Sunday, December 11, 2005

Bleeding Hearts Love Murderers

Have you heard this stuff about saving Tookie Williams, four time murderer and founder of the Crips Gang from the death penalty? LINK

These kinds of things are absurd in my view. This guy is a murderer. He has been living on borrowed time for the last 25 years that he spent in prison. Have pity on the family he killed, not this piece of crap.

Some people really don't know what a needy cause is...

9 comments:

The Jewish Freak said...

An important point here that people are missing. Revenge is not the issue, and how much he is reformed is not the issue. The issue is simply one of how much as a society do we value human life? When someone steals property he is punished in kind; why not so when one takes a life (or lives?). The punishment meted out for the taking of a human life reflects our idea of the value of a human life. If Mr. Williams was truly reformed he would understand this. - JF

Jewish Atheist said...

I'm against the death penalty, and consequently, against this dirtbag being killed. I'm against it not because I don't think he deserves it, because he surely does, but because I believe that a civilized society has no business executing people.

Capital punishment does not work as a deterrent and it doesn't make the world more safe than life in prison. Moreover, it's a proven fact that wrongly convicted people have been executed, which is completely unacceptable.

That said, people who are protesting for this guy should find more important causes to fight for. More innocent people die every day in this country in car accidents, through preventable disease, and at war. Not only is this fight a waste of resources, but it's terrible PR for liberals. It lets the bastards on the right accuse well-meaning people on the left of being pro-murderer.

Jewish Atheist said...

(er, that "bastards" didn't refer to anyone here, btw)

Orthoprax said...

JA,

I myself have been accused of being a liberal so I know how that is, but in any case, I've had the death penalty debate before but have never been able to convince people either way. But I'll try again anyway. ;-)

"...but because I believe that a civilized society has no business executing people."

Why not? Would you rather use thousands upon thousands of your tax dollars to support a murderer?

"Capital punishment does not work as a deterrent and it doesn't make the world more safe than life in prison."

That may be true, but this is about desserts and justice. Practical concerns are secondary, in my view. Capital punishment surely doesn't reduce the deterrent effect or make the world less safe.

"Moreover, it's a proven fact that wrongly convicted people have been executed, which is completely unacceptable."

That is unfortunately the case with any legal system. You will unavoidably, in a human-run system, have false positives. But one shouldn't make punishment decisions based on those few innocents who get the raw end of the deal. You're letting all the guilty bastards out there have free range.

Is it any better for an innocent individual to suffer time in prison? Same argument. What we need are better checks on the system to make such occurances as rare as possible, not lighten the sentence so every bastard out there can let out a sigh of relief.

Jewish Atheist said...

Why not? Would you rather use thousands upon thousands of your tax dollars to support a murderer?

1) It currently costs more to execute a person than to keep him in prison.
2) Saving money is no justification for killing.

That may be true, but this is about desserts and justice. Practical concerns are secondary, in my view. Capital punishment surely doesn't reduce the deterrent effect or make the world less safe.

Hmm. I do agree that there is some justice in a murderer being killed, but I still don't think it's right for a civilized society to do it. I guess it just feels wrong to me. There's enough justice in locking him up for the rest of his life. Killing is a very serious thing, and whenever it can be avoided, I think it should be.

That is unfortunately the case with any legal system. You will unavoidably, in a human-run system, have false positives. But one shouldn't make punishment decisions based on those few innocents who get the raw end of the deal. You're letting all the guilty bastards out there have free range.

Well, obviously you have to look at the tradeoffs. I don't think we gain anything by killing the guilty, and there's an incalculable loss for every innocent man put to death.

Is it any better for an innocent individual to suffer time in prison?

It's better if that person ultimately gets exonerated and can live out the rest of his life in freedom. This has happened disturbingly often in light of DNA evidence.

What we need are better checks on the system to make such occurances as rare as possible, not lighten the sentence so every bastard out there can let out a sigh of relief.

I agree wholeheartedly with the first half, but I'm not sure the system will ever be good enough that the risk of killing the innocent is worth it.

Jewish Atheist said...

Look at the countries which practice capital punishment. The twelve countries with the most executions in 2004:

Country Executions Executions per 100 million residents
1 Kuwait 9+ 400
2 China 3,400+ 260
3 Iran 159+ 230
4 Singapore 6+ 140
5 Saudi Arabia 33+ 130
6 Vietnam 64+ 77
7 Belarus 5+ 48
8 Yemen 6+ 30
9 United States 59 20
10 Pakistan 15+ 9
11 Egypt 6+ 8
12 Bangladesh 7+ 5

(from wikipedia)

Which one of these does not belong?

Orthoprax said...

JA,

"1) It currently costs more to execute a person than to keep him in prison."

Does it? How do you figure? And why would that be?

"2) Saving money is no justification for killing."

This is true. But I cannot justify wasting tax (read: mine and yours) money to keep alive and comfortable an individual who I don't think is worthy of life.

"I guess it just feels wrong to me. There's enough justice in locking him up for the rest of his life. Killing is a very serious thing, and whenever it can be avoided, I think it should be."

In my view, murder should be followed with death. This murderer has demonstrated that he does not respect other's right to life and he does therefore forfeit his own. There is no way to fully find justice when one takes another's life but each moment that a murderer stays living is an affront to those that he killed.

"I don't think we gain anything by killing the guilty..."

Except justice.

"It's better if that person ultimately gets exonerated and can live out the rest of his life in freedom."

True enough. But even so, we don't make prisons into happy hospitals just because there are a few innocents who will inadvertantly suffer in prison.

"...but I'm not sure the system will ever be good enough that the risk of killing the innocent is worth it."

We might also have innocents being imprisoned for their entire lives without reprieve. That's possible too even without the death penalty. That's not very nice either. Should we not have life imprisonment for the sake of the innocents?

"Look at the countries which practice capital punishment. The twelve countries with the most executions in 2004:"

Ah, that's just making the US guilty by association. Actually a logical fallacy.

Jewish Atheist said...

Here's some info on costs:

http://www.amnestyusa.org/abolish/cost.html

"The Death Penalty Costs More
"Elimination of the death penalty would result in a net savings to the state of at least several tens of millions of dollars annually, and a net savings to local governments in the millions to tens of millions of dollars on a statewide basis."
-- Joint Legislative Budget Committee of the California Legislature, Sept. 9, 1999

Recent Cost Studies

* A 2003 legislative audit in Kansas found that the estimated cost of a death penalty case was 70% more than the cost of a comparable non-death penalty case. Death penalty case costs were counted through to execution (median cost $1.26 million). Non-death penalty case costs were counted through to the end of incarceration (median cost $740,000).
(December 2003 Survey by the Kansas Legislative Post Audit)
* The estimated costs for the death penalty in New York since 1995 (when it was reinstated): $160 million, or approximately $23 million for each person sentenced to death. To date, no executions have been carried out.
(The Times Union, Sept. 22, 2003)
* In Tennessee, death penalty trials cost an average of 48% more than the average cost of trials in which prosecutors seek life imprisonment.
(2004 Report from Tennessee Comptroller of the Treasury Office of Research) "

Jewish Atheist said...

As to whether it's moral, we'll have to disagree. I don't think either of us believes that one can prove a moral issue.