Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom And what is it with the media today? Its Tookie Williams all the time day!
Originally Posted By tiggertoo <<So vengeance is evil, but torture isn't?>> ROTFLMAO!!! Thanks for the laugh. Think for a moment, please. There are different kinds of torture. Physical torture, I would not approve of. However, sitting a man in a cell for years and years, thinking about what they could have been doing with their time, you know, kind of what we already to. I'd just eliminate cable TV. Yeah, that kind of torture I can live with. It's called self inflected torture, torture of a troubled mind.
Originally Posted By itsme >>The monster was not reformed. He threw chemicals at guards, beat up and raped fellow inmates and even ordered the stabbing of another inmate ------ So in your opinion how long does it take to know if someone is reformed?
Originally Posted By gadzuux There's a trap here that's all too easy to fall into. It goes something like - well he did this, this and this, and he didn't do that and the other thing, so therefore he deserves to die. Says who? You? People are all too eager to rationalize away about why their personal 'verdict' is correct - because obviously this guy is "an animal" "a monster". It's not a good idea for anyone to think that they can decide who "deserves" to die. What if he did something heroic after he was convicted? Are you now going say "well I've decided that he deserves to live". You don't get to make that choice. And we as a society don't get to make that choice. We do anyway, but that doesn't make it right. The victims and their families? It's a tragedy, but they are no better served by capital punishment than by lifelong incarceration. And those that think they'll gain some eventual satisfaction by the death of the culprit - they lose either way. If they do find solace in the vengance, they are reduced in the process. If they don't, then why do it? In sum, the right to kill other humans is not ours to take. Just because we do it anyway doesn't make it right. This has nothing to do with religion - morality and right vs wrong still exist outside of religion.
Originally Posted By itsme I dont want to sound like im sticking up for this guy, Im not. But i laugh at all the "how bad he is" in prison 15 years ago people. Why would the warden of the prison during those years say this? <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10085975/from/RL.5/" target="_blank">http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10 085975/from/RL.5/</a> "On its Web site, the Correction Department said of Williams: “By 1994, having firmly entrenched himself as the leader of the Crips at San Quentin, he wielded his power as his lieutenants and other minions were dispatched to carry out his objectives.†The paragraph was removed a day after it was posted following a call from The Associated Press. Daniel Vasquez, who was warden at San Quentin from 1983 to 1993 and wrote a letter supporting clemency for the last death row inmate executed, said he had never seen such an inflammatory statement in a press release from the prison. “It’s like they’re trying to drum up business for death row,†he said."
Originally Posted By cstephens tiggertoo wrote: > A nice, cozy penal colony on the North Slope of Alaska and a room roughly the size of a cubicle. 23 hours a day, for 50+ years stuck in this hole Sounds like physical torture to me. /cs
Originally Posted By itsme >>There's a trap here that's all too easy to fall into. It goes something like - well he did this, this and this, and he didn't do that and the other thing, so therefore he deserves to die. ---- Thats why i say religion doesnt belong here. Many sides of the spectrum support death in one way or the other.
Originally Posted By patrickegan “This is so indicative of the mentality of the rabid-right. Dehumanize a person so it's easier to destroy them. Yes, he committed heinous acts, but that doesn't take away from his humanity.†And what is indicative of the rabid-left is to separate the perp from his crime. In this effort of denial it becomes much easier to drape the mantle of victim upon the killer. People who rabidly support politicians who support the woman’s right to infanticide should really take a softer tone else they run the risk of sanctimony.
Originally Posted By cstephens tiggertoo wrote: > How? You volunteer to spend 50+ years, 23 hours a day in a nice, cozy penal colony on the North Slope of Alaska and a room roughly the size of a cubicle and then tell me that's not physical torture. But if you say it's ok, it must be. /cs
Originally Posted By cmpaley >>“This is so indicative of the mentality of the rabid-right. Dehumanize a person so it's easier to destroy them. Yes, he committed heinous acts, but that doesn't take away from his humanity.†And what is indicative of the rabid-left is to separate the perp from his crime. In this effort of denial it becomes much easier to drape the mantle of victim upon the killer.<< And if you actually read my arguments and statements, you will see that it's based on something other than a "rabid-left" ideology. Williams, to me, is just another criminal. His particular case is irrelevant to my view on the issue. I am against the death penalty in all cases in our modern society, so I would speak out against the death sentence no matter WHO was up for execution. Back 100 years ago, it was a moral and necessary option because it was the only way to protect society from dangerous criminals. Today, we have means of rendering a dangerous criminal harmless to society through incarceration, so it's not a moral or ethical option. >>People who rabidly support politicians who support the woman’s right to infanticide should really take a softer tone else they run the risk of sanctimony.<< That's a strawman, but one I've come to expect from you...you need to come up with new material. My position is pro-life in the complete sense...I am opposed to abortion, euthanasia, unjust war and the death penalty...all in line with the teachings of my faith.
Originally Posted By tiggertoo Since you can’t seem to answer the question, I’ll help and answer the converse: How is it NOT physical torture to incarcerate a prisoner for 50 years? First, we don’t touch them at all. We would simply be taking them out of society like we already do. You should already know take many maximum security prisoners are limited to a couple hours outside their cells per day (meals, showers, etc…). A cubicle is roughly 6’X10’X10’, about the standard size of a one person cell in death row. The location is merely to dissuade ideas about escaping. Three meals a day. The length of time, LIFE (however long that is). This is nothing new, and, no, it is not physical torture, unless you count the naughty chair as physical torture too. And if you do…well…okay. That’s your choice. But let me ask you this: hypothetically, if your daughter hit your son, would you advocate your son hitting your daughter back? Or would scold them and send them to the naughty chair for as long as they deserve? Anyhow, given the choice between killing or incarcerating for life without parole, I feel secure believing incarceration is the more ethical and humane. But also, more meaningful and gives the perpetrator time to inflict the agonizing pain of knowing this is all they will every see again. Self inflicted torture.
Originally Posted By cstephens tiggertoo wrote: > Since you can’t seem to answer the question I'm refusing to answer the question because if you can't see yourself that the conditions you describe are physical torture, there's nothing that can be said to you to convince you otherwise. > But let me ask you this: hypothetically, if your daughter hit your son, would you advocate your son hitting your daughter back? Or would scold them and send them to the naughty chair for as long as they deserve? You've been watching too much "Supernanny". And if you're trying to equate a child hitting another child to a man brutally murdering 4 innocent people, then you're proving that it's useless to engage in a productive discussion with you. /cs
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>But also, more meaningful and gives the perpetrator time to inflict the agonizing pain of knowing this is all they will every see again. Self inflicted torture. << I understand what you're saying, but is that really how it is? Does someone like Tookie Williams sit around reflecting on what he did wrong, or do they continue to play the victim to any of their celebrity guests willing to show up for a vist and listen? Does he truly ever get it?
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Well thats it, The law states that if you are found guilty and death is your sentance then that what it is. It has nothing to do with religion.>> <<Thats why i say religion doesnt belong here. Many sides of the spectrum support death in one way or the other.>> There ya go. The moonbat libs are once again trying to claim that the U.S. is NOT a Christian nation. Wake up people. Separation of church and state is a MYTH. This country was founded as a Christian country by men who were Christians. I suppose you’re one of those who call it a HOLDIAY TREE too!! The libs never have any answers which is why they keep losing elections. Oh… itsme is not a lib?? Nevermind… ;-)
Originally Posted By gadzuux >> Does he truly ever get it? << What does it matter, one way or the other? He's in for life. Look at manson, sitting in a cell somewhere in visalia never to see freedom again - who cares if he's remorseful or not? Lot's of prisoners with crimes every bit as heinous as williams copped a plea, so they're not eligible for the death penalty. They're not necessarily 'better' or 'worse' than death row inmates, they just came to different terms during the trial and sentencing. It's this kind of capricious wheeling and dealing with life itself that makes the whole process inherently unfair. It's beneath us as a culture to be putting our own citizens to death in the guise of 'justice'. Almost no other civilized nation on the planet does it, more than half of the fifty states don't do it - it's just these isolated little pockets where it occurs, and we happen to be in one of them. Let's evolve.
Originally Posted By tiggertoo <<I'm refusing to answer the question because if you can't see yourself that the conditions you describe are physical torture, there's nothing that can be said to you to convince you otherwise.>> Right…. Just admit you cannot prove your assertion that incarceration in the manner which I described is tantamount to physical torture? If you could, you would have by now. You can’t. So admit it. <<You've been watching too much "Supernanny". And if you're trying to equate a child hitting another child to a man brutally murdering 4 innocent people, then you're proving that it's useless to engage in a productive discussion with you.>> 1) I’ve never heard of “Supernanny,†or whatever it is. Sorry. 2) You seem to think this is only about Mr. Williams. It is much broader issue than that. 3) If you cannot see the analogy I am making between vengeance and incarceration, then perhaps it is YOU who are useless to debate with and not I. After all, all you have succeeded in presenting are some snide comments and sad attempts at deflecting the question. I explained to you why I do not consider it physical torture. Will you or will you not, provide a counter-argument? And the line, “it's useless to engage in a productive discussion with you,†is an obvious copout. Either you can, or cannot answer. Which is it?
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>Look at manson, sitting in a cell somewhere in visalia never to see freedom again - who cares if he's remorseful or not?<< Bad example. Personally, I resent every nickle spent on him and in keeping him alive. I look at every Hot Pocket he chokes down as food out of the mouth of a needy person elsewhere. And look how his followers tried to kill President Ford -- all while he was "safely" behind bars. With Williams behind bars, enjoying his celebrity visits, the Crips just keep on doing what they do. They sure aren't reading his childrens books.
Originally Posted By tiggertoo <<I understand what you're saying, but is that really how it is? Does someone like Tookie Williams sit around reflecting on what he did wrong, or do they continue to play the victim to any of their celebrity guests willing to show up for a vist and listen? Does he truly ever get it?>> I can always count on you for sensibility 2oony. Thanks. Honestly, I don’t think Tookie would have ever felt remorse for what he had done. He also should have never been given the public eye as he was. All in all, I believe he should have been incarcerated for life, without parole. Preferably in a remote location, where fawning fans would not have access. He should be left in his cell to do whatever he wishes to do in his cell, like he had for 25 year (minus the fanfare), but knowing it will be for the rest of his life. That’s would be torture enough.
