Skip to main content

If they kill Stanley now they would do nothing more than create a 'savior' for the crips, and a martyr for the black community.

His death would conjure up a unique following, and his presence in death would create a stimulus for the community and a stumblingblock for those who seek retribution. I don't suggest that there will be a 'cult-like' following. I just think that since his sentence is so highly controversial and publicized, the fence-sitters, and the disinterested will be persuaded by the outcome of his death. In many ways his death would work against the justice system.
think about it...

Stanley, to many, including those who nominated him for a nobel peace prize, represents human progress. Relevant to this board is the black communal progress that evident to many, not including you. As he is known for creating the gang, he is understood to be able to relate to those that are nesting in what society calls the breeding grounds for criminal activity. His ablity to relate implies that he is an interconnected intermediary or intercessor.

I'm sure you're not picking up what I'm putting down, so I'll digress.

However, I think that his death will be a small step towards providing an alternative solution to the justice systems one dimensional remedie for blacks in general.

The black community is not as attuned as it should be towards blacks being disproportionately killed by the justice system. I think this will give us an opportunity to focus our agency towards valuing our lives, as it is apparent that no one else will.
quote:
Stanley, to many, including those who nominated him for a nobel peace prize, represents human progress. Relevant to this board is the black communal progress that evident to many, not including you. As he is known for creating the gang, he is understood to be able to relate to those that are nesting in what society calls the breeding grounds for criminal activity. His ablity to relate implies that he is an interconnected intermediary or intercessor.


1. Tookie Williams is hardly Nobel Peace Prize material.

...perhaps Tookie merits this award for doing such a fine job promoting the death of numerous innocent Black people.


2. If left up to California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, slim chance exists where Tookie Williams will not be executed.

"Crips" hobbies included extorting money from non gang members, assaults and robberies, most of which occurred on the school grounds making school a very dangerous place to be.....

....and I'm willing to bet, 99.9999999% of this activity took place in the "Hood", where Black people live, specifically a South Central Los Angeles, etc., etc.

.....had this activity occurred in the Caucasian, Korean, Hispanic, Jamaican, Ethiopian, Islamic, Jewish, Filipino, Samoan, etc., community, instead of gunning down unarmed individuals in "cold blood", Tookie Williams and/or his associates, would have met plenty of resistance.....

.......namely the resistance of other armed individuals shooting back at him, and/or his cohorts.......to which slim chance exists where Tookie, and/or many of his associates, would be alive today!
.

3. No telling how many innocent Black people Tookie Williams and/or others are responsible for maiming, killing, robbing, etc.
Last edited {1}
quote:
1. Tookie Williams is hardly Nobel Prize material


This is your opinion. Which is valid and relevant. Unfortunately, not enough people that are relevant to this issue agree. Otherwise there would be no controversy.

quote:
2. Slim chance exists where Tookie Williams will not be executed.


May be true, but not applicable to what I stated. I don't care to calculate his chances for survival, not for me to due. I would like to imagine, however, the impact of his death or life, towards the black community.
HeruStar,

I hear what you are saying, however there are many, many men who are more deserving of your support.
The only thing "Tookie" is connected to is the legacy of the Crips and that is a legacy of fear,drugs and death for his black brothers and sisters. His spawn has done more to destroy the black communities across the globe than some evil whites could have ever envisioned.
Yes he clearly had the leadership ability and vision but he squandered it on evil deeds.
Whitey did not kill "Tookie" Tookie condemned "Tookie."
He is not the second coming or the prophet. He is a false god.
In a world where human progress is foremost, one has to at least contemplate what Stanley can contribute. Let's use Hitler for example; Highly charasmatic, great leader that used his abilities for 'evil deeds'. If Hitler where to all of a sudden, realize his error and change his ways, could he, or could he not, have contributed vastly to the European society?

If we are condemned after realizing our mistakes, then aren't we working against progress?
Well if it were me answering my Hitler question, I would err on the side of caution and blast his brains out his ear.

But hey I just refuse to be socially evolved- I still believe that if we stuck enough murderers heads on pikes to the entrance of our cities (with trite little signs)that there would be a reduction in crime or atleast victims families would feel better Smile.
quote:
Well if it were me answering my Hitler question, I would err on the side of caution and blast his brains out his ear.


MY question was could he contribute?

To which your obvious answer is 'he doen't DESERVE a chance to contribute'.

Well, in light of who deserves what.

I think SOCIETY deserves his(Stanley's) contributions. He has a debt to society. WE all know that the best way to avoid paying a debt is bankruptcy or DEATH. How is his death any compensation? Wouldn't it make more sense for him to owe some of the proceeds from his books, to the families that were wronged. Killing him would be catering to the irrational complexities of a highly EMOTIONAL society. It's not about what's JUSTLY right, or RATIONALLY right, it's about what FEELS right. What's ironic is that in a capitalist driven, profit-oriented society the justice system lets EMOTIONS dictate the supply and demand of harsh penalities whether or not the benefit outways the cost or vice versa.
quote:
people make their choices, and oftentimes, suffer the consequences of those choices.


Yeah, but these 'consequences' are our creation. They are our means of satisfying our thirst for blood and revenge. The death penalty is a consequence without any truly socially agreed upon and defined intentions. Before we can even compromise as to what PURPOSE it serves to kill Stanley, we begin discussing when and how he dies.<--o.k. o.k. this is all neither here nor there...

Stanley represents (from a societal point of view) a criminal that has been rehabilitated. When they let him publish those books, when they produced that movie, they let the community see his atonement, which signifies a remorseful and rehabilitated individual. If and when they sentence him to death, the justice system will be viewed as one that not only has a lack of interest in rehabilitating criminals, but is anti-rehabilitative in that it KILLS it's publicly rehabilitated criminals.
HeruStar,
quote:
If and when they sentence him to death, the justice system will be viewed as one that not only has a lack of interest in rehabilitating criminals, but is anti-rehabilitative in that it KILLS it's publicly rehabilitated criminals.


Not to cavalier about it but,.....yeah, it just might send a message, to people who might in full knowledge, know that they're going in the same direction Tookie had taken.
so we are to put someone to death in hopes that it 'MIGHT' send a message? What if his death does not send the message that is intended? Are we to revive him, and try a different angle? He death is absolute, but the "message" is not. Since the message is incumbent upon how society responds emotionally, whether it be fear, which is thought to lead to deterrence, whether it be a spontaneous joy that dwells on antecedent actions that temporarily satisfy one with a present sense of justice with no regards for ethical consequences of the future, we can't expect the 'message' to be concrete. Emotions are shifty, but rationalism persists through, under, or around irrational emotions. One can expect that the 'message' will evolve into a shameful disgusts in the past and present actions of the justice system.
If I were you jefftec, Blacksanction, etc., etc., ..........

I would leave the floor in useless discussion to the Nmaginates, the Kevin41s, the Empty Purnatas, the Isomes, the Fines, etc., etc., to have their own in house discussion on the merits of:

A. worthless AA benefits.

B. doomed for failure social welfare as applied in Black community issues.

C. giving credence to the voice of anything else but Democracy.

D. damn the Republican Party, and/or anyone else of credibility, let us give praise and thanks to the sleazy, the criminal, and/or the egregiously incompetent.

E. Tookie Williams deserves both the Nobel Peace Prize and another chance to walk the streets again, but as for any truly innocent and/or law abiding Black people, or otherwise, who seek equity, let them rot in Hell.

F. There is no such thing as criminal activity, sleaze, or greed in the Black community, and if anything like this exists it must all be the fault of racist Caucasians, the Bush Administration, the Republican Party, etc.

Mind you since the 60s the Black community has been under the spell of the Democratic Party, liberal ideology, etc., etc.,

......more or less left to run its own course, directed by incompetent individuals affiliated with the Democratic Party.....

....but still, in spite of this reality, it is surely the fault of racist Caucasians, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, the Bush Administration, President George Bush, etc., etc., that the Black community continues to be the most poverty stricken, void of competent representation, many times criminal, moving very fast in the wrong direction community within the U.S.


Sincerely,

Michael Lofton
quote:
Originally posted by Isome:
quote:
Originally posted by jefftec:
...yeah, it just might send a message, to people who might in full knowledge, know that they're going in the same direction Tookie had taken.


It's been proven that the death penalty is not a deterent. It serves no purpose other than revenge.


And if I was a member of that family that he so viciously slaughtered, revenge is exactly what I would want. The difference is that I would want to pull the handle.
quote:
Originally posted by jazzdog:
quote:
Originally posted by Isome:
quote:
Originally posted by jefftec:
...yeah, it just might send a message, to people who might in full knowledge, know that they're going in the same direction Tookie had taken.


It's been proven that the death penalty is not a deterent. It serves no purpose other than revenge.


And if I was a member of that family that he so viciously slaughtered, revenge is exactly what I would want. The difference is that I would want to pull the handle.


Ahhh, JazzDog, an honest man. Everyone tries to cloak their blood lust in terms of "justice" and "what's best for society." But all of that is bs. Anyone supportive of the DP seeks revenge.
Blacksanction--
quote:
Originally posted by Blacksanction:
Revenge is a deterent for the 99% of us law abiding citizens. The DP is for the killers who have no respect for the rest of society (until its their execution time).

Clearly the DP was in place at the time that Tookie did his crimes so he is to blame for his own impending death and no one else just, call it delayed suicide.


Retaliation is the right of "no" man. The fact that we live in 'the belly of the beast' -- a Godless Country 'will never' justify the DP--IMHO!

Blame is a 'deep' cannon and goes much deeper that your loose ramblings...

Fine
It is sad that we think because a white man puts on a black robe that he's above man and closer to God than the rest of us....by getting to determine when life ends for someone....just like the murder..this country is probably the only real industrialized country that does that.....because it is ran by and supported by death loving hicks..from war on down....caging em, shooting em or frying em is the solution...man this country really lacks sophistication in its thinking......
Kevin41
quote:
Originally posted by Kevin41:
It is sad that we think because a white man puts on a black robe that he's above man and closer to God than the rest of us....by getting to determine when life ends for someone....just like the murder..this country is probably the only real industrialized country that does that.....because it is ran by and supported by death loving hicks..from war on down....caging em, shooting em or frying em is the solution...man this country really lacks sophistication in its thinking......


I am off but,

--This is yet another example of the whitewash of Black Antiquity.

To espound further, I mean--this is the white man's method of reintroducing and handfeeding 'us' back what we invented in the first place....!

Blame was mentioned by Blacksanction in a previous post. -- We were originally a strong, spiritual, fun loving people before 1446. The shackles of slavery ended that state. It should not be a surprise or wonder that we have arrived at such a low, barbaric state...we are in essence immulating our captors...who were themselves--thieves, murders out of Europe, correct?



Fine
I find it stunningly brilliant that execution was invented by whites to the detriment of blacks.
To actually believe that prior to slavery that our black ancestors lived in harmony with neighbouring tribes is absolute bullshit and fantasy.
Believe what you want, but the killing of other people has been around for as long as man has been able to put his hands around the neck of his fellow man.
quote:
Originally posted by Blacksanction:
Revenge is a deterent for the 99% of us law abiding citizens.


Come again?

quote:
The DP is for the killers who have no respect for the rest of society (until its their execution time).


The death penalty is not a deterrent. Most People who are willing to kill are not deterred by the death penalty.
    :: A Gallup Poll Finds Decreased Support for Death Penalty When Compared with Life Sentence ::

  1. A May 2004 Gallup Poll found that a growing number of Americans support a sentence of life without parole rather than the death penalty for those convicted of murder. Gallup found that 46% of respondents favor life imprisonment over the death penalty, up from 44% in May 2003. During that same time frame, support for capital punishment as an alternative fell from 53% to 50%. The poll also revealed a growing skepticism that the death penalty deters crime, with 62% of those polled saying that it is not a deterrent. These percentages are a dramatic shift from the responses given to this same question in 1991...

    :: FBI Report Reveals Murder Rate Rise in the South ::

  2. According to the FBI's Preliminary Uniform Crime Report for 2002, the murder rate in the South increased by 2.1% while the murder rate in the Northeast decreased by almost 5%. The South accounts for 82% of all executions since 1976; the Northeast accounts for less than 1%. Read the report. (FBI Preliminary Uniform Crime Report 2002, June 16, 2003).

    :: Capital Punishment and Deterrence: Examining the Effect of Executions on Murder in Texas ::

  3. Authors John Sorenson, Robert Wrinkle, Victoria Brewer, and James Marquart examined executions in Texas between 1984 and 1997. They speculated that if a deterrent effect were to exist, it would be found in Texas because of the high number of death sentences and executions within the state. Using patterns in executions across the study period and the relatively steady rate of murders in Texas, the authors found no evidence of a deterrent effect. The study concluded that the number of executions was unrelated to murder rates in general, and that the number of executions was unrelated to felony rates. (45 Crime and Delinquency 481-93 (1999)).


Proponents of the death penalty should just be honest and admit they are vengeful, short-sighted, overly-emotional people whose opinions about the issue are based on their most base instincts of rage and bloodlust.
Look what else I found:
    Homicide Rates Fall in Canada After Abolition of Death Penalty

    The abolition of the death penalty in Canada in 1976 has not led to increased homicide rates. Statistics Canada reports that the number of homicides in Canada in 2001 (554) was 23% lower than the number of homicides in 1975 (721), the year before the death penalty was abolished. In addition, homicide rates in Canada are generally three times lower than homicide rates in the U.S., which uses the death penalty. For example, according to the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics, the homicide rate in the U.S. in 1999 was 5.7 per 100,000 population and the rate in Canada was only 1.8. Canada currently sentences those convicted of murder to life sentences with parole eligibility. (Issues Direct.com, 8/4/02).
quote:
Originally posted by Blacksanction:
"Blame is a 'deep' cannon and goes much deeper that your loose ramblings... "

_Fine_________________________________________

I have no idea what you mean by this but I like the phrase none the less tfro

Are you sure it is not canyon as opposed to cannon?

Of course if you were hit by a cannon it would leave a deep hole and make you feel empty inside.


--I meant loose cannon, as stated.

I point my reference -- "Blame is a 'deep' cannon and goes much deeper that your loose ramblings" -- to the exact ["ancient"] brutalities imposed upon us during that peculiar institution called "slavery" that surface ["today"] as 'black-on-black crime.

Mixed with the acidious drippings of racism, ["our hidden psychosis of this insane treatment"] surfaced as our self-hatred to/of one another.

The loose/"deep" cannon is therefore ["our hidden psychosis of this insane treatment"].

Fine
"Proponents of the death penalty should just be honest and admit they are vengeful, short-sighted, overly-emotional people whose opinions about the issue are based on their most base instincts of rage and bloodlust."

So one can assume that if someone walked into your house and slaughered all your love ones for no good reason that you would not want vengence, you wouldn't be emotional and the rage and bloodlust that a normal caring person who has feelings for his loved ones shows would be absence.

So just how cold is your heart?
quote:
Originally posted by jazzdog:

So one can assume that if someone walked into your house and slaughered all your love ones for no good reason that you would not want vengence, you wouldn't be emotional and the rage and bloodlust that a normal caring person who has feelings for his loved ones shows would be absence.

So just how cold is your heart?


If a fine sista walked past I might have all manner of emotions and impulses toward her. Do I act on them without thinking or do I funnel them through the lens of appropriateness, reasonability, legality, etc.?

Whether I would have the impusle to exact revenge, IMHO, has little to no bearing on whether I rationally believe that that would be the right and best thing to do.
MBM, with all due respect, even with your manners and impulses getting out of hand, hitting on a fine woman where the worst that can happen is that you get turned away and coming home to find that you little slice of heaven is full of blood spattered dead family members is a bit of a stretch.

Having you family slaughtered like sheep I would hope would be an emotional event for everybody unless you don't give a shit about them in the first place, in that case you should probably be a suspect.

And just what is appropriate and reasonable when it comes to someone killing your family and what you want to happen to the person who did the crime. Everybody wants to paint people who want revenge as being irrational where in reality I think that wanting revenge is rational and right. Sorry, for me coming home to an empty house scarred by what has happened and knowing that the monster who did it is still alive, even if he is in prison does not sit well with me.

Like I said, not only would I want it I would be there to see it done.
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by jazzdog:
"Proponents of the death penalty should just be honest and admit they are vengeful, short-sighted, overly-emotional people whose opinions about the issue are based on their most base instincts of rage and bloodlust."

So one can assume that if someone walked into your house and slaughered all your love ones for no good reason that you would not want vengence, you wouldn't be emotional and the rage and bloodlust that a normal caring person who has feelings for his loved ones shows would be absence.

So just how cold is your heart?


My heart isn't COLD at all. As a human being, I would want revenge for my loved ones if such a henious crime took their lives. Unfortunately, I am a christian and I should forgive those who tresspass against me. AND, I would still have a hard time forgiving.

What about the perpetrator? We are all governed by the laws of society. There are consequences if we break society law. Unfortunately, the law at the time of the crime is death.

I usually cringe when I get jury duty notice because I don't want to be on a death penalty case. Hence, I would then have to decide if I was for or against the death penalty.
quote:
Originally posted by jazzdog:
"Proponents of the death penalty should just be honest and admit they are vengeful, short-sighted, overly-emotional people whose opinions about the issue are based on their most base instincts of rage and bloodlust."

So one can assume that if someone walked into your house and slaughered all your love ones for no good reason that you would not want vengence, you wouldn't be emotional and the rage and bloodlust that a normal caring person who has feelings for his loved ones shows would be absence.

So just how cold is your heart?


Hypothetically--my first level reactionary would be internal: sorrow-hurt-remorse and then anger.

Second level would be external: retribution--life sentence for wrongdoer, period.

Fine
quote:
Originally posted by jazzdog:
Like I said, not only would I want it I would be there to see it done.


See, that? That right up there... that's what I'm talking about. Vengeful. Bloodlust. And, I love you man, my heart is not cold. *snicker*

But, really... look at what you said. You would relish the opportunity to watch someone die, because your own relatives have died by their hand. That is revenge. That is an overly-emotional response that lets your primitive instincts dictate your behavior.
quote:
Originally posted by Isome:
quote:
Originally posted by jazzdog:
Like I said, not only would I want it I would be there to see it done.


See, that? That right up there... that's what I'm talking about. Vengeful. Bloodlust. And, I love you man, my heart is not cold. *snicker*

But, really... look at what you said. You would relish the opportunity to watch someone die, because your own relatives have died by their hand. That is revenge. That is an overly-emotional response that lets your primitive instincts dictate your behavior.


Of course its revenge, I didn't said this had anything to do with justice, justice would be getting it done quickly so they don't get to hang around for 10-15 years waiting, convicted beyond all reasonable doubt, get 120 days to appeal to make sure everything was done right and hey hey goodbye. Justice would be making sure that they died in agony just like the victims.

I still don't understand how you can fault someone for being overly emotional when their family is slaughtered, being over emotionally is if the guy steals your car and you want him put to death, killing a family of four as this person did qualifies as a emotional event and any response to that is expected and reasonably in my book.

As for relishing the opportunity to watch the person who slaughtered my family die, absolutely.

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×