. I hate it when people misuse cliches for the sake of pretention.

Misuse cliches? I don't believe it is misused when applied to "one of the best examples of rehabilitation." Really? One of the best huh? How about you tell me what cases of rehabilitation you are using as a basis, really I would like to know. Or you could just say, "I'm sorry, I may have exaggerated" and we'll leave it at that. I am done debating, just awaiting those 'basis cases' that you were referring to so I can put them in my notes :roll:

[SuM827 0]

I assume you mean, "of course the guards are going to lie if he beats them"...well I'll tell you what, you decide whether he beats guards and inmates OR he is still involved in the gang and then we will discuss.

What's sad here is you fail to understand that the guards would have reason to lie about an inmate that had beaten them in the past. Even if it was 12 years ago, I'm sure there are still guards working there that Williams had been involved in altercations with. Yet you're speaking as if they're neutral parties.

Thanks for giving me the link that supports my point. Here is a quote from YOUR link..." Death penalty opponents also took up his cause, pushing him into the limelight by nominating him for the Nobel Peace Prize and the Nobel Prize for literature, prestigious nominations that are surprisingly easy to make." And they say death penalty opponents...NOT 'people who think he's reformed' so don't quote Philip Gasper who is the guy who apparently nominated him 4 years in a row because he is and I quote, "an anti-death penalty activist" so you'd just be supporting my point.

you didn't have a point, you didn't know who made the nominations, and said we could wait 50 years to find out. I did know who made them, and pointed you in the direction of that information. See how important reading comprehension is? When I say "You don't have to wait, the info is out there....." I'm not disputing your point, genius.

you confused me with this because A: I have never watched "The O'reilly Factor" and B: Why would a man who says he is 100% against gang violence hold information back that would stop it? So again I say, sounds like gang thinking to me.

Or he was in prison at the time, and "snitches" aren't treated favorably in the washroom. It's not gang thinking, it's more like "Please don't gangbang me" thinking.

Misuse cliches? I don't believe it is misused when applied to "one of the best examples of rehabilitation." Really? One of the best huh? How about you tell me what cases of rehabilitation you are using as a basis, really I would like to know. Or you could just say, "I'm sorry, I may have exaggerated" and we'll leave it at that. I am done debating, just awaiting those 'basis cases' that you were referring to so I can put them in my notes

It's nice when you finally make a point, even if it's way off. How many murderers, child molesters, rapists, and drug dealers are released only to become repeat offenders? The cases are easy to find (GOOGLE IT). Many of the people that are released after "their time is up" fall into the cycle of recitivism. This is not really a point you can argue, but thanks for trying. We release people on a regular basis who are a danger to society, and here we've executed one who has reformed and hasn't done harm to anyone in the last decade. And by the way, when I said "one of the best examples" I'm talking about the most high-profile case, not the award winner for "most improved offender", that would be completely subjective, and impossible to know.

[Rybo 0]

First of all, you didn't have a point, you didn't know who made the nominations, and said we could wait 50 years to find out. I did know who made them, and pointed you in the direction of that information.

This is the only part I'll respond to. If you knew about The Nobel Prize you would know that the "official nominations" are not revealed until 50 years after the award is given. The people may say that they were the ones that nominated him. I am merely pointing out that it's not listed until 50 years later.All the best

[SuM827 0]

First of all, you didn't have a point, you didn't know who made the nominations, and said we could wait 50 years to find out. I did know who made them, and pointed you in the direction of that information.

This is the only part I'll respond to. If you knew about The Nobel Prize you would know that the "official nominations" are not revealed until 50 years after the award is given. The people may say that they were the ones that nominated him. I am merely pointing out that it's not listed until 50 years later.All the best

None of this changes the point of the link, which was to let you know who made the nominations, not to rebutt any statement you made.