Will the execution of Crips founder be a mistake?

0 Replies

coluber2001 wrote:

I agree with that. After twenty four years, this is not the same guy. But then that would beg the question, "How long does it take until one is no longer the same person?" Isn't that an impossible determination to make?

0 Replies

Amigo wrote

Quote:

Tookies hasty execution will spark empathy with the people that will start a movement.

Twenty six years is hasty??? IMO the last twenty six years were a gift.

0 Replies

Does anyone know the origin of the gang's name, Crips?

I was curious, so tried to look it up, but got only "theories". One of the most chilling I read:

Quote:

7 July 1975 - U.S. News & World Report: A Senate subcommittee, also investigating school violence, reported that one gang in Los Angeles calls itself 'Crips' -- described by the subcommittee as 'a short form of cripples, which in turn is derived from the gang's trademark of maiming or crippling their victims.'

For some other interesting guesses:

http://www.snopes.com/language/acronyms/crip.htm

0 Replies

Your guess is as good as anyone else's, JW. I, too, had heard the story that one of Tookie Williams's original associates walked with a pronounced limp, i.e. was crippled, and that the name was originally given as a taunt by some Bloods. But the name stuck and the gang members decided to accept it.

But, as I said, your guess is as good as anyone's, including mine.

0 Replies

kickycan wrote:

coluber2001 wrote:

I agree with that. After twenty four years, this is not the same guy. But then that would beg the question, "How long does it take until one is no longer the same person?" Isn't that an impossible determination to make?

I don't know, but I think the concept of redemption flys by many
Christians even though that forms the crux of their religion. The question may be whether society stands to gain more from the execution of a person than the continued life, and I'm speaking from more than a monetary viewpoint. I really haven't followed this story carefully, but Williams seems to have been a strong and viable voice against gangs and their violence. A person who has been through the whole experience from within the trenches is bound to be more credible to the youth than someone who has always been on top of the hill looking down.

Aside from that, considering that a number of deathrow inmates have been released from prison based on DNA evidence, it is almost a certainty that innocent people have been executed in the past and will be in the future. That the state executes the innocent is almost to horrible to contemplate, but it must be admitted in order that it doesn't continue.

0 Replies

Thank you coluber, for your thoughtful posts to this thread.

Reasoning about stats that say there is no deterrence from the death penalty, or the reality that most executions happen only in the US and countries like China, Iran and Saudi Arabia, don't seem to budge those so convinced that state execution is "right".

I thought it a very good point you made about the concept of redemption/rehabilitation "flying by" so many "Christians".

They are the same ones who see no double standard in the US on the one hand practicing "rendition" of prisoners to other contries to be tortured, and on the other hand straining for the high moral ground from which they will bestow "freedom" upon the world.

0 Replies

au1929 wrote:

Amigo wrote

Quote:
Tookies hasty execution will spark empathy with the people that will start a movement.

Twenty six years is hasty??? IMO the last twenty six years were a gift.

Aaaahhh the gift of solitary confinement.

0 Replies

I have to wonder if the alternate sentence of "life without possibility of parole" really meant that a convicted killer would never get out, would we see a reduction in the percentage of those favoring the death penalty.

I realize Charles Manson only got "life" after the death penalty was overturned in California, but the possibility he could be released into society is chilling to me.

He's up for parole again in 2007.

0 Replies

Amigo wrote:

au1929 wrote:
Amigo wrote

Quote:
Tookies hasty execution will spark empathy with the people that will start a movement.

Twenty six years is hasty??? IMO the last twenty six years were a gift.
Aaaahhh the gift of solitary confinement.

If it were not better than execution he wouldn't be fighting for many more.

0 Replies

snood wrote:

Just for the sake of discussion, Finn - is there a circumstance when you could imagine paroling anyone convicted of murder - or put another way, is there a circumstance you could imagine yourself considering a murderer having paid his debt to society without being killed?

Yes, but it's unlikely.

Assuming that the convicted murderer was actually guilty of first degree murder, I would never argue for his or her parole, and I do not believe that such a debt can be paid, even with death.

I have already made it clear, though, that I do not support capital punishment. My objection, however, is for political, not moral reasons.

From a moral standpoint, I have no difficulty with the notion that when someone murders a fellow human being, his or her life is forfeit. I really don't have a problem with the concept of retribution. I do have a problem with the ability of the State to unerringly deliver retribution, and an even more basic problem with the notion that the State should be empowered to kill its citizens.

Never-the-less, I'm not inclined towards clemency for convicted murderers.

I suppose that my opinion on this issue is largely predicated upon the fact that I believe in life after death.

As I have commented before, redemption doesn't require clemency.

The murderer who repents and devotes his or her remaining years to the furtherance of all that is good is to be commended, but are they to be pardoned? I don't think so.

If Williams truly repented (and I honestly don't believe that he did) his repentance would be its own reward.

The notion that Williams the repentant Gang-banger was of such societal value that he transcended justice was foolish. It is hard to imagine anyone being of such value individually.

0 Replies

JustWonders wrote:

Does anyone know the origin of the gang's name, Crips?

I was curious, so tried to look it up, but got only "theories". One of the most chilling I read:

Quote:
7 July 1975 - U.S. News & World Report: A Senate subcommittee, also investigating school violence, reported that one gang in Los Angeles calls itself 'Crips' -- described by the subcommittee as 'a short form of cripples, which in turn is derived from the gang's trademark of maiming or crippling their victims.'

For some other interesting guesses:

http://www.snopes.com/language/acronyms/crip.htm

I heard a "gang expert" the other day explain that the "Crips" was a corruption of "cribs," and the origin of the "Crips" had to do with the location of their original members being referred to as "cribs."

This same expert stated that Tookie Williams was not a co-founder of the Crips as he did not become a member until 18 or more months after the Crips was formed.

0 Replies

dagmaraka wrote:

Finn d'Abuzz wrote:
9 children books doesn't make up for 4 lives.

and executing him does?

No, but so what?

Yours is a glib reply without any real substance.

The basic presumption is that we are a nation of laws.

Williams was convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to death -- by the application of our laws.

In order for him to evade the sentence of the law, it is reasonable to expect that his continued life could, somehow, be judged to be of such value to society that it trumped the very fundamental interest of society to protect its innocent members from murder.

It is difficult to imagine how a reasonable argument could be made that continuing to author anti-gang children's books fits the bill.

Perhaps if Williams were producing vaccines against the greatest health scourges of our time, we might, as a society, decide that his continued life was so valuable as to demand an exception to one of our most basic tenets, but authoring children's books?

The man already wrote 9. If these 9 were unable to dissuade kids from joining gangs, then it is hardly likely that 10, 11, 12 or 13 might. If they were, why do we need the continued life of Tookie Williams?

0 Replies

Amigo wrote:

I think their making a big mistake in every way. I think people will live to regret this. Especially if he is executed maintaining his innocence which I think he will.

Information will come out after his death that will put focus on why their wasn't a stay thus Supporting the argument against capital punishment, painting an even worse picture for the Conservatives as callous and blood thirsty alienating them farther from a larger group of people.

I think their desperate for a victory and revenge for the way things have been going for them and this is just another mistake. It's sad.

Tookies hasty execution will spark empathy with the people that will start a movement.

So far, no cigar.

0 Replies

coluber2001 wrote:

Balderdash.

What you are describing is a fly trying to get past a window.

The person of right now is not the person of a second ago.

The person of today is the sum total of yesterday's experiences. When one of those experiences is murder, it is foolish to suggest that the minute after lives were taken, the person has a fresh slate.

With your "enlightened" system, no one would be accountable for any action.

0 Replies

Well, in your system, Finn, wouldn't a saved life negate a life snuffed out? I mean, if it is a sum total kind of thing, like you say. And in the case of Tookie, you probably could make a very good case that he saved many more lives than he was responsible for destroying. What say ye to that?

0 Replies

kickycan wrote:

Well, in your system, Finn, wouldn't a saved life negate a life snuffed out? I mean, if it is a sum total kind of thing, like you say. And in the case of Tookie, you probably could make a very good case that he saved many more lives than he was responsible for destroying. What say ye to that?

No, a saved life doesn't balance out a taken life.

A million saved lives doesn't morally balance out a taken life, but from a perspective of societal good, there comes a point where the calculus need be considered.

I don't think anyone is capable of making a good case (let alone a very good case) that Williams, with his books, saved more lives than he took, although you're welcome to try.

0 Replies

Will the execution of Crips founder be a mistake?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know