*DAMN R6 Forum

"To threaten me with death does not accomplish the means of the criminal justice system or satiate those who think my death or my demise will be a closure for them. Their loved ones will not rise up from the grave and love them. I wish they could. I sympathize or empathize with everyone who has lost a loved one. But I didn't do it. My death would not mollify them."

"I'll go through [the excecution] with dignity, with integrity, with love and bliss in my heart. I smile at everything, and I'm quite sure I'll smile then, too."

An interesting article from the NY Times here (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/13/national/13cnd-Tookie.html?ex=1292130000&en=ad2aa8a42bdb0cca&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss)

I don't know a huge amount about the trial for and against, not had time to research into it... but its a compelling read and i still wonder exactly what people hope to achive by killing each other. If he was guilty what has his death achived, and if he was innocent...

i'm truly disgusted by the death penalty.
i think that it simply keeps the circle of killing going.

a man like that, who changed himself while in prison, helping children stay out of the stuff he created .. a four time nobel peace prize nominee .. an author of lesson-teaching childrens' books.

he's done more for society than most people america.

"an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind."

libre

All i can say is sweet sweet justice.  If you do study the trial BFG, you will know this man was nothing more then a murderous Quadrupile Homicidle piece of shit.  He was an eloquent writer, if he actually wrote most of his own material, he did have an author constantly working with him, that captured the hearts of many who know nothing about the case.

Fact of the matter was, he blew 4 people apart with a shotgun at close range after robbing them for a less then combined amount of $300.  He used his own shotgun, they verified the shells, and a number of witnesses placed him there.

Another factor, the man never admitted to anything, yet wanted a reprieve for being redeemed.  How does that work? I didn't do it, but I have done stuff to redeem myself for it. Also, the media has hyped the actual amount of "people" he may have helped with gangs to get out of them.  They claim hundreds of thousands have changed their lives because of him, yet his book has sold less then 5,000 copies. Once again the numbers don't match.

I could go on, and I am sure someone will stick up for this piece of trash and I am ready, but at least you are arguing against the death penalty and not for this scumbag.

The lessoned learned here at least for gang members is, yes you can do crime and kill, but eventually you will pay for your crime. You will not be able to do nonsense work for a crime you claimed to have never comitted so that the Hollywood moronic elite can try to buy your way out of punishment.


edited for new post:

The Nobel Peace Price nominee stuff is another sham, yes he was nominated, but by one ultra liberal professor who did so to gain credibility for tookie.  The Nobel laureates never took his nominations seriously on any level. And yes, he has done more for society then most, he managed to delete 4 people from it, 2 who were elderly and he managed to start one of the most notorious gangs ever that is responsible for more deaths then he saved.  God bless this man.....

PS. don't get me wrong and think he shouldn't have been in jail for the rest of his life. that, of course, is the alternative to the death penalty.

I think BFG's quote from tookie summed it up,


There are 4 people who weren't able to smile ever again, have another happy moment, write childrens books or have a bunch of idiots fight for their right to live.

so let's keep the circle going and kill more people eh ?  ::wall::

just another arguement of pro and against the death penalty, I won't convince you of my views and you can't convince me of yours. But at least this piece of shit is dead for all the right reasons.

I didn't know that fah i'll have a good read around when i get home tonight :) If he did it (from what i read there seemed to be questionable evidence in some areas) then i in no way question the fact he should have spent the rest of his life behind bars.
I havn't read anything he wrote, and he certainly hasn't captured my heart, and yoru right this is definatly about the death penalty and not the individual.

but i also feel exactly the same way that leen described things, what does this circle of killing really hope to achive? Just as in war and conflict, revenge doesn't solve the problem. And to be killed in such a cold blooded manner, what is what the state has done to him any better than what he did in shooting those people other than to serve as 'revenge' ?

Don't want things to go down hill here but i think there is a really valid question on what exactly the death penalty hopes to achive. Only a handfull of countries around the world still have the death penalty, many also are condemed for their shocking abuse and torture of prisoners and their appauling human rights.

Well, what it DOES acheve,
is that it insures that a TAKER from society,
is stopped from TAKING any more.

FOUR close range shotgun murders, and the raising of the largest gang in the United States, earned his place on the needle table.

Further, what the Death Penalty does accomplish(in blatant GUILT cases like his) ..is to stop the cycle of subsidizing crime, rewarding the TAKERs of peace, predators, and stops the flow of money used to cage these animals at MY fucking expense.

(below i refer to clear cut GUILT cases on death row)..not the questionable ones that make the debate convenient for detractors)

Not only do they commit their original crime, but they Leech MY tax dollars, with staying alive for endless appeals at approximately ONE MILLION dollars a pop..and a furhter 2 milion in housing(conservatively)..plus medical (which many LAW abiding citizens cannot afford) law school (provided at cost by the state) for a practice that will never happen...and due to certain civil rights activist efforts, they are unable to do meaningful infrastructure work in most states...(although texas and Alabama still have chain gangs) but nothing that would add value BACK to the communities from which they stole in the first place.

And the death penalty is not rendered in Revenge, it is in Justice for what has been taken, and to prevent future occurrences..And for those who believe that the death penalty is wrong, i encourage you to visit Death Row sometime. Its VERY enlightening...way fewer rays of light rotting away for no reason than detractors would have you believe.  And while prison conversions MAY be legit, i am unable to take that as evidence that thse men are turned around..and in these extremely violent offenders, i do not wish to subsidize their appeals, law degrees, and free health care. They would have..(to a man), NOt afforde me the same consideration, had I been the victim of their crimes... Warehousing these people for their lifetimes at a cost of BILLIONS is as ludicrous as the propostion that the Death Penalty stops crime, but it certainly allays the long term costs...

I have my personal reasons for the desire to examine cases to prevent innocent prosecutions, but for those that are cut and dry, i say Throw the switch. There is a price to pay.  Its really not that hard to keep yourself fron killing, raping and robbing, and i dont give a shit what your background is. Its that simple...

Tookie got what he wrought.

His gang has killed THOUSANDS upon THOUSANDS of people..many of them entirely innocent of any crime whatsoever. And made BILLIONS in drug sales...and arm sales..

Glad he did those good things near the end..glad he taught kids..it is also his responsibilty to make one last final demonstration for those kids, why continuing thier lifestyle is a zero sum game.

I can only explain my rationale from my point of view and others who have had a loved one killed, and that is "closure".  It actually ends a lot of the feelings and emotions wrapped up into the whole travesty, and it gives a sense a justice to what is usually senseless killings in the first place.  Without the final execution of the execution, you just linger with the hatred for an individual who is allowed to exist, enjoy, think, meet with loved ones, and basically have the day to day operation of most individuals except it is done in captivity.

The fact of the state is only here to carry out the will of the people.  Fact of the matter is most people in america still support capital punishment, and with the over 60 court cases most Californian capital punishment cases get, there is no legal doubt they have had their due process. Another statistic is that no man has been found innocent after receiving capital punishment, but men on death row have been found innocent.  So it seems the long drawn out process of killing capital punishment cases does work. Sad as it is for the initial wrong persecution, it is eventually found out.

On another note, you cannot compare the deaths of war to those of criminal. Very different cases, you can argue similarities, but usually on vastly different grounds, means and mental capacities.

Not to get too sidetracked, but i do agree with the death penalty... my uncle got stabbed on a sunday afternoon while eating/drinking in his local pub after asking that some lads to leave the pub (he was a bouncer - not working that day though), they came back 30 mins later, stabbed him through the back and killed him. This guy who did it will be shortley released, after about 10 years of prison... this is just not right at all.

After seeing my auntie/family members distraught at my uncles bedside watching him trying to survive on life support for 3 days was to much.

I would personally would pull the switch, load the bullet, whatever means.

Do i think he should be let of with it?, No.

Does it matter what he's done in prison to "better himself"?, No

At the end of the day, if you're guilty why the hell should that person be allowed to live the rest of his/her life, yeah they might be in prison so fucking what, they are not the ones that are dead.



 

Personally, I think it's disgusting that anybody would call him a good man worthy of our pity. Not only did he kill those 4 people, they estimate the number of murders he actually committed and didn't get caught for at four times that number- 40 people dead, and he can write a couple children's books to be absolved for their killings?! Furthermore, who knows how many people he ordered hurt or murdered as the leader of the biggest, most brutal gang in the United States to date, a gang notorious for its violence and role in spreading the use of crack cocaine throughout the country.

On the case: there are a few things that stick out to me in particular, that don't really seem to be indicative of a changed/innocent man: the fact that the man never apologized for the killings he perpetrated, his years of fighting and violence within the prison, his initial plot to escape prison that involved blowing up a transport and killing the guards operating it, and his unwillingness to cooperate with police investigations about gangs in LA. Truthfully, I think that had these things not occurred, he would have had a much better shot at life in prison than they considered.

Anyway, everything the man does seems to be an utter sham, and how sad it is that we could be so easily duped by it. I can only imagine the awful torture this must have been for the families of his victims, who had to stand by and watch all those years while he proclaimed his innocence, and everybody lauded him and sung his praise. How would you feel if your son's killer got nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize? Not only is that adding insult to injury, it would feel absolutely horrifying to think that so many of your fellow peers would even think of endorsing it... but they did.

However, in the end, I do consider myself someone opposed to the death penalty. I would have much preferred that Tookie Williams rot in solitary for the rest of his life, left to think about all the hurt and anguish he caused those people, than to get the painless release of death that is execution. Violence begets violence, I think. In this situation, though, I don't necessarily believe that what happened was wrong. There was a large amount of demonstrated evidence against him, and he did so much wrong to his fellow human beings that warranted something be done, to take a stand and say that we do not condone that, no matter what.

But that's just my two cents. :)

The death penalty is ridiculous in that it achieves what is certain anyways. Life in prison with no chance of parole is worse than death, plus its cheaper for the taxpayer. He got off easy.

Research has shown that the cost of incarcerating someone for their whole life is less than executing them because of all the formalities of the death penalty such as an automatic appeals process that can last many years and cost millions of taxpayer dollars. I'll link ya when I have more time.

I say one appeal, with competent council..within 30 days of the conviction.
Evidence review...THEN..

out the door with the $1 bullet, and $25 pine box.

Would negate the anti-argument about the cost of endless appeals..

Yeah I'f only we were more like Communist China.

hahah, now there's a can of worms.  Should get interesting now

Snap!! So what exactly did you say you did differently from the chinese? ... have a trial then find them guilty then 'humanely' execute them.

Sure, if you want to disregard the "let them have their first trial (where if they are convicted) they get ONE appeal, with a different COMPETENT council...PLUS an independant review of the evidence...THEn the shooting..." part.

Lets not oversimplify so as to lump a perfectly reasonable solution with the Chinese kangaroo trials...

I can help about 2500 families with the 2 Million we waste on endless incompetent and unenthusiatic appeals...and the nearly 2 million it will cost to house then for fifty years...so thats rehabilitation and social programs for FIVE THOUSAND disenfrancised young families to PREVENT the liklihood that those kids will end up on death Row down the line...

Perfectly logical and reasonable and prudent trade..Even by liberal standards..

The death penalty is the easy way out. What kind of punishment is being relieved of all your worldly worries? A life without freedom is worse than death.

Well at seems when they don't kill you spetz you get to write childrens books, gain a slew of ignorant supporters who claim you never commited a crime, and basically become an idiots hero.

Your right, these people are in really harsh conditions.

Truly lock them in a cell with basically shit to eat, water, a hole to shit in, no human contact and sleep standing up. Only then would I accept life without parole.  Right now they get too much to keep existing. Truly give them a shithole to live in and you would gain mass support for life in prison.  This is the current problem we have.

I actually dont mind if its the easy way out.
At least Im not being charged for it...

Im being pragmatic here..
Prevention and Cost savings.
There nothing logical or compassionate about charging me FOUR million dollars for a lifetime murderous criminal. its always stumped me, that the ;anti' crowd wont concede that extrememly obvious point.

Im not talking about 'iffy' cases either.
I wouldnt mind strengthening the process to weed out the innocents, but once they're weeded out..let the killing commence.  Remember..PREVENTION and COST SAVINGS...

I dont view this in a moral light as it applies to the CRIMINAL..im looking at the Human rights of the law-abiding citizen population at large(and the VICTIMS)...Why punish THEM (by charging for prisoner upkeep, and education when there is no societal return?)

Blows me away ..seriously, that there is an advocacy wing about ten times larger for Criminal rights (Rights and feelings, and mercy for the truly GUILTY), then there are for victim rights (you know, the ones that suffered the brutal killings, rapes, and tortures at the hands of the criminals youre so passionately defending the dignity of)...talk about backwards reasoning.  Really..cmon now.
How much air time did that poor Vietnamese family get today? NONE.
The RACIAL betrayal of the Nobel Peace Prize nominee got all the airtime..all week.
That fucking SICKENS ME..and if you were being consistent, it would sicken you too..

Apply some of that compassion to the victims how bout? Do they deserve justice
OR the humiliation of the pseudo-civil rights three ring media circus?
How you think that family felt to see all the Media stars come out to proclaim the innoncence, Honor and Nobel worthiness of a guy that SHOTGUNNED (12 gauge, btw) their entire fucking family?
Further, Do they deserve to foot the bill to keep someone alive that took THEIR families?
It almost takes an animal to support these notions as well..

Human rights at the exlusion of logic and reason, then fails to remain a discussion on rights and dignity at all..at that point it becomes a knee-jerk reaction to the CORRECT PREMISE that Life is valuable...Yes it is...and the lives of the victims and the law abiding are FAR more valuable than the ones who disregard that value...and spit in the face of it.

Dont you think that these criminals cheapen the sincerity of your intent when they would Kill you in a heartbeat for enough money to buy more crack or support a meth habit, or becuase they THOUGHT you saw them commit a crime? You and your (truely) admirable respect for life would not mean a fuck to one of these guys committing these crimes at the time they commited them..but once caught OH ...THEN they want your compassion..and pull the heartstrings and ask Jesse and Sharpton, and Snoop Dog to come protest for them and do the media circuit...how fucking convenient.

You advocates arent insulted in the least by their CONTINUED manipulation?
Asking, no...Demanding that you call for human dignity and leniency and mercy when they showed none?

You know what kind of animal it takes to shotgun FOUR PEOPLE at CLOSE RANGE???
i mean, you go home wearing the victims brains on your clothes in that sort of act...
Mercy for that? NO FUCKING WAY..NONE>

BANG.

Responding to the idea of giving 30 days of life after the conviction and sentencing to death, how many people were found innocent well after that 30 day period?  How many innocent people would have been wrongfully executed just so we could save you a few bucks?  Is there a specific number of innocent Americans that can be executed when you will say "Oh well, at least I saved money by not paying for their lengthy incarceration before execution."

You might as well have the bailif gun down the convicted and sentenced right there in the courtroom.

Since the real world is not 'Sheixworld', it is in fact cheaper to house a prisoner for life than to execute them, it cost roughly 6 times more to put them to death.

I believe the guilty always get what's coming to them, whether it's 10 minutes after the fact or 10 years, some shit will happen that will equalize the order of things without the meddling of mortal man.

The death penalty is wrong, if you can't see that I pity you.

Murder and violence are the cowards solutions, whether it's the government or a misguided youth, it solves nothing and perpetuates the cycle of death.

Here's a list of countries that still have the death penalty (notice the only industrialized nations on the list are the U.S. and China) Also, look up the murder rates of nations without the death penalty and contrast that to the murder rate in the United States. You'll find that the death penalty does not deter murderers, in fact you'll find that murder rates are higher in countries with the death penalty than without.

Afghanistan
Antigua and Barbuda
Bahamas
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Barbados
Belarus
Belize
Botswana
Burundi
Cameroon
Chad
China (People's Republic)
Comoros
Congo (Democratic Republic)
Cuba
Dominica
Egypt
Equatorial Guinea
Eritrea
Ethiopia
Gabon
Ghana
Guatemala
Guinea
Guyana
India
Indonesia
Iran
Iraq
Jamaica
Japan
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Korea, North
Korea, South
Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan
Laos
Lebanon
Lesotho
Liberia
Libya
Malawi
Malaysia
Mongolia
Nigeria
Oman
Pakistan
Palestinian Authority
Philippines
Qatar
Rwanda
St. Kitts and Nevis
St. Lucia
St. Vincent and the Grenadines
Saudi Arabia
Sierra Leone
Singapore
Somalia
Sudan
Swaziland
Syria
Taiwan
Tajikistan
Tanzania
Thailand
Trinidad and Tobago
Uganda
United Arab Emirates
United States
Uzbekistan
Vietnam
Yemen
Zambia
Zimbabwe

What is your definition of Industrialized?  Because Japan is on that list.[/size]

Aside from not even touching the Victims rights vs Murderers rights (which is half my premise along with cost reduction and prevention of further criminality)..You went the Sheixland route. No Need.
Maybe if i hadnt seen friends and family BRUTALIZED at the hands of the sytem in favor of some fucking lowlife peice of shit that wouldn't grant YOU the mercy you claim he deserves..

in FACT..i agreed with your premise, and even pointed out that the criminals that are playing the emotional/human rights card..are manipulating YOU, into thinking that there is something noble about keeping them alive so they can watch cable, do drugs, get a law degree, and get free medical care, when their victims lives are OVER, as well as the lives of their families. Victim rights NEVER EVER get mentioned in these arguments, but tackling their advocates on some etheric moral ground is extremely common.

And for the record, the ONE AND ONLY reason it is more expensive to Execute than to warehouse,
is that they can appeal as many times as a judge will allow it. The costs are both sides, defence and prosecution, jury calling, and state wages paid for all the clerical mess that goes with unlimited appeals...warehousing of data over time, etc...ad nauseam. What again is wrong with providing a much more competent defense, and Discovery process the first time? Tell me how using INDEPENDANT council, not either paid by the state, or by foreclosing on the accused family homes, (belonging to mothers fathers and grandparents..) is so much more inneffective or inhumane than public defenders that generally AGREE in the guilt of their clients, and provide LUKEwarm defences at best?... that whats in place.

And as for all those innocents you think will get executed? well, that is SOLELY due to incompetent defence...which is supplied by the state. And ok, so you dont like 30 days..fine...Defence has one year (even TWO) to prove their case. NOT THIRTY..you talk about costs of executing people..it comes from  thrity years of appeals..No one is served by that crap...at all. If thirty days was your true objection, the new time frame should be acceptable to you....remeber, we are providing well paid, enthusiastic competent defence..not some first year law school retread..that cannot wait to get home to see the game...and believes his client is guilty anyways, not deserving of a fair trial.

Im appealing for a MUCH more stringent first process..and ONE viable effective appeal effort. Nothing whatsoever immoral about that...Its not prudent to disregard a viable and more humane appeal process alternative, simply becuase you think im evil for not saying the death penalty is wrong. Im saying that theres much more wrong with the process than just the death process.and as long as poeople refuse to ackowldge some of these simple realities, and keep it all in the realm of the moral..noting wil ever be re-evaluated.

i specifically alluded to the sincerity and worth of your premise that life is valuable, simple so you could see that im ATTEMPTING to cede your points while disagreeing with you. That agreement prevents me from calling your well-thought out views...Spetzland...or saying that i pity you. Dont pity someone who agrees with your premise but disagrees with the ends. I do pity the families that have no advocates for THEIR suffering while everyone is arguing the morality of what happens to their murderers and rapists, arguing that those lives are more important than those already lost at the hands of violence and greed.....thats whats EXTREMELY tragic..and if you cant see THAT, well then the pity party is a two way street.

Most are defended by court apponted and NON motivated and POORLY paid defenders.
I say some of that money that the taxpayers put out on those MANY trials...(which are almost entirely unneffective due to lack of enthusiasm and incompetence), be placed with competent and motivated defenders, with staffing for adequate evidentiary review. And once guilt is firmly established...the needs and rights of the many takes precedence. Cost control, and (repeat) crime control. Im not claiming it works to prevent OTHER criminals, but death will stop those criminals in their tracks. Im for that.

Im Not seeing how that isnt seen as a viable alternative to the weak 'court appointed' system we have in place.  And no need to pity me..like i said, im not approaching this with a moral agenda. Its not my job ...But i can say with certainty that there IS a viable alternative to the TORTURE that the families are put through over the course of the many appeals...but again..the Victims never seem to matter..nor their feelings.

Like i said, i dont believe that the Death penalty deters crime, but it totally stops re-offenders.

And stopping the thirty year appeal process saves the state, and by extension, me, Billions of dollars for educaction and crime prevention (which i would have presumed youd agree with becuase it would educate and rehabilitate at risk youth to prevent them from ending up with their predecessors)..But again, in favor of an insulting take on my views, this was totally disregarded.

I'm just curious, how many innocent people have been executed? How does that effect your sentiment towards the death penalty?

How many innocent pepole would be sentenced to life without parole if the death penalty were abolished?

The number is exactly the same.

Yeah, and when they DO kill you, you become a martyr.

Brutha, I stated this earlier. No man who has been executed has been found to be innocent after the fact. But, people who have been sentenced to death have been found innocent. So the system at it's current state is working.


I'm just curious spetz, what is the manly or "brave" solution.  Since bravery is the opposite of cowardice. So it is brave to let a murderer live and to carry on a somewhat normal life in a cell then to make him pay for erradicating life?


This is by far a false correlation.  It is true the death penalty is not a deterrant, but incarceration is not either.  Basically people kill no matter what. It just so happens we have so many killings because the means in the US is easier; ie: guns, weapons and our cultural acceptance of violence popularized by the media, movies and music. You reap what you sow. But to let them live is a travesty to the families of the victims and a reward for the criminal.

but if they find out they are innocent during life in prison then they get out... we cant dig up a dead person.[/size]

But Dark, it has yet to happen. So, you are arguing what is possible and not fact.

Actually Fah, I'm not bying that no innocent people have been excecuted. I read something about that in a news paper over here a few days ago. I'll do a search on the internet when I got more energy...just finished my last exam 2 hours ago, so my brain is empty.

haha no worries, find the artice when you can and I shall rebute

http://www.geocities.com/gfadp/innocent.htmlhttp://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/
Some facts to ponder Fah
According to "deathpenaltyinfo" 1 in 8 (thats 12.5%) were innocent.

I AM NOT arguing against or for the death penalty, I just thought I should show these facts.[/size]

hahah, what you posted was a list of "compelling evidence" supporting their possible evidence.  In truth, if they were innocent, they would have had the guilty verdict overturned post mortem.  Albeit worthless, it would have to be done by law. In addition this evidence is posted by a anti execution group. Also if you read this "report" most cite lawyer incompetence, that could be anything. These are all opinion based arguments but not actual facts, most of this stuff is legal technical mumbo jumbo.  The same stuff that they tried to get tookie freed with.

The Radelet and Bedau book I have experience with. A lot of what they write about is how there were legal technicalities that could and maybe should have kept a guilty verdict from being passed, but they hardly sit there and refute most of the evidence with hard evidence. Basically a bunch of what ifs that is most murders defences. Same as OJ, put up enough defences that have no correlation with each other and eventually one can be seen as fact.

Also in legal schools the book is basically considered a sided piece of bad writing. It does contain some serious insight into technical problems that go on in law cases, but the book is considered trash because of the way they cite the terminology of cases and the factual numbers they produce. I can cite more into this if you like but it gets wordly technical. Erm, maybe google has a better way to put it then i do.
So i reiterate, no person has been put to death who has later been found guilty, only guilty people on death row have been found innocent.

Operating under the assumption that we have yet to kill a person that's been found innocent is operating within the problem itself... and it's terrible logic. Just because we have yet to find that we've executed an innocent person, doesn't mean we haven't and didn't know about it... also, I doubt that we are likely to admit our mistakes in those situations, and try our best to prove ourselves wrong. That just doesn't happen! Glad to see you're brimming with such optimism though.

Anyway, you say we are dealing with fact and what is possible here... well, with human life on the line, you don't deal with what you presume to be a fact based mostly on subjective evidence, you look at every possibility. What if every court decision was upheld, and your "guilty until proven innocent" rationale killed some innocent people? Seriously, you act as if we're serving justice in a flawless system, but we're not. There is a huge margin of error, and it's pretty twisted to thing we hang entire lives on it.

In the end, the death penalty is something final, that you can't undo once you realize you've made a terrible mistake... you can't bring somebody back to life. Life in solitary, however, allows for wrongs to be undone (if they can be) and for justice to be served to the wicked. Think Count of Monte Cristo style prison, THAT'S what I've got in mind for cold blooded killers (except my prison would have no loose stones... only concrete). Of course I would never get away with it.. but hell, it would be a punishment far worse than death.
 

k, but you are arguing then that every case in the history of executions and even any case for that matter is based upon soley 100% refutible evidence. That no case with witnesses and evidence is ever right. That if 4 people saw someone kill another that we must never believe them in that all 4 might possibly be conspirators working for some alterior motive. There are capital murder cases that have irrefutible evidence. I am not saying all the cases are sound, I am just stating the facts. Do I think all people should be killed, no, but I should have to state that. You are stating that no matter what and no matter how sound the proof that we cannot kill on some assumption of tainted evidence, bad juries and a billion other things. If these arguements were allowed as plainly into all court cases the ability of our court system would cease to operation. Yes there is human error, i do not argue that, but people are not sent to death row based upon some fabulous belief that the world is against just one unlucky person who happened to have shit spouted upon them not only once in a conviction, but numerous times upon what usually is up to 30 appeals.

So now we get to the root of the problem heir in. You cannot really attack the system based upon a belief that killing a criminal is against your beliefs. this is what it always comes down to. People attack a system because they just feel it is wrong to kill a criminal based on their beliefs. It is not the system, but personal belief. But currently the system is set up because it is what the majority of the people want. If this wasnt true the death penalty would be overturned just as fast in CA as it would nationally. So if you feel killing a criminal is morally wrong, argue that, but trying to attack the system for a moral belief baffles me.

Wouldn't you have to argue the exact opposite gs? Arent you right to life and pro-execution? I could be wrong.

Yes, that's why I put it up there as a question for my opposition.  ;)

New Frank Zappa Album...Mother Of Assumptions.

The laws in Sweden are fucked up.
The worst penelty you can get is life sentence, and there isn't alot of people who gotten that.
Rapist have pleaded to be mentally insane, so they get out a few months later raping again.
People who have murdered other people gets from 2-8 years in jail, then they get out again.

The prisons in Sweden has better food than the schools here. Which is a bit retarded.

Point being, death penelty has it good and bad sides, but if you killed a person, you should be let out a year after.

The person who killed the swedish foreign minister, pleaded that he was mentally ill. I can't really remember what happened to him, but hes didn't get that strong of punishment..

i don't think that is a fair assumption, GS. abortion is a whole different topic. and just to tell you, i am against the death penalty and against abortion.

that would be like me assuming that the people that are for the death penalty are also for the war, etc.
i know many people that are for the death penalty and strongly disapprove of the war.
making an assumption like that is a very unfair generalization.

When you post things like you just did GS, you sound like a drunken bully to me. Where does life begin GS? Science says one thing, religion says another thing, and there lies the problem. I'm not religious, but you are...so it will just be another endless debate, a dance around a subject where people get more and more annoyed with you and you add fuel to the fire by joking and telling us we'll all go to hell while you'll be saved no matter what you do because you believe.....call me a coward if you wish, but no more. You just killed a good debate.

That would include me.. .

Yes, I'm aggainst the deathpenalty. I don't think anyone has the right to take another humans life away, state or private person. I believe that humans are a sum of the experiences they've had during their life, some experiences leave a deeper, some leave a shallow impression. ie. Parents probably have the most influence on most people, good or bad.

Now if someone has the misfortune of being born to lousy/abusive/bad parent(s) and on top of that is ,say, met with nothing but crap from the society around them, you can't really hold them fully accountable. I'm not excusing murders, rapist etc. not by a long shot, we're still creatures with our own will and have to take responsibilty for our actions. But, I think that since (insert X-amount) of our character is defined by interaction with other people which is beyond our control; that we can't just sit back and say "Sorry pal, you failed to swim up the torrent, now die"

Then again, I've never had a close one brutally murdered, maybe experiencing that would change my view, hopefully I'll never have to find out.

As for abortion, basically I don't think that a fetus is a human yet. I don't know where the line goes, but I think that women have the right to decide over their own body, and the fetus is a part of their body. And added to that is the fact that if it's not legal, those who want to, will find less safe ways of get rid of the fetus.

This doesn't come from any religious point of view for me, but I think that a fetus is a living thing the second that a sperm fertilizes an egg.  Therefore, that living thing should be protected by law just as any normal person would be.

See, Brutha, we can have a civilized debate about this without a bunch of name-calling.  ;)

I don't. I don't consider a small cluster of Cells to be a baby. My stance on Abortion is'nt black and white - i do think women should have the right to have an abortion up until a certain point when i believe that the cells have developed and multiplied enough for it to be considered a 'living being'

You are happy to kill a fully grown human but unhappy about the right for women to terminate a birth from the point sperm fertilizes an egg??

It's definately not human, for the first weeks there's nothing human about it, it's a process, a liquid-like substance . When the sperm and egg start hanging out together they start a mutation that will eventually develope in to a human, eventually.

... So do you think the US should be  executing women who have an abortion then on the ground they have committed murder?

hahaha very good point. Its been a long day and im being really freaking slow tonight. think i better stop before i make myself look any more stupid.

This is another excellent one to chew on ...
So what you are saying here is you only blame the women for not using protection. You have kids GS, you know it takes 2 to tango.
What about rape victimes, they should bare the child of their molesters for 9 months ?
Child pregnancies, A 12 year old girl that gets knocked up should have to go through the entire pregnacy ?
And even more unwanted children in orphinages all over the world nobody gives a toss about.

I see your point GS, I just re-read what I wrote and I'll have to rephrase the part about the unwanted children.
I was trying to point out that there are more unwanted children in orphinages that won't get adopted than parents that want to adopt.
I was not implying that I don't give a toss about those children. My apologies for the bad choice of words.