Tookie Williams & the death penalty

Originally Posted by Carrera

Crime in the U.S. is far higher than in Europe. The death penalty hasn't prevented such high levels of crime. Moreoever, crime in some U.S. states is unacceptable to the point there is a problem.
Look at crime in Japan. It's very low. But the U.S. has had more nutty serial killers than nearly anywhere else.
The death penalty has made little difference and crime is even higher in capital punishment states.
Also, murder is wrong and murder is murder. I would never take part in the apparently legal murder of another individual (i.e. in a jury or as a governer) and set myself up as judge and jury. It goes against my beliefs (not being religious).
I do take the point there are evil people out there who can cause untold misery to the victim. If your father, mother or brother was a victim of such a crime, it's human nature you would want to take revenge.
But really nobody has the right to decide who lives or dies. Violent killers should be isolated from society instead to ensure the safety of other people.

Originally Posted by DiabloScott

Killing someone is always classified legally as homocide.

The legal definition of murder includes intent to kill - premeditated or not, the intent was to kill the person. Capital punishment in USA is only imposed on convictions of multiple counts of murder, or in some cases murder of a police officer or other official.

Manslaughter is unintentional murder but may include intent to do great harm. Justifiable homocide would include self-defense or defense of another person.

I think it a much bigger tragedy that our prisons are filled with non-violent drug offenders than that we execute extremely violent subhuman scum.

Originally Posted by jhuskey

If actors and celebrities want to use their influnce let them campaign for cancer research,safer cars,safer neighborhoods etc. not some low life gang member.
Just my opinion.

Originally Posted by jhuskey

I understand the US legal definition,I was trying to draw someone out to give me their definition between,war deaths,self defense,car wrecks involving alcohol or negligence etc.
The fact is we all rationalize these scenarios differently .
I use the story of the $20 bill laying in a bank teller to illustrate rationalization.
Would you take it? Most say no. Why? Because it's not mine.
Would you take it from the floor under the window?
Most say no. Why? Same reason.
How about out in the adjoining parking lot?
Many say yes, found money, but only the location has changed not the fact that it is not your money.

If actors and celebrities want to use their influnce let them campaign for cancer research,safer cars,safer neighborhoods etc. not some low life gang member.
Just my opinion.

Originally Posted by MountainPro

The state should never have the power of life an death over anyone. If you commit murder then you will be locked up.

Watching the news report on this guys death was harrowing. It took him 20 minutes to die and several 'lethal' injections and he was exasperated as to why he wasnt dead yet. Some news reports say he was peaceful durin gthe operation...he was in utter anguish.

Originally Posted by limerickman

That's a very good analogy, JH.
Well put.

Originally Posted by cheapie

you are wrong. it took 20 minutes to find the vein and administer the toxin. once the needle was placed his death came quickly.

however, your version does make for a more sympathic story so feel free to go with it.

Originally Posted by MountainPro

listen up folks, if it isnt too much trouble i would like to see everyones avatar jazzed up for the festive season...

blame huskey. (and meehs)

Originally Posted by MountainPro

well, personally i wasnt there in the room with them when the lethal doses were administered, i suspect you were nowhere near the scene either. All i have to go on are BBC news reports. You on the other hand seem to have insider knowledge.

Originally Posted by limerickman

That's a very good analogy, JH.
Well put.

Originally Posted by DiabloScott

I don't understand that analogy at all... at least as it is supposed to be analogous with the death penalty.

As rationalization - you don't take it from the teller because it belongs to the bank, you take it in the parking lot because it belongs to no one... if someone says "oh that's mine, the wind just blew it out of my hand" you hand it over. If the amount of money is large enough that you think someone might report it missing, then it would be reasonable to report it to the bank. Yes, we rationalize - no, that's not a bad thing if not misused.

Agreed that celebreties have way too much influence on politics.

Originally Posted by roadhog

I mostly want to know if Jesse Jackson will be standing outside the gates of the facility in Mississippi that will soon put a Mr. John Nixon to death (apparently the next scheduled one in the country). I'm guessing......no. Hmmm, how does this guy choose his battles then...

Originally Posted by jhuskey

The analogy is that we all rationalize at different levels and that the original premise was that the money did not belong to you and in the end it still doesn't except by default.
If you kill someone with a gun you may get the death penalty. If you run someone down in a car you will probably get a slap on the wrist and a small fine,discounting civil suits.
The point is the person is just as dead and most of us do misuse rationializing,in that it is ok to steal because I don't have what he has,or they won't miss it they have plenty.
I asked in an earlier post that if you knew someone was going to kill an innocent person, would you kill them to save that person in turn making you a murderer.Or a good samaritan?