Good Riddance

I don't know how you all feel about capital punishment, but I
believe there are criminals so vile and their crimes so heinous that
justice cannot be served with nothing less than killing them.

In fact, I have different ideas for them, but the society would
probably never accept these ideas. I want them to become guinea pigs
for medical experimentation. A new drug? A new surgical technique? An
inexperienced surgeon who needs more experience? Well, try it on these
bastards first.

Instead of testing new drugs that might be toxic on college students
who volunteer, why not use these human trash so that they can actually
offer something to society and the greater goods?

---

"The greatest thing you'll ever learn is just to love and be loved in return." -- Toulouse-Lautre, Moulin Rouge

I'm opposed to Capital Punishment. I think I may have said it
before, but considering the fact that our justice system has made
mistakes in the past, until we have the power to give life to the dead
(who we unfairly executed) I don't think it's our right to take life.

As for the medical testing... I think the key word is
"volunteer." Since college students volunteer, I don't have too
much sympathy for them if something goes wrong. And the torture
idea is pretty monstrous. I'd like to take the high road and have
our government not sink to the level of the criminal.

But what about all those patients who can benefit from the medical testing? It's not just punishment.

---

"The greatest thing you'll ever learn is just to love and be loved in return." -- Toulouse-Lautre, Moulin Rouge

Breaking a few bad eggs along the way to medical progress...

I don't know. Even though it's not nearly as bad as what the
Nazi's did, the whole idea of "Medical Testing" on unwilling test
subjects doesn't sit with me. As long as we have volunteers,
what's the problem?

I think testing is good, but surgey is a bit far. I think the death penalty should be reserved only for those with evidence such as video of the crime and undeniable facts.

---

-[Better to be Honest than Kind]-

I think the death penalty should be reserved only for those with
evidence such as video of the crime and undeniable facts.

• photoshops Myrk on the grassy knoll. :biggrin:

I don't believe in capital punishment because there is no such thing as
irrifutable evidence, short of catching the person red handed and even
then, people can lie about that. If you have the time and money, you
can prove ANYTHING these days. Look at Tango & Cash if you don't
believe me. :biggrin:

I think compulsory blood/organ donation (relative to the severeness of the crime committed) would be good.

I'm not 100% for the capital punishment, though I do find myself
sometimes yelling at the TV that X should be tortured to death and his
mangled body let to rot in plain sight as a warning to others alla<span style="color: lightblue;"> Tepes-style.</span>

I think medical experiments and such would be a good thing. As well as blood and organ ... well, you cannot call it exactly donation pfft.

Also, if they are most certain of the guiltyness of the victim, undeniable facts (video or something), I think torture would be a good example for those who have thoughts about turning to "bad ways". Perhaps burning the bottom of the feet and then taping it and showing it in TV would be good example enough. Or sinking them in Sulphuric Acid... or HCl you know... I think those screams would be a perfect warning. I know I'm sadist, yes I do. I can't help it.

Anyway, uh... yeah, our punishment system is WAY too easy. Death penalties - only for those who have commited a crime not bad enough to be tortured to death. But for others - keyword: pain.

---

HL2 tutorials 'n' stuff: http://madedog.pri.ee
217.159.236.34:27050 - CSS Server - Clean | koffer.ee

That's pretty barbaric, and to be honest I don't think that would
discourage criminals. Criminals don't think they're going to be
caught, so why would changing the punishment have any effect?

he should be treated as mercifully as he treated his victims.........

Doc Brasso....

a good public thrashing would be enough of a deterent for most of the street scum/footbal hooligans/buskers etc.

[edit]wtf, Doc, what happened to your eyebrows? were you playing with matches again?

---

i eat paint

There are circumstances where we can prove guilt without any doubt.

For example, I am pretty sure that Bin Laden is responsible for countless number of deaths in our time. If he's ever captured, we should use his body in some beneficial way.

The problem with medical testing is that we currently use healthy volunteers. Some of these drugs are potentially extremely toxic. And I rather have someone who is going to be killed anyway to suffer the adverse reaction than some healthy upstanding citizen.

I am always ambivalent about practicing my surgical skills on innocent patients during my medical training. As medical students, the only way to learn something is to practice on real people. There's really no way to replace that.

But I feel bad at the same time. Why should this guy suffer from my inexperience? He could've easily have the nurse or the other more experienced doctor perform the procedure and it probably would be a lot faster and potentially less uncomfortable.

I even had to practice incising and performing surgeries on real patients, but I always feel very bad afterward. I usually do an adequate job, but it takes me twice as long to do something compared to an experienced surgeon.

I 'd feel a lot better if the person I'm practicing on is a vile criminal who committed some vicious crime.

---

"The greatest thing you'll ever learn is just to love and be loved in return." -- Toulouse-Lautre, Moulin Rouge

I am glad the Terminator did not grant clemancy for a killer

Oh, wait: Tookie Williams! Now I understand why this thread was posted now of all days.

I've always believed, and will probably always believe, capital
punishment is wrong. Killing is wrong, no matter how you do it. One
might discuss the justness of locking someone up for life, but atleast
it gives them a chance to continue. What if, years later, new evidence
come up proving the prisoners innocence?

Furthermore, how is evidence ever 100% undeniable truth? There's no
such thing. Videos and photos can be tampered with, witnesses can be
bribed, documents distorted.

A secure way would be having a couple of hundreds clear-minded eye-witnesses at the crime scene, but even that isn't foolproof.

Stating that, I do obviosuly not like the idea of forced medical testing.

---

I came for the great service - but I stay for the extra leg space. ZombieLoffe.

I say kill 'em, locking them up for life is expensive and cruel.

---

Better to be in denial than to be human.

Bill Gates understands binary: his company is number one, and his customers are all zeros.

thats my serious voice fishman....

Doc B

I've not met a doctor with such a stance, then again, I rarely discuss politics with doctors.

I agree that these criminals should be put to good use. Medical testing is a good idea, as is forced labour. Perhaps they should be given a choice.

---

"If you talk at all during this lesson, you have detention. Do you understand?"

• My yr11 Economics teacher

Forced Medical testing seems a bit Nazi like IMO. He was a soul-less killer who got what he deserved. He refused to admit guilt or even apologize when at deaths door. The gang he helped start is responsible for countless hundreds of deaths,rapes,robberies, and god knows what other mayhems. I think the message here is clear, and a solid one by human standards. I think justice was served, albeit 27 years late.

Now that I think of it,the capital punishment is softer
when compared to life imprisonment. What's execution, which in the
worst case means about 30 seconds of pain , when compared to being
trapped in a small cell for 60-70 years? I'd go mad.

This is the reaction from an eye-witness to Tookie's execution. He's a column writer for the LA Times.

---

A Barbaric End to a Barbaric Life

Steve Lopez

In an odd way, the most disturbing thing about watching a man die by
lethal injection is how discreetly death creeps into the room.

No sudden jolt, no snapping of the neck at the end of a rope, no severed head.

The inmate gets a shot, he closes his eyes, he sleeps.

The room where Stanley Tookie Williams was killed Tuesday morning is
set up like a theater, with neat rows of spectators sitting or standing
on risers to view the execution.

Late Monday night, as one of
39 witnesses, I was ushered past dozens of guards and prison officials
and into the viewing area a few feet from the octagonal death chamber.

Before us in the stuffy little auditorium, the curtains were opened,
Williams was led in by guards, and the midnight show began ? a dark,
sinister, medieval drama in an archaic prison.

Never having
witnessed an execution, I had tossed my name into the ring of potential
spectators in order to see precisely what we're all a party to in a
state that sanctions capital punishment. And now here I was, watching
the clinical, calculated procedure used by the state of California to
kill a man.

I watched the executioners struggle to tap a
vein, digging into Williams' arms for minutes that seemed like hours.
He was calm, if exasperated by the delay. Splayed out on his back and
secured with tape and restraints, he lifted his head to study our
faces, and he mouthed goodbyes to supporters who shared these close
quarters with the relatives of his victims.

There was no
apparent sign of suffering on Williams' part when the lethal injection
did its duty. He lay motionless for several minutes before he was
declared dead and the curtains were closed, show over.

"The state of California just killed an innocent man," three of his supporters shouted in unison.

That struck me as an insult to the families of Williams' victims. Of
all the things Williams might have been, he wasn't innocent, and
watching him die made me feel no differently about the man.

His
victims, all four of them, were shotgunned as if it were a cheap thrill
for Williams. And as one of the first Crips, he started something that
destroyed everything in its path, bringing genocide to neighborhoods on
top of all the other problems.

---

"The greatest thing you'll ever learn is just to love and be loved in return." -- Toulouse-Lautre, Moulin Rouge

Andrei said:
<SPAN style="COLOR: lightblue">Tepes-style. </SPAN>

YEEEEEEAH! I agree. I'm serious, the loss of barbarism in our society is one fo the reasons that everyone is all gay and effeminate now. If we valued the things that REALLY make society work, like brute force and REAL justice, society would be much better.

the "Justice" of the united states is not REAL justice. "You killed a husband and father of four, we now sentence you to live in an air-conditioned cell with TV and three meals a day. It will all be free, paid for by the widow of the man you killed and others like her. So as long as you learn to be even more vile than you are now, you can get some ass from the other inmates, and rule the place!"

Justice my ass. They killed Tookie williams and it's less than he deserved.

---

I tried sniffing coke, but the ice cubes kept getting stuck in my nose.
http://www.dimebowl.com

There are worse things in life than death although I agree Satchmo! Bloody criminals kill someone and go to prison for 5-6 years and then they're free again :\

America has an effective legal system!

I disagree with killing people in such a way with the deaht panelty. The executer is for me just as bad as the person he executes. Cant see anyway how it can be good. For this im glad they stopped those brutality's here quikly after WWII. I believe of all the Nazi leaders that where supposed to be executed here only 2 or 3 got really in front of the fire platoon.

---

RUST Gamedesign
pepper design

The strength of the turbulence is directly proportional to the temperature of your coffee.

The last execution on my little island was in 1989. He deserved it :evilgrin: .

If Tookie killed all of your loved ones (your parents, all your siblings), would you still be so forgiving?

For me, I would want the bastard to die. In fact, if the law allows it, I would like to kill him with my own hands.

---

"The greatest thing you'll ever learn is just to love and be loved in return." -- Toulouse-Lautre, Moulin Rouge

Well, no, obviously everyone here would be extremely upset and angered
if they were put in that position, but in my opinion we should be
thinking logically when it comes to issues like that. If we let
passions intervene, ever murder would be answered by more
murders/deaths which would just beget more violence in the end.
At some point, violence has to stop, and thats why we have laws and
governments in place, to prevent anarchy.

I can't help but think of Gandhi's famous dictum: "An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind."

I know, you and Gandhi are right. I know that's the right thing to do, but I just don't know whether I can bring myself to forgive them.

I am definitely a person driven more by passion than by reason. It makes me who I am, and I am not sure whether I can ever change my nature. It works to my advantage sometimes (allowing me to achieve goals with superhuman motivation), but I've suffered the consequences of my passion many times in the past (I slept with one of the nurses in residency, creating a huge scandel).

I wish the world has more people like you and Gandhi. We wouldn't have any problems with crime or terrorism if that's the case.

---

"The greatest thing you'll ever learn is just to love and be loved in return." -- Toulouse-Lautre, Moulin Rouge

I wasn't trying to build myself up to the level of Gandhi, by any
means. Like I said, everyone here would be extremely upset and
angered if they were put in that position (myself included), but
thinking about it calmly right now I would hope my desire for bloody
revenge would be restrained by laws, because who knows how many of
Tookie's family members I would kill before I felt avenged.

Gandhi is the stuff of legends, I'm just an online forum poster.

But at least you aspire to be like him. I have serious doubt whether I can even contemplate forgiveness to someone like that.

---

"The greatest thing you'll ever learn is just to love and be loved in return." -- Toulouse-Lautre, Moulin Rouge

Anyone can surpass Ghandi, if they truly desire to do so. Most people haven't such a strong will however. Unfortunately most people never live up to what they could have been had they just made the effort. All it takes sometimes is believing in yourself.

Having said that, I agree with you Satchmo,

"Good Riddance."

I just saw a flyer on campus about raising awareness of the death penalty and it had information about Tookie's life.

Apparenlty, after he was put in jail he became very anti-gang and even
wrote childrens books to discourage youths from joining gangs. He
has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize more than once.

Here is a nytimes.com article about him from 2000, if anyone cares to see a different perspective:

December 6, 2000

Antigang 'Role Model' Is Up for a Nobel and Execution

By EVELYN NIEVES

ORTH
RICHMOND, Calif., Nov. 30 ? The old, dingy house that serves as an
after-school center for this impoverished East Bay town was alive with
happy noise. Children crammed both floors, their presence masking the
shabbiness of the furniture and filling the empty spaces on the
yellowed walls. They pecked away on computer keyboards, sat at school
desks finishing compositions and stuffed themselves into a corner room
to hear Martika Pittman, 10, read aloud from a book by an ex- gang
leader now on death row:

"Many gang members think they respect
themselves," Martika read. She let each word hover in the air before
reading the next. "They think they have good self-esteem because they
feel good about themselves. But they are wrong. So were we."

The younger children sat cross- legged on the floor around her, frozen
in attention. They barely flinched when adult visitors walked in. Not
until they heard that the very author they had been reading, Stanley
(Tookie) Williams, was on the telephone from San Quentin did their
attention to his book "Gangs and Self-Esteem" waver. As word spread,
the children, about 60 in all, came running from every which room to
see if they too might talk to Tookie. "Tookie! Tookie!" they shrieked,
the way other children might react to Michael Jordan. "Let me say hi!"
"No, let me!"

When Mr. Williams, a co-founder of the South
Central Los Angeles Crips who was convicted of killing four people in
1981, was nominated for a 2001 Nobel Peace Prize recently, people were
stunned. But not the children here at North Richmond's Neighborhood
House. They read his books, most of which are subtitled "Tookie Speaks
Out Against Gang Violence." They write essays on his themes, draw
pictures to illustrate the morals of his stories.

They are also
part of his brainchild, the Internet Project for Street Peace, which
allows them to talk to Somali immigrant children in Switzerland,
through e-mail and chat rooms, about how to avoid gangs and trouble. At
Neighborhood House, the Tookie antigang message is reinforced on a
daily basis.

To others, Mr. Williams' nomination for the most
prestigious humanitarian award in the world has a larger meaning. It
has drawn praise around the world from those opposed to capital
punishment, and scorn from those who support it. And still others
wonder whether a convicted murderer is an appropriate role model.
("What a swell message for kids," wrote a columnist for The San
Francisco Chronicle. "You can gun down four people and still turn your
life around.") And on death row at San Quentin, about a 30-minute drive
from North Richmond and Neighborhood House, the nomination has inspired
some inmates to want to do something besides wait around to die, Mr.
Williams said.

"It's beautiful," he said in a phone interview
conducted from Neighborhood House in which his voice, soft and low, was
barely audible above the din of the children.

A 19-year
veteran of death row ? he denies committing the shootings, which
occurred during two robberies in Los Angeles, and is requesting his
third evidentiary hearing ? Mr. Williams spends most of his time in his
9-by-4-foot cell writing, using his metal bed frame as a desk. "One's
existence," he said, "is really determined by one's mental train of
thought."

He has had eight children's books published, most for the early grades, and has finished four more, including his memoirs.

Barbara Becnel is the executive director of Neighborhood House, a
nonprofit community organization that runs a drug rehabilitation
center, distributes free food and offers other humanitarian services to
this very poor, mostly black community. She also acts as Mr. Williams's
editor, co-author and conduit to the world. She met him in 1993 while
researching an article on black youth gangs for Essence magazine. The
research led her to start writing a book on the history of the Crips
and their archrivals, the Bloods. "Everyone told me I had to go talk to
Big Took," she said.

He co-founded the Crips at age 17 (his
co-founder, Raymond Washington, was killed on the streets in 1979) and
landed on death row 10 years later. "He was quite remorseful of his
Crips legacy," Ms. Becnel said of their first meeting. "He wanted to
reverse his legacy. He told me he wanted to write children's books that
preached an antigang message."

Ms. Becnel said they first
worked together on a video message that was played at a summit meeting
between the Crips and the Bloods. The five-and-a-half-minute message
was the hit of the occasion. "All 400 people in the audience were at
the edge of their seats," Ms. Becnel said. "There was total silence.
When the screen went dark, 400 people leaped out of their chairs and
started clapping. I thought, if he could command that level of
attention, maybe we were on to something."

In 1996, Ms. Becnel
was able to sell the idea of a children's book by a death row inmate to
the Rosen Publishing Group, which specializes in books for
disadvantaged children that are distributed to schools and libraries.
Proceeds from the books are funneled into the Internet Project for
Street Peace and other antigang projects. Mr. Williams writes his books
in his cell and dictates the writing to Ms. Becnel. The latest is a
book for middle-school students that offers a harsh view from death
row, "Life in Prison." His four unpublished books await her editing.

The Internet Project, which led to Mr. Williams's nomination for the
Nobel Peace Prize, began when Ms. Becnel told him that the Crips gang
was spreading to South Africa and elsewhere. Although Mr. Williams has
no access to the Internet, based on what he gleaned from television
shows, he told her he wanted to use the Internet to reach children
around the world. Ms. Becnel saw the idea through the financing and
realization. She also monitors his Web site, www.tookie.com for him.

Mario Fehr and five other members of the Swiss Parliament put forth Mr.
Williams's Nobel nomination after learning of his Internet project.
"With his work, he has saved the lives of a lot of children around the
world," Mr. Fehr said. "Secondly, I think that no matter what mistakes
a high-risk youth has made, he can change the direction of his life for
the better and give a good example to young people. And last but not
least, I strongly oppose the death penalty and I hope that the
discussion about the nomination will help to push the death-penalty
debate to a higher level."

Mr. Williams' shot at winning the
prize is long at best. But at Neighborhood House, where many of the
students come from troubled families that know of gangs and violence
firsthand, the consensus is that Mr. Williams deserves the award. The
other day, the children were writing him congratulatory cards, as
though he had already won the prize.

"Dear Tookie," wrote Dante
Lee, 13, "I think you learned your lesson and you care about us, and
that's why you write the books. Thank you."

"I believe it,"
Dante said, nodding. "Me too!" said Ronald Weathersby, 14. "Me too!" a
half-dozen, then a dozen, other children chimed in. "Me too!"

The "transformation" did not occur right away. For a long period of time, he was one of the most vicious inmate in prison. He caused tremendous amount of mayhem in jail, and even continued his gang activities from within the prison.

He only changed his ways after one of many stints of solitary confinement. I don't believe he truly changed. If he did, he would have admitted his guilt and sought forgiveness. What would a cunny, sly gang leader do in prison? Instead of fighting against the system, he played the system and his supporters like puppets. He feigned kindness and his peace-loving ways. No one likes to stay in solitary confinement. He's smart enough to figure out a way out of the harsh punishment.

Heck, he almost conned his way out of his death penalty. I have absolutely no sympathy for him.

---

"The greatest thing you'll ever learn is just to love and be loved in return." -- Toulouse-Lautre, Moulin Rouge

I still believe that no one is of definate evil. People do things they need to do.

I mean, no one would kill someone else just for the sake of it (Unless
they're crazy, but that again isn't evil), they do it for money,
status, fear or whatnot. One can question the reasons of murder from
certain individuals, but I think everyone feels sorrow and guilt
because of their actions. It's just human.

<span style="color: yellow;">Edit: Reading through my own post, it didn't make much sense. My point is: No one is naturally, unchangably evil. </span><br style="color: yellow;">

---

I came for the great service - but I stay for the extra leg space. ZombieLoffe.

True. But if people murder others for power or greed, it's still wrong. And that's evil to me.

---

"The greatest thing you'll ever learn is just to love and be loved in return." -- Toulouse-Lautre, Moulin Rouge

Anyone can surpass Ghandi, if they truly desire to do so.

It's "Gandhi" and not "Ghandi".

Gandhi was the family name of a great man, namely Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi.

Ghandi (or Ghandy) was the family name of a bunch of pretenders who
tried to use the popularity and fame of the name to their own political
ends, and now pass themselves of as Gandhis.

Anyone can surpass Ghandi, if they truly desire to do so.

It's "Gandhi" and not "Ghandi".

Gandhi was the family name of a great man, namely Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi.

Ghandi (or Ghandy) was the family name of a bunch of pretenders who
tried to use the popularity and fame of the name to their own political
ends, and now pass themselves of as Gandhis.

That's low.

@Satchmo I see what you're saying, and I agree. Desperation can
do a lot to change a man in the moment. But the moment they're
out of danger....

I just thought it would be beneficial to post that article to at least get some other views into the discussion.