Justice dictates that since this man callously shed the blood of others, his blood must be shed by man as well.
Innocent blood, even if it's by proxy, is an indelible stain.
Posted on 12/03/2005 5:52:39 PM PST by bikepacker67
"Dead, he's a martyr"
Nope, he's just a dead piece of human fecal matter.
I'm absolutely against the death penalty - unless it is applied by an individual protecting his life, liberty, or property. The state, on the other hand, should not be in the business of taking ones life. The state is too fallible and errors do occur; one innocent person being put to death by the state is too many!
So let him be a martyr. He'll still be dead.
Case closed.
Dead, Justice and Judgment are appeased.
A martyr for what?
Dead, he's dead. The "celebrities" will forget all about him and go on to their next "cause celeb".
Nice theorizing from Ms. Parker, whose writing I always enjoy, but as for Tookie, let him fry. Not just for the murders committed by his own hand, but for the hundreds, thousands maybe, of murders committed by his gang banger followers.
"Life without Parole" can always be commuted by some about to be indicited governor hoping to taint the jury pool. Death on the other hand is permanant at least in this life. If Tookie has a clemency request, he will have an opportunity to present it in the next life.
Justice dictates that since this man callously shed the blood of others, his blood must be shed by man as well.
Innocent blood, even if it's by proxy, is an indelible stain.
I read an article once about a "judge" sentencing a murderer to "Life in prison without parole for 20 years." ROTFLMAO! What the heck does that mean?
With the exceptions of sedition and espionage, I really don't think the state has any business killing citizens. That said, as long as we have a criminal justice system that allows thugs and murderers to write books, hold interviews and "profit" (not just in a monetary sense) from their crimes, maybe it's the only viable alternative at this time.
I've got no problem with clemency, provided there are certain conditions.
#1 he is placed into a cell without windows or views into the hallways.
#2 he is given zero recreation time outside the cell.
#3 he is not given any food, again.
I oppose driving, because one road death is too many.
The death sentence IS a deterrent...I don't care what any freakin university study tells us...The bank robber, WILLIE SUTTON himself told me to my face that the only reason he didn't kill anyone is because he knew he would be killed by the death penalty. So there you have it.
Surely his grovelling victims would have loved those options too, given the choice he forced upon them - their sudden terrified deaths without mercy.
However difficult to face, it is the right thing that must be done.
This man deserves his fate. He and his prodigies have destroyed thousands of lives. They have turned the streets of LA into killing fields and have shown no remorse for their carnage. The death penalty exists in this nation for men like this. To say that we should end capital punishment because someone innocent might be put to death is fine. Lets debate it after they bury this piece of garbage.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.