Don’t let California execute a peacemaker

[Leif]

http://www.socialistworker.org/2005-2/567/567_06_Tookie.shtml

Don’t let California execute a peacemaker

By Alan Maass | December 2, 2005 | Pages 6 and 7

THE STRUGGLE to save Stan Tookie Williams is reaching a new turning point.

On November 30, people in as many as 50 towns and cities across the U.S. will gather at meetings, film screenings, pickets and protests as part of a national day of action calling for Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to grant clemency to the former gang leader-turned-peacemaker.

Stan is scheduled to die in San Quentin prison’s death chamber on December 13 for four 1979 murders that he has always maintained he didn’t commit.

Since going to prison, the co-founder of the infamous Crips gang in Los Angeles has rehabilitated himself, writing a series of children’s books that warn against crime and prison. Those books--plus his efforts to promote peace agreements between rival street gangs--have earned him a series of Nobel Prize nominations since 2001. Last year, the FX cable channel premiered a movie about Stan’s life, starring Jamie Foxx.

This October, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected Stan’s latest appeal, clearing the way for California’s Attorney General Bill Lockyer, a Democrat, to seek an execution date. But people from all walks of life--ranging from Hollywood and hip-hop superstars to long-time anti-death penalty and anti-racist activists--have come together in a growing movement asking Schwarzenegger to grant clemency.

That effort took a step forward last week when Schwarzenegger announced that he would hold a clemency hearing with Stan’s lawyers--something the governator refused to do in one of the two death penalty cases to cross his desk since taking office. But there are no guarantees--so activists have much more planned to keep up the pressure.

With his growing numbers of supporters around the country, Stan is one of the most famous death row prisoners in the country. But many of the issues in his case are the same as those facing the 3,400 other prisoners on death row around the U.S.

In particular, racism played a central role in Stan’s case. His murder trial was moved from Los Angeles to a predominantly white, conservative area, the jury in the case was all white, and the prosecutor, in his closing argument, compared Stan to a Bengal tiger in the zoo. Like almost everyone else on death row, Stan also had inadequate legal representation.

The connection to the wider struggle against the death penalty will be highlighted because the November 30 day of action for Stan coincidentally falls on the same day when abolitionists will mark the expected 1,000th execution since the capital punishment was reinstated in the U.S. in 1976.

From the exoneration of another death row prisoner last month--the 122nd since 1976--to recent revelations that a victim of the Texas execution machine from a dozen years ago was likely innocent, the evidence of what’s wrong with capital punishment continues to pile up. The struggle to save Stan is helping to expose this unjust system--which singles out the poorest and most vulnerable in society for the ultimate punishment.

[Leif]

The death penalty is obviously not effective as a deterrent, otherwise people would not commit crimes which obviously would get them executed. I'm not going to bother arguing that the death penalty allows innocents to die, as the same situation occurs by putting innocents in prison, and is possibly far worse than a quick execution. That's assuming most get quick executions, which does not occur in the U.S.

One should view the death penalty through its permanency. The death penalty, without any doubt whatsoever, incapacitates criminals from harming others in the future. But, it also does not allow them to contribute to society nor rehabilitate themselves to being functional members of society. Thus, given that certain individuals have such mental inclinations of crime, that is -harming others, stealing, etc, even when given alternate means of existence, it is only these who should be given the death penalty. Be they criminally insane or simply too inclined by former habits, individuals incapable of being rehabilitated should be executed in the most humane and non-denigrating way possible, as execution should be for incapacitation purposes only and not public spectacle, which unnecessarily makes light of violence.

Too often justice is viewed as the maintenence of some "moral balance" in which an "eye for an eye" must be taken. For a better society, one must view justice as a maintence of order, stability, and public welfare than a institutional means of public revenge, which does not undo harm done by criminals nor focus on creating a public good. This view leads to unjust actions, such as executing people based upon the moral negativity of their crimes, which does not allow one-time criminals to rehabilitate themselves, no matter how disgusting their crime may be.

The death penalty, again, must be viewed by its permanence. If we kill a man, we strip him of his ability to do good and bad actions. Before we condemn someone to an ever-lasting state like this, we should be sure they could not contribute good to society before they die.

[Berianidze]

The death penalty is obviously not effective as a deterrent, otherwise people would not commit crimes which obviously would get them executed. I'm not going to bother arguing that the death penalty allows innocents to die, as the same situation occurs by putting innocents in prison, and is possibly far worse than a quick execution. That's assuming most get quick executions, which does not occur in the U.S.

But the success of any punishment depends on its certainty, severity, and swiftness--and as far as the death penalty goes in the United States it is none of these. The greatest thing about the death penalty isn't the possibility of deterrence, but rather how it incapacitates criminals from committing acts again. There have been numerous studies done as to whether or not the death penalty is a deterrent, but the American criminal justice system is far from the model in which such a question should be judged. If I'm in a state of mind where I'm going to commit a heinous crime, and I know that if I can a) get a good lawyer, b)in a state where I can make numerous appeals, and c) may end up waiting 10-15 years before I'm executed, it's not going to portray significant enough consequences to deter me from committing whatever crime I'm planning.

But if we made a law executing people for the more petty crimes, let's say public intoxication, and people were immediately arraigned, brought before a judge, tried, and executed that would seriously deter most people from public intoxication. I know this isn't applicable to all instances, but if applied appropriately (unlike the American system) then at the very least the death penalty incapacitates heinous criminals from acting out against society ever again.

[Starr]

The death penalty is obviously not effective as a deterrent, otherwise people would not commit crimes which obviously would get them executed.

I suppose it is not, when someone sits on death row for year after year and then is quickly and painlessly put to sleep one day with a "lethal injection" If people were executed immediately after their trial in harsher ways it could be different. Though I don't really think people who go around killing others are thinking too much about any consequences that may come.

It was funny there was a show on about this gang-banger the other night. They had a few whites on , and they were all talking about how this was a changed man and it would be wrong to execute this guy who is now involved with "good deeds." The only person on the show who disagreed was a "negro." Who said he needs to be judged for the criminal acts, that sent him to death row, and not on what he is doing today.(duh!) It is pretty scary when the only one speaking with any sense is a nigger. LOL

I do think that with all the publicity this is getting and with all the celebs crying about it,etc. Arnie is going to be compelled to "do the right thing", which is of course the wrong thing. If he does not, he probably would be called a racist.

[Leif]

But the success of any punishment depends on its certainty, severity, and swiftness--and as far as the death penalty goes in the United States it is none of these. The greatest thing about the death penalty isn't the possibility of deterrence, but rather how it incapacitates criminals from committing acts again.

Yes, I completely agree with incapacitating unreformable persons. I merely believe that we should have full confidence that a person can not be reformed before we permanently remove them from society.

There have been numerous studies done as to whether or not the death penalty is a deterrent, but the American criminal justice system is far from the model in which such a question should be judged. If I'm in a state of mind where I'm going to commit a heinous crime, and I know that if I can a) get a good lawyer, b)in a state where I can make numerous appeals, and c) may end up waiting 10-15 years before I'm executed, it's not going to portray significant enough consequences to deter me from committing whatever crime I'm planning.

I agree. Do you think a socialist system should focus on deterrence, though? Will the harsh policies (as in your statement addressed below) be worth the cost to society?

But if we made a law executing people for the more petty crimes, let's say public intoxication, and people were immediately arraigned, brought before a judge, tried, and executed that would seriously deter most people from public intoxication. I know this isn't applicable to all instances, but if applied appropriately (unlike the American system) then at the very least the death penalty incapacitates heinous criminals from acting out against society ever again.

People would definitely think twice before committing petty crimes, but in enforcing such a punishment we'd be killing people who otherwise might not be deleterious to society. That's to say, while these persons might commit small petty crimes, they might also be productive members of society who can be taught to change their ways. If we killed someone after spending years feeding, providing, and educating a person, we'd have wasted all of our resources if he was to be executed. If this person was sent to a work-camp to be reformed and reintroduced to society, we would not have wasted all the years of resources upon him.

It was funny there was a show on about this gang-banger the other night. They had a few whites on , and they were all talking about how this was a changed man and it would be wrong to execute this guy who is now involved with "good deeds." The only person on the show who disagreed was a "negro." Who said he needs to be judged for the criminal acts, that sent him to death row, and not on what he is doing today.(duh!) It is pretty scary when the only one speaking with any sense is a nigger. LOL

That "nigger" is thinking in a morally negative non-productive way. I.e. he wants to punish someone without actual consideration of what this person has left to provide for society.

[Leif]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2005/12/01/EDG5TG04SF1.DTL

This doesn't change my view that he shouldn't be executed, but I think it sets the record straight on some issues, and should be presented.



Tookie's tales
Debra J. Saunders

Thursday, December 1, 2005

LIES SO pervade the campaign waged to "save" convicted killer Stanley Tookie Williams that Williams and company don't even bother to cover their tracks when they say things they know aren't true.

So, as Williams' Dec. 13 execution date looms and supporters are pressing Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to grant him clemency, the Death Row inmate claimed in an interview Monday with MSNBC's fatuous Rita Cosby that he was convicted by an "all-white jury." That's not true, and Williams knows it.

In fact, Williams' own clemency lawyers have stipulated that the jury that convicted him in the 1979 murders of Albert Owens, Yen-I Yang, Tsai-Shai Yang and Yee Chen Lin during two armed robberies was not all-white. In the clemency petition, Williams' latest set of lawyers argued that prosecutor Robert Martin had kicked all African Americans off the jury. When prosecutors produced a death certificate that showed that juror William McLurkin was black, the lawyers noted in a reply that it doesn't matter if McLurkin was black or part-black, because he "looked Filipino."

Hello. That's not white. Williams' own Web site (www.tookie.com) features a fact sheet that, while asserting that no African Americans were on the jury, stipulates a Filipino and Latino served on the jury.

Why did Williams say something that he knew wasn't true? I just figure he knew he could get away with it.

In the MSNBC transcript of the Cosby interview, Williams, a co-founder of the Crips gang in South Central Los Angeles when a teenager, said, "I never ordered, nor have I initiated, any killings on my part, period."

The not-guilty-of-murder quote flies in the face of the clemency petition's "atonement" claim. To wit: Williams "has accepted responsibility, repented and done whatever he could, from where he is, to atone."

No: Williams has done whatever he could to seem to apologize while dodging any consequences of admitting his crimes.

Let me add a few things you may not know: The not all-white jury convicted Williams after his alibi defense crumbled. Also, jurors had learned of Williams' plans for an armed escape from jail. The jury foreman testified that when the guilty verdict was announced, Williams mouthed this threat to the panel: "I'm going to get each and every one of you mother -- ."

Over the years as he appealed his conviction, his appellate lawyers claimed that Williams did not receive adequate counsel because his trial lawyer did not use a diminished capacity defense, as Williams was brain-damaged -- due to drug abuse, mental illness and head injuries. An appellate judge weighed in, "A mental-state defense would have contradicted (the alibi) defense by conceding petitioner's presence at the scenes of the murders." Despite numerous appeals, various courts -- including the liberal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals -- continued to uphold his conviction.

His lawyers now laud Williams because he "refuses to make a false confession, knowing it could benefit him penally, (which) shows the strength of his character." What, then, of his character on the brain-damage dodge -- an odd defense for a man whom supporters hail as a jailhouse philosopher and co-author of children's books?

Los Angeles City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo told me he sees Williams' legacy as one of "death and violence" -- with more than 300 gang-related homicides in Los Angeles alone each year. "No matter how he tries to distance himself from violent gangs, he helped create them," Delgadillo noted.

Crediting Williams for denouncing gangs is sort of like praising tobacco companies for their anti-smoking campaigns.

Should Schwarzenegger grant clemency? Delgadillo said: "I think the justice system has done its job and a jury of his peers found him guilty." (In plain talk: No clemency.)

Williams' lawyers also say the clemency petition only asks for life without parole. That is technically true -- and entirely misleading. Considering Williams' many claims to MSNBC's Rita Cosby that he is "innocent," and that "being able to live, it would allow me to prove my innocence." That can only mean one thing: That after the execution is stayed, Williams will spend years filing more appeals. He won't be satisfied with a life behind bars. He wants out.

Back in 2000, when Swiss legislator Mario Fehr nominated Williams for the Nobel Peace Prize, Fehr told me over the phone that Williams "might not even have killed those four people. I don't know what he did 20 years ago." Fehr, you see, wanted to send the message to young people "that no matter what mistakes you have made in your life, you can change for the better."

The Tookie-philes are so filled with their own uplifting message that they are participating in a campaign to free a convicted killer. They can't really care that Williams gunned down four innocent people -- not when they are willing to embrace his lies and abet a cold-blooded killer's bid to go free.

[Jimbo Gomez]

I'm for reinstating the deathpenalty, but I'd put severe conditions on its use. Basically, I'd only use it on pederasts, traitors and people serving life in jail who commit a serious crime there. Execution would be done with a painless but public hanging.

[Petr]

Why are you against death penalty, Ymir? Communist China executes more people than the rest of the world combined.


Petr

[Jimbo Gomez]

I need to add something. In the old days in Europe, before the French Revolution, criminal law was different than now (by that I do not mean the use of torture). These days there is just guilty or not guilty. Back then the severity of the punishment depended on the level of proof. A judge could be convinced enough to order a lashing, but not enough to order your execution. I think this is preferable to what we have now. I would require additional proof, stricter than needed for a conviction, in order to allow a deathpenalty.

[Ixtab]

Punishment -- whether it be the death penalty or something less severe -- is obsolete, as B.F. Skinner admirably demonstrates in his book Beyond Freedom and Dignity.

[Jimbo Gomez]

Punishment -- whether it be the death penalty or something less severe -- is obsolete, as B.F. Skinner admirably demonstrates in his book Beyond Freedom and Dignity.

Ix, that's silly. How the hell would you deal with criminals?

[Ixtab]

Ix, that's silly. How the hell would you deal with criminals?-The more crucial question seems to be, Why is criminal behaviour rewarding in the first place?
-Our natural response to this question is basically to say it's uncaused--by saying it's the criminal's "choice". Just as people appeal to a first cause, God, to explain the universe, so people have invented 'free will' and 'responsibility' to explain human behaviour. 'Choice' is the first cause, the unmoved mover, of psychology, used when we are ignorant of the true causes of our thoughts and actions. I associate it with the discredited ideas of Deity in Cosmology because it posits an unmoved mover, Impetus in Physics because it posits an indwelling causative agent, and Geocentrism in Astronomy because its foundation is anthropocentrism.

[Berianidze]

Yes, I completely agree with incapacitating unreformable persons. I merely believe that we should have full confidence that a person can not be reformed before we permanently remove them from society.
I agree; but my faith in humanity has all but ceased to exist. It would greatly depend on the nature of the crime and other circumstantial evidence to be observed/analyzed by whomever was judging an individal capable of being reformed or not. However, I do believe there have to be standards within the law and not every case in which sometimes there will be people whom probably could be rehabilitated that may perish in a series of executions.

I agree. Do you think a socialist system should focus on deterrence, though? Will the harsh policies (as in your statement addressed below) be worth the cost to society?

Yes I think a criminal justice system has to be focused on deterring and incapacitating criminals. When it comes time to initiate policies (and their harshness) I would only implement those that demonstrate the greatest utility for society. I wouldn't initiate laws that would send 1000's to the gallows by the day. Law and order is extremely important to me, but so is the cost of law and order, and things have to be placed in some sense of balance.

People would definitely think twice before committing petty crimes, but in enforcing such a punishment we'd be killing people who otherwise might not be deleterious to society. That's to say, while these persons might commit small petty crimes, they might also be productive members of society who can be taught to change their ways. If we killed someone after spending years feeding, providing, and educating a person, we'd have wasted all of our resources if he was to be executed. If this person was sent to a work-camp to be reformed and reintroduced to society, we would not have wasted all the years of resources upon him.

I agree with this, but it would be dependent on the crime. Crimes involving treason, blatant disregard for public safety, truly heinous, despicable murders would be definite cases of execution. There are other viable punishments for lesser crimes, and instances where for instance the citizen in question might still provide some service to society (particularly after society has fed, clothed, provided, and educated as you said) in which I agree with the concept of work camps. This would be the solution for lesser felonies, petty crimes, and ideological enemies whom it would be more of a burden and less productive to overall society to simply eliminate them (not to mention I don't want to create any more pressure for ourselves than we already would be subject to from the "human rights" community). But a penal work colony would be an excellent addition to any criminal justice system.

[Ixtab]

By the way, I am using the word 'punishment' (aversive control) in the psychological, not popular, sense. I do not oppose negative reinforcement (taking things away), which is different from punishment.

[Atlas]

I'm for reinstating the deathpenalty, but I'd put severe conditions on its use. Basically, I'd only use it on pederasts, traitors and people serving life in jail who commit a serious crime there. Execution would be done with a painless but public hanging.

I agree with that. The main argument of those who oppose the death penalty is : " but look at the US, there's the death penatly and this is the country of the West World that has the most crime, murder and people in jail. "

This is the only exception, in Iran, China and many others countries where the death penalty hasn't been banned, theres low crime and murders.

[Jimbo Gomez]

By the way, I am using the word 'punishment' (aversive control) in the psychological, not popular, sense. I do not oppose negative reinforcement (taking things away), which is different from punishment.

Not all people care when you take things from them (like money), and some have almost nothing meaningful to take.

Of course, if you count 'taking their freedom or life' as a negative reinforcement, we're just quibbeling about semantics here.

[Petr]

Ix, that's silly. How the hell would you deal with criminals?
Ixabert is a weak-minded, unstable person who adopts new worldviews every now and then and changes them if challenged harshly enough. His superficial hyper-logicality is just a mask for his insecurity.


Petr

[Felix the Cat]

http://www.abcgallery.com/B/bruegel/bruegel74.JPG

[Niko Bellic]

the co-founder of the infamous Crips gang in Los Angeles has rehabilitated himself

I don't care if he rehabilitated himself. How many murders is he indirectly responsible for because of the act of forming the Crips?

[Sinclair]

Wouldn't it be nice if more people decided that peace was the answer and so forth BEFORE they got put on death row?

Wasn't something posted about how Dahmer or somebody is a born-again Christian now?

[Ixtab]

Ixabert is a weak-minded, unstable person who adopts new worldviews every now and then and changes them if challenged harshly enough. His superficial hyper-logicality is just a mask for his insecurity.-There are five errors in this paragraph. Namely:--
-The implication that the views I have expressed to-day are 'new'. My view on the ineffectiveness of Punishment dates back to October of 2003 (at the latest ) - ever since I read Skinner's Beyond Freedom and Dignity.
-I am not, nor do I pretend or try to be, "hyper-logical." A deep sentamentalism is present in my system of thought.
-World-views ought to undergo constant revision as understanding and knowledge grow. Mental rigidity, not adaptability, is the mark of weak-mindedness.
-Psychologically I am a remarkably stable individual. I've no notion how you came to the opposite conclusion. No psychiatrist has ever diagnosed me with any disorder.
-Since I've been a member of the Phora, the only positions that have changed because they were "challenged hard enough" were that on the Jewish question, and my idea (via Marx's earlier writings) of "species-being", which I have since abandoned. The National Socialists and FadeTheButcher (respectively) were responsible for this change in my mental history.

[The Retard]

This guy wasn't a peacemaker, he formed the westside crips and killed four people. :rofl:

[Eisenhans]

Good riddance. Gang members are terrorists and I don't see what in the hell anyone finds amusing about being in a gang.

Here there are liberals that don't care what the person did-they just back themselves up with the first amendment stating that opressing his opinion is opressing his right.

As I see it, anyone who does things such as even hints to starting a gang needs to end with a bullet in their head-Compliments of the State.

[Helios Panoptes]

By the way, I am using the word 'punishment' (aversive control) in the psychological, not popular, sense. I do not oppose negative reinforcement (taking things away), which is different from punishment.

When things are taken away and it weakens a behavior, it is negative punishment. This is what you mean if you wish to take something away from a person to weaken his criminal behavior. Maybe that's not what you're suggesting, though.

[Leif]

Why are you against death penalty, Ymir? Communist China executes more people than the rest of the world combined.

Firstly, I'm not totally against the death penalty, which I stated quite clearly if you read my post in its entirety. Secondly, do you have any proof, evidence, or facts?

Ixabert is a weak-minded, unstable person who adopts new worldviews every now and then and changes them if challenged harshly enough. His superficial hyper-logicality is just a mask for his insecurity.

While I agree that Ixabert has changes his stances on multiple issues, your attack is not warranted in this case, as Ixabert has been against the death penalty for quite some time.

As a side note, you've contributed nothing but baiting (towards myself) and personal attack (towards Jotunlock/Ixabert) in this discussion. :nono:

How many murders is he indirectly responsible for because of the act of forming the Crips?

I think the better question is, "What social stimulus made joining violent gangs so easy to these young men?" I mean, I could go tell people to be communists all I wanted, but unless there was a material cause for them to do so, such as high unemployment, most would probably ignore me. I believe it is a similar situation with this man. I am not excusing his actions at all, I merely think that crimes possibly "inspired" by him can not be attributed to him more than the conditions which gave rise to these crimes.

Wouldn't it be nice if more people decided that peace was the answer and so forth BEFORE they got put on death row?

Wasn't something posted about how Dahmer or somebody is a born-again Christian now?

He "was" a born-again Christian until a fellow inmate stabbed him to death. He was un-reformable, however, in that he was insane. In my view he should have been executed immediately after his conviction.

[Vindex]

If they want to keep charlie behind bars for the manson family, might as well waste old tookie williams too,the killing,drugs and misery his gang causes are way beyond any the manson family pulled.

But maybe they should let him off, since the shit his crips gang does removes more negro's from North America, then aids.

[Starr]

That "nigger" is thinking in a morally negative non-productive way. I.e. he wants to punish someone without actual consideration of what this person has left to provide for society.


Someone like Tookie should not even have any more chances. Most killers and child molesters and other such scum are not going to provide anything to society, but to rot in prison and suck up taxpayer dollars, and maybe get out one day and commit more crimes. If anything would be productive it would be his public execution.

But maybe they should let him off, since the shit his crips gang does removes more negro's from North America, then aids.

So they can give him a metal before they put him to sleep. Maybe that could make up for him not winning the nobel prize.:D

[Crowley]

Anybody who murders a store clerk in a robbery should be put to death. It is beyond the pale to murder kids working what is probably their very first job. Then there were 3 other people he murdered as well. I don't know their stories.

[Starr]

I just started following this story, so I don't know a lot about it. What was the race of his victims?

Wasn't something posted about how Dahmer or somebody is a born-again Christian now?

Dahmer was yes, and also Jew David Berkowitz(the Son of Sam) is some type of minister these days. Susan Atkins(my avatar) is also a born again. It seems as though a lot of people find God, Jesus, or whatever when they go to prison.:p

[The Retard]

What was the race of his victims?

Three Asians and a white guy.

[Leif]

Someone like Tookie should not even have any more chances. Most killers and child molesters and other such scum are not going to provide anything to society, but to rot in prison and suck up taxpayer dollars, and maybe get out one day and commit more crimes. If anything would be productive it would be his public execution.

I'd be more than willing to believe you if you provided reasons why Mr. Williams shouldn't have a chance.

[Starr]

I'd be more than willing to believe you if you provided reasons why Mr. Williams shouldn't have a chance.

Since he is set to be executed the better question is why should he be given a chance? All he is really doing(most likely started to save his ass) is attempting to help with a problem that he helped create. And what kind of twisted logic would find that worthy of a nobel prize? That is insane. The leaders of the "black community" should be the first ones calling for him to be fried, but because they are niggers, who routinely make heroes out of gang-banging thugs, all they know how to do is bitch about racism and/or how he was set up,etc.

[Kodos]

I'd be more than willing to believe you if you provided reasons why Mr. Williams shouldn't have a chance.

It sends a very bad message to spare his life. If I was the Emperor I'd perhaps be willing to allow him a fighting chance in the arena :D.

[Kodos]

I need to add something. In the old days in Europe, before the French Revolution, criminal law was different than now (by that I do not mean the use of torture). These days there is just guilty or not guilty. Back then the severity of the punishment depended on the level of proof. A judge could be convinced enough to order a lashing, but not enough to order your execution. I think this is preferable to what we have now. I would require additional proof, stricter than needed for a conviction, in order to allow a deathpenalty.

I very much agree. I actually didn't know this about legal history...

[Leif]

Since he is set to be executed the better question is why should he be given a chance?

I have been explaining that since my first response to this article:

The death penalty, again, must be viewed by its permanence. If we kill a man, we strip him of his ability to do good and bad actions. Before we condemn someone to an ever-lasting state like this, we should be sure they could not contribute good to society before they die.

This man is doing good. He should be obligated to continue doing so, and also denounce himself and his actions (which the second article said he has not, because he maintains his innocence, although the jury has convicted him and he needs to "play ball" anyway.)

It sends a very bad message to spare his life.

Possibly, but the U.S. legal system has been sending mixed messages forever.

[Ixtab]

When things are taken away and it weakens a behavior, it is negative punishment. This is what you mean if you wish to take something away from a person to weaken his criminal behavior. Maybe that's not what you're suggesting, though.You are using the term in the popular, not psychological, sense. I oppose 'punishment' only in the technical-psychological sense of the term.

Negative reinforcement: Taking something away in order to INCREASE a response. E.g., taking a toy away from one's son so that he will clean up his room or something. I do not oppose this form of control.

Punishment: ADDING something aversive in order to DECREASE a behaviour. I oppose this for a number of reasons.

[Helios Panoptes]

You are using the term in the popular, not psychological, sense. I oppose 'punishment' only in the technical-psychological sense of the term.

No, I am not.

Negative reinforcement: Taking something away in order to INCREASE a response. E.g., taking a toy away from one's son so that he will clean up his room or something. I do not oppose this form of control.

Agreed.

Punishment: ADDING something aversive in order to DECREASE a behaviour. I oppose this for a number of reasons.

No, adding something aversive is positive punishment. Removing an appetitive stumulus is negative punishment. This would be, for instance, taking away a toy to compel a child to stop hitting his sister. Whether it is punishment or reinforcement is entirely determined by the influence on behavior. Weakened response is punishment, strengthened is reinforcement. Positive or negative is determined by whether a stimulus is presented or removed.

[Ixtab]

No, adding something aversive is positive punishment.My terminology is derived directly from Skinnerian Behaviourism; where yours comes from I do not know. However, your terms show an ignorance of operant conditioning, of which four types are known to exist: positive reinforcement (adding something to INCREASE a response), negative reinforcement (taking something away to INCREASE a response), punishment (adding something to DECREASE a response), and extinction (removing something to DECREASE a response). This is quite elementary.


Removing an appetitive stumulus is negative punishment.The example you proceed to give would fall under the category of EXTINCTION: removing something to decrease a behaviour. [Punishment results in extinction if not applied consistently.]

Positive or negative is determined by whether a stimulus is presented or removed.In Psychology, on the other hand, Positive Reinforcement is so called because it ADDS something to the environment to increase behaviour (increase=reinforcerment); Negative Reinforcement is so called because it REMOVES something from the environment to increase a behaviour; Punishment refers to ADDING something aversive in order to DECREASE a behaviour; and Extinction refers to REMOVING something from the environment in order to DECREASE a behaviour. This terminology is universally accepted and is, moreover, perfectly symmetrical.

[Starr]

Before we condemn someone to an ever-lasting state like this, we should be sure they could not contribute good to society before they die

What does "could not" mean. Who is going to judge if they "could" contribute something positive to society? That argument could and therefore would be made in favor of anyone. A man who kidnaps and murders 20 children, could someday speak to parents, or write a book on the danger that pedophiles present to the community and the warning signs,etc. It is different but similar in a way to when someone will say "every life is a life" Again I will say, he killed 4 people and now they want to spare his life because he is trying to do something about a problem he helped to create. That just seems retarded to me.

[Berianidze]

What does "could not" mean. Who is going to judge if they "could" contribute something positive to society? That argument could and therefore would be made in favor of anyone. A man who kidnaps and murders 20 children, could someday speak to parents, or write a book on the danger that pedophiles present to the community and the warning signs,etc. It is different but similar in a way to when someone will say "every life is a life" Again I will say, he killed 4 people and now they want to spare his life because he is trying to do something about a problem he helped to create. That just seems retarded to me.

Perhaps then it should be measured in what material sense the individual could contribute to society; for instance if the alleged criminal held hist doctorate and thirty years of experience in cardio-vascular medicine...would it be possible to rehabilitate him (whatever his crimes) and have him return to his respective field of expertise--but I agree with you for the most part.

[Leif]

What does "could not" mean.

The same thing that "guilty" means in a court-room. Within a reasonable doubt, such a person has a mental defect so as not to allow him do good things for socety such that it would justify his existence. If someone repeatedly commits the same crime after being "reformed" they are insane and must be executed immediately. That is what "could not" means. Now, as to my original question directed at yourself, is there a reason that Mr. Williams has shown himself unreformable? I would say he has proven himself quite the contrary, and a full rehabilitation seems possible.

[Starr]

The same thing that "guilty" means in a court-room. Within a reasonable doubt, such a person has a mental defect so as not to allow him do good things for socety such that it would justify his existence. If someone repeatedly commits the same crime after being "reformed" they are insane and must be executed immediately. That is what "could not" means. Now, as to my original question directed at yourself, is there a reason that Mr. Williams has shown himself unreformable? I would say he has proven himself quite the contrary, and a full rehabilitation seems possible.

if we are talking about lesser crimes here, I don't disagree, but why give a violent felon(a killer, rapist, child molester,etc) the chance to repeat their crimes, as you hear about happening from time to time?

And what types of mental defects are you talking about? Though it is pretty obvious that some people are predisposed to commit violent crimes, I don't believe there is yet a known cause(just ideas) for something like this that can be detected by any kinds of tests or brain scans,etc.

To answer the question in all honesty, the nigger killed 4 people(not in self defense or in "the heat of passion" or any other way that would make it more excusable) and he needs to pay for that with his life.

[Felix the Cat]

http://www.lesoir.be/mediastore/_2005/decembre/du_1_au_10/_08_arnold_AFP.jpg

[Billy Score]

The fact that he had time to become a doer of "good deeds" in prison is a sign of a weak justice system. Had his skull been fragmented sooner, there would be no issue since he hadn't made this insincere "change." To hell with him and his offspring.

[Crowley]

I just started following this story, so I don't know a lot about it. What was the race of his victims?



The white kid was executed because of his race, or so the savage bragged after the fact. These cold blooded murderers who can't face their own death make me cringe. Off with their heads!

[Leif]

The white kid was executed because of his race, or so the savage bragged after the fact. These cold blooded murderers who can't face their own death make me cringe. Off with their heads!

Um...according the articles I've read about him, he hasn't admitted to killing anyone, including the one that said he should get the death penalty. From whence does your knowledge arise?

[Billy Score]

Um...according the articles I've read about him, he hasn't admitted to killing anyone, including the one that said he should get the death penalty. From whence does your knowledge arise?
He formed the crips. I don't care if he was a vegan pacifist, he formed a violent and dangerous gang. This alone justifies his being cast into the fire.

[Berianidze]

He formed the crips. I don't care if he was a vegan pacifist, he formed a violent and dangerous gang. This alone justifies his being cast into the fire.

Exactly. Anybody who's ever had to deal with the threat of gangs and their disastrous behavior knows how much of a problem they are. I don't see this as a race issue or anything of that nature, a criminal is a criminal. The crips and bloods could be seen as some of the biggest threats to African-American equality, as they only feed the image of the black man as a criminal, and someone to be feared. While I think it's also important to assess the situation in which gangs arrive out of, the Crips symbolize nothing but random violence and drug trafficking--and no matter how much he as "changed" the man responsible for their inception should be held accountable.

[Helios Panoptes]

Ix,

Extinction

The behavior is operating on the environment to produce some reinforcer. But then the reinforcer stops being delivered when the behavior happens and the behavior goes away. The reinforcer was not readily available in the environment until the behavior happened, so the behavior operated on the environment to produce the reinforcer. Then the behavior stopped having the effect of producing a reinforcer, so the behavior decreased. It is important to note that the thing that is stopped in extinction is the very thing that originally kept the behavior happening—the reinforcer.



* When Fido first came to live with Janie, every time he stood on his back legs she gave him a treat, so Fido did this in Janie’s presence very often. After a few weeks Janie ran out of treats and didn’t bother to get any more. For a while Fido continued to stand on his back legs around her, but gradually he did it less and less often. His standing behavior was extinguished when the treats were no longer delivered for it.
* The treats made him stand on his back legs, and when the treats went away he gradually no longer bothered to stand on his back legs.

...................................

Negative Punishment

With negative punishment the behavior is operating on the environment to produce some reinforcer to start with, just like in extinction. But then something else that was readily available in the environment is taken from the environment when the behavior happens. The reinforcer continues to be available if the behavior is performed, but the loss of this other thing causes the behavior to happen less often in the future. It’s not the discontinuation of the reinforcer that causes the change as happens in extinction, it’s the withdrawal of something else.



* Every time Jimmy pulled his sister Sally’s hair, she squealed, so he pulled her hair a lot. Their mother got very tired of this, so one day when Jimmy pulled Sally’s hair, she took his Game Cube system and locked it in the trunk of the car. Jimmy eventually got his Game Cube back, and he pulled Sally’s hair less often (at least in the presence of Mom) so that he wouldn’t lose it again.
* Unlike in extinction, the reinforcer for pulling Sally’s hair was still available… she would have still squealed when he pulled her hair. But something worthwhile to Jimmy was taken away when he pulled her hair. Even though the Game Cube had nothing to do with him pulling her hair in the first place, its loss was sufficient to cause him to pull Sally’s hair less often in the future.

http://www.behaviorlogic.com/id117.htm

[Crowley]

Um...according the articles I've read about him, he hasn't admitted to killing anyone, including the one that said he should get the death penalty. From whence does your knowledge arise?

Some article on FR.

[nateddi]

Tookie needs to be killed not in spite of being a great man, but because of it.

The world must see how the US truly rolls. If the government gets complacent to lefty activists it will only hurt the global struggle against US exceptionalism.

[Ixtab]

Ix,



http://www.behaviorlogic.com/id117.htmI said:

"I do not oppose negative reinforcement (taking things away), which is different from punishment."

You said:
"When things are taken away and it weakens a behavior, it is negative punishment. This is what you mean if you wish to take something away from a person to weaken his criminal behavior. Maybe that's not what you're suggesting, though."

I wasn't talking about negative 'punishment,' even as you have here defined it, but specifically negative reinforcement. 'Negative punishment' seems to be what in Skinner's language is known as omission training, something which does not fall under the category of 'punishment' in his system. When I say I am opposed to 'punishment' I mean what you call 'positive punishment'. I do not oppose negative reinforcement on the one hand, and what you call 'negative punishment' (omission training) on the other, which are both two very distinct things.

[Leif]

Some article on FR.

Link?:confused:

[Starr]

Perhaps then it should be measured in what material sense the individual could contribute to society; for instance if the alleged criminal held hist doctorate and thirty years of experience in cardio-vascular medicine...would it be possible to rehabilitate him (whatever his crimes) and have him return to his respective field of expertise--but I agree with you for the most part.

I suppose if they had some sort of special talent, especially one that would ensure they could give something positive to society, exceptions could be made, perhaps. Such exceptions would be very few and far between, however. That would not eliminate the problem of them possibly committing a crime again, however. Writing books and doing what "tookie" is doing does not qualify as a special talent.

As for him bragging about his crimes, I have heard that also. It has been said a few different places, the only one I can really remember is on Bill Oreilly's show. I think the "negro" I referred to earlier in the thread also mentioned this.

[Ixtab]

He formed the crips. I don't care if he was a vegan pacifist, he formed a violent and dangerous gang. This alone justifies his being cast into the fire.You're one tough teenager, Mazdak!

[Billy Score]

You're one tough teenager, Mazdak!

Yes because i clearly implied that.

[Starr]

Less than two hours to go. The governor is a racist. Free tookie.:(

[Felix the Cat]

(I heard threats of riots if he died - any news on this?)

Stanley Tookie Williams executed (http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/12/13/williams.execution/index.html)

SAN QUENTIN, California (CNN) -- Convicted killer and Crips gang co-founder Stanley Tookie Williams was executed early Tuesday at the California state prison at San Quentin.

The execution went ahead as scheduled after the U.S. Supreme Court late Monday rejected a last-ditch appeal.

The high court's ruling followed California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's decision to deny clemency for Williams, 51, who received a lethal injection at 12:01 a.m. Tuesday (3:01 a.m. ET).

The unofficial time of death was 12:35 a.m. (3:35 a.m. ET), a prison spokeswoman said.

In denying Williams' bid for clemency, Schwarzenegger said there was no reason to "second-guess" the jury's verdict.

"Based on the cumulative weight of the evidence, there is no reason to second-guess the jury's decision of guilt or raise significant doubts or serious reservations about Williams' convictions and death sentence," Schwarzenegger said in a five-page statement explaining his decision.

Williams was convicted of killing four people in two 1979 robberies in Los Angeles.

Before Williams went to the execution chamber, the stepmother of one of the men Williams was convicted of killing said she felt "justice is going to be done tonight."

"I had faith that when Governor Arnold looked at the facts of the case that he was going to decide not to do clemency," said Lora Owens, whose stepson, Albert Owens, was shot to death in a convenience store holdup. "I don't like it being said it's a political decision. It was an evidence decision."

Williams had maintained his innocence since his arrest and conviction in the brutal 1979 slayings. He had denounced gang violence and written children's books with an anti-gang message, donating the proceeds to anti-gang community groups.

As Williams was being moved to a holding cell next to the death chamber Monday evening, his lead attorney, John Harris, had said the convict was "at peace."

His lawyers late Monday filed another request for clemency from Schwarzenegger, citing the statements of three new witnesses Harris said could provide exculpatory evidence. That request was also denied.

"He's at peace, but we're fighting, and he knows it," Harris said of his condemned client.

Protesters for and against the death penalty gathered outside the gates of San Quentin early Monday evening.

Celebrities, activists and anti-death-penalty advocates had spoken out on Williams' behalf. Civil rights leader Jesse Jackson, who visited with Williams, said Schwarzenegger decided "to choose revenge over redemption and to use Tookie Williams as a trophy in the flawed system."

"To kill him is a way of making politicians look tough," Jackson said. "It does not make it right. It does not make any of us safer. It does not make any of us more secure."

And Sister Helen Prejean, a Roman Catholic nun and a prominent death penalty opponent, compared the death penalty to "gang justice."

"Gang justice is, if you kill a member of our gang, we kill you -- and don't tell me anything about how you changed your life or what you're going to do," she said. "You kill, and we kill you. And that's what the United States of America is doing with this."

But Schwarzenegger questioned the sincerity of Williams' conversion to nonviolence.

"Is Williams' redemption complete and sincere, or is it just a hollow promise?" Schwarzenegger wrote. "Without an apology and atonement for these senseless and brutal killings there can be no redemption."

He added: "In this case, the one thing that would be the clearest indication of complete remorse and full redemption is the one thing Williams will not do."

Williams was sentenced to death in 1981 in the killing of Owens, a 26-year-old Los Angeles convenience store clerk, in February 1979. The clerk was shot twice in the back with a 12-gauge shotgun while face-down on the floor.

Less than two weeks later, jurors concluded, Williams killed an immigrant Chinese couple and their 41-year-old daughter while stealing less than $100 in cash from their motel. Part of the daughter's head was blown off in the shooting.

Robert Martin, one of the prosecutors who sent Williams to prison, said the courts "have scrutinized this from every angle and they've found that the evidence is rock solid." He questioned whether there was any moral equivalence "between co-authoring some children's books and the senseless murder of four people in cold blood."

"The books will live on," Martin told CNN. "We have many authors who have died, and their books are still in print. And if they have any good effect, that can continue. So I don't believe that that is a conclusive argument."

Williams' lawyers went to the Supreme Court after the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected an affidavit that suggested the one-time gang leader was framed for the four killings.

Gordon Bradbury von Ellerman, a jail trusty who had been held with Williams in the Los Angeles County Jail from 1979 to 1980, stated he was the cellmate of another trusty, identified as George "Roger" Oglesby. Von Ellerman states that Los Angeles Sheriff's Department personnel provided Oglesby with documents to aid him in testifying against Williams in return for reduced or dropped charges.

"I was personally aware that Los Angeles Sheriff's Department personnel would often provide information to these inmates so that they could help frame defendants for crimes," he said in the statement.

The San Francisco-based 9th Circuit rejected that petition Monday afternoon, arguing that Williams and his lawyers failed to present enough evidence of innocence to block the execution.

[Starr]

Yes, there were threats of riots, I guess we will have to wait and see if anything comes of that. I suspect it will not really be reported, unless it is pretty large scale. Gang bangers are going to be pissed off, certainly. It could get interesting.

[Billy Score]

yes, what a terrible shame that the state killed a drug dealing, gang leader and multiple murderer. Can't you all see he wrote CHILDREN'S BOOKS!! It is obviously racism that motivates this execution, not crime. Clearly children's books are more important than countless deaths, drugs, etc. the US is a barbaric nation:mad:

I saw "international socialist organization FREE TOOKIE" boards. How fucking embarassing. The white trash rednecks who came out against these assholes have my total support.

[Jonathan]

Arny - Ay em a Ripablicin end Ay say: thon't be ecanamic gurly man.

[Crowley]

Link?:confused:

Not worth the search, but you are right Williams has never confessed.

[Eisenhans]

Glad to hear the sumbitch is dead.

One down, a good lot more to go.

[jcs]

Glad to hear the sumbitch is dead.
The only viable argument against the death penalty...

[Felix the Cat]

Gangs and Self-Esteem (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0823923444/qid=1134529245/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/102-1511763-1242540?n=507846&s=books&v=glance)

Gangs and the Abuse of Power (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0823923460/qid=1134529317/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/102-1511763-1242540?s=books&v=glance&n=283155)

Gangs and Violence (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0823923452/qid=1134529317/sr=1-3/ref=sr_1_3/102-1511763-1242540?s=books&v=glance&n=283155)

Gangs and Weapons (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0823923428/qid=1134529317/sr=1-4/ref=sr_1_4/102-1511763-1242540?s=books&v=glance&n=283155)

[Starr]

Now this is retarded. What the hell is wrong with some people? I do not say that necessarily because of the anti-death penalty comments, but rather just the way in which this dead gang banger/killer is made into a victim that they are crying about. yes, even "people" like tookie are worthy of dignity and are "a life":rolleyes: I also believe a lot of these white fools who are so saddened by this would not be so sorrowful if this was not a precious minority. I am going to fucking puke.

VIENNA, Austria - California's execution of Stanley Tookie Williams on Tuesday outraged many in Europe who regard the practice as barbaric, and politicians in Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's native Austria called for his name to be removed from a sports stadium in his hometown.

At the Vatican, Pope Benedict XVI's top official for justice matters denounced the death penalty for going against redemption and human dignity.

"We know the death penalty doesn't resolve anything," Cardinal Renato Martino told AP Television News. "Even a criminal is worthy of respect because he is a human being. The death penalty is a negation of human dignity."(cry me a river)

Capital punishment is illegal throughout the European Union, and many Europeans consider state-sponsored executions to be barbaric. Those feelings were amplified in the case of Williams, due to the apparent remorse they believe the Crips gang co-founder showed by writing children's books about the dangers of gangs and violence.

Leaders of Austria's pacifist Green Party went as far as to call for Schwarzenegger to be stripped of his Austrian citizenship — a demand that was quickly rejected by Chancellor Wolfgang Schuessel despite his government's opposition to the death penalty.

"Whoever, out of political calculation, allows the death of a person rehabilitated in such an exemplary manner has rejected the basic values of Austrian society," said Peter Pilz, a Greens leader.

'Stanley Tookie Williams Stadium'?
In Schwarzenegger's hometown of Graz, local Greens said they would file a petition to remove his name from the southern city's sports stadium. A Christian political group went even further, suggesting it be renamed the "Stanley Tookie Williams Stadium.":222:

"Mr. Williams had converted, and unlike Mr. Schwarzenegger, opposed every form of violence," said Richard Schadauer, the chairman of the Association of Christianity and Social Democracy.

Williams was executed early Tuesday at California's San Quentin State Prison after Schwarzenegger denied Williams' request for clemency. Schwarzenegger suggested that Williams' supposed change of heart was not genuine because he had not shown any real remorse for the killings committed by the Crips.

Criticism came quickly from many quarters, including the Socialist Party in France, where the death penalty was abolished in 1981.

"I am proud to be a Frenchman," party spokesman Julien Dray told RTL radio. "I am proud to live in France, in a country where we don't execute somebody 21 years later."

"Schwarzenegger has a lot of muscles, but apparently not much heart," Dray said.(lol)

In Italy, the country's chapter of Amnesty International called the execution "a cold-blooded murder."

"His execution is a slap in the face to the principle of rehabilitation of inmates, an inhumane and inclement act toward a person who, with his exemplary behavior and his activity in favor of street kids, had become an important figure and a symbol of hope for many youths," the group said.

'A cowardly decision'

In Germany, Volker Beck, a leading member of the opposition Greens party, expressed disappointment. "Schwarzenegger's decision is a cowardly decision," Beck told the Netzeitung online newspaper.

From London, Clive Stafford-Smith, a human rights attorney specializing in death penalty cases, called the execution "very sad."

"He was twice as old as when they sentenced him to die, and he certainly wasn't the same person that he was when he was sentenced," Stafford-Smith said.

Rome Mayor Walter Veltroni said the city would keep Williams in its memory the next time it celebrates a victory against the death penalty somewhere in the world.

Rome's Colosseum, once the arena for deadly gladiator combat and executions, has become a symbol of Italy's anti-death penalty stance. Since 1999, the monument has been bathed in golden light every time a death sentence is commuted somewhere in the world or a country abolishes capital punishment.

"I hope there will be such an occasion soon," Veltroni said in a statement. "When it happens, we will do it with a special thought for Tookie."

[Felix the Cat]

Hah, predictable

What's "wrong" with them is that they have no "Tookies" of their own

[Billy Score]

I read this. Europe is a conglomerate of weak, pussified nations and does not deserve an ounce of respect.

[Starr]

Hah, predictable

What's "wrong" with them is that they have no "Tookies" of their own


There are plenty of people that do have "tookies" of their own that were crying about this as well. Anyone catch the old washed up hippie Joan Baez singing last night as they awaited his execution? I think the cunt is trapped in a time warp and still believes she is living in the late 60s protesting the war in Vietnam.:rofl:

[Billy Score]

There are plenty of people that do have "tookies" of their own that were crying about this as well. Anyone catch the old washed up hippie Joan Baez singing last night as they awaited his execution? I think the cunt is trapped in a time warp and still believes she is living in the late 60s protesting the war in Vietnam.:rofl:
My mother nearly worships the ground Joan Baez walks on. Someone should give her kids drugs and kill her friends in gang related drivebys. Then lets see how much a few kiddy books are worth.

[Felix the Cat]

The Stanley "Tookie" Williams Vigil at San Quentin, Monday, December 12, 2005 (http://www.zombietime.com/tookie/) :rolleyes:

http://www.zombietime.com/tookie/IMG_3941.JPG

[Billy Score]

i mentioned the above trash earlier. what an embarassment. the new left should be torn apart by wild bears.

[Starr]

Why do these people, more often than not, always seem to look like they just crawled out of a cardboard box and haven't showered in years?

[Ixtab]

What kind of name is "Tookie"?

[Jimbo Gomez]

What kind of name is "Tookie"?


A name a negro would give to himself. Why?

[Berianidze]

The Stanley "Tookie" Williams Vigil at San Quentin, Monday, December 12, 2005 (http://www.zombietime.com/tookie/) :rolleyes:

http://www.zombietime.com/tookie/IMG_3941.JPG

Like Mazdak said, these people are an embarassment. The "save 'Tookie' Williams" movement was a joke, and has absolutely nothing to do with socialism--it amazes me how these people attach themselves to the most ridiculous causes imaginable and pretend to be the voice of socialism for the 21st century :mad:

[Lenny]

If I were governor I would've spared his life, as he had clearly reformed

Hell, even if he had been released, it's unlikely that he would've ever even commited another crime (not that I would've advocated his release)


This sort of thing is not without precedent: In the 1930s Governor O.K. Allen of Louisiana, part of Huey Long's political machine, pardoned and procured the release of the famous singer Huddie Ledbetter as he was serving prison time for attempted murder. The world is certainly a better place because of it

[Starr]

For some reason I don't think the world would be a better place if Tookie's life had been spared, or he had been released.;)

[Lenny]

For some reason I don't think the world would be a better place if Tookie's life had been spared, or he had been released.;)Maybe it wouldnt be a better place, but since he had clearly reformed you dont think he deserved to be spared?

[Starr]

It is clear that he needed to appear to be reformed. If he would have been sent back to Africa I wouldn't have objected to his release.

[Lenny]

It is clear that he needed to appear to be reformed.hypothetically: If he was truly and genuinely reformed would you support his death sentence being changed to Life?

[Starr]

No. He is still a killer. And I don't think anyone should have to pay to keep him fed and housed. Since I support blacks no longer living among us I am certainly not going to cry over one that gets executed.

[infoterror]

Punishment is obsolete.

Eugenics is the future.

[raven]

These kind of people are the reason why I have distanced myself from traditional leftism 3 years ago. I still have a common belief that right-wing economics doesn't work... I believe that there are some dudes out there that make outrageous amounts of money when that amazingly excessive money can be used to at least pay those below the poverty line better wages. I was never really for the welfare state (I only am in favour of welfare in terms of a temporary transitional safety net and for people who are not physically able to work). I don't believe in giving a person a fish but teaching them a fish. I believe in helping people help themselves and thats why I am for rich corporate giants taking some of their excess and creating more jobs with it and adding more to the payroll of the common people. Like in all honestly does some dude (who in many cases is a jew) need whatever billion dollars they have?

I also agree on some social issues with the new left as well. However, just as I am opposed to a big burdenous welfare state I also don't see eye to eye with their world-wide egalitarian views, their mass immigration and multi-culturalism, their blatant double standards, their human rights for criminals and to a degree liberal degeneracy, etc. Personally I consider myself a Social Anarchist. Basically sort of what Noam Chomsky's school of thought is though I don't endorse his views per se. Yes an (aethistic) jew I know, but I'm actually not anti-semitic, I just think Judaism is a primitive religion/culture and that Israel is a primitive state. I don't believe there is any sort of organized conspiracy... I just have the common sense to know that jews have all of a sudden after WWII acquired more wealth per capita, and a much more disproportionate corporal and media influence than gentile whites.

I consider all these so-called new leftists and supposed leftist anarchists like the ARA and Anti-fas to be a farce. Bakunin, an avid opposer of zionism, would be rolling around in his grave knowing that there are anti-fascist/racist groups and other such nutty groups claiming to be anarchists. And these fools who called for a scumbag gang lord to be spared? What bs is this? If anything the death penalty should be reinstated in the EU and the British Commonwealth (Canada, Australia, etc.)

[Billy Score]

These kind of people are the reason why I have distanced myself from traditional leftism 3 years ago. I still have a common belief that right-wing economics doesn't work... I believe that there are some dudes out there that make outrageous amounts of money when that amazingly excessive money can be used to at least pay those below the poverty line better wages. I was never really for the welfare state (I only am in favour of welfare in terms of a temporary transitional safety net and for people who are not physically able to work). I don't believe in giving a person a fish but teaching them a fish. I believe in helping people help themselves and thats why I am for rich corporate giants taking some of their excess and creating more jobs with it and adding more to the payroll of the common people. Like in all honestly does some dude (who in many cases is a jew) need whatever billion dollars they have?

I also agree on some social issues with the new left as well. However, just as I am opposed to a big burdenous welfare state I also don't see eye to eye with their world-wide egalitarian views, their mass immigration and multi-culturalism, their blatant double standards, their human rights for criminals and to a degree liberal degeneracy, etc. Personally I consider myself a Social Anarchist. Basically sort of what Noam Chomsky's school of thought is though I don't endorse his views per se. Yes an (aethistic) jew I know, but I'm actually not anti-semitic, I just think Judaism is a primitive religion/culture and that Israel is a primitive state. I don't believe there is any sort of organized conspiracy... I just have the common sense to know that jews have all of a sudden after WWII acquired more wealth per capita, and a much more disproportionate corporal and media influence than gentile whites.

I consider all these so-called new leftists and supposed leftist anarchists like the ARA and Anti-fas to be a farce. Bakunin, an avid opposer of zionism, would be rolling around in his grave knowing that there are anti-fascist/racist groups and other such nutty groups claiming to be anarchists. And these fools who called for a scumbag gang lord to be spared? What bs is this? If anything the death penalty should be reinstated in the EU and the British Commonwealth (Canada, Australia, etc.)
Wow, an old style anarchist. This forum is a breeding ground for anti modernists. As much as i despise anarchy and anarchists, at least we are getting semi intelligent ones here. I welcome you raven

[Lenny]

Since I support blacks no longer living among us I am certainly not going to cry over one that gets executed.OK let's say that we had the exact same situation except Williams was a white man instead of a colored man. Would you support him being spared?

[Crowley]

Punishment is obsolete.



You wouldn't think this if a friend or loved one was murdered. It's easy to be detached when the people being slaughtered are strangers. Saying punishment is obsolete is saying justice is obsolete.

[Helios Panoptes]

You wouldn't think this if a friend or loved one was murdered. It's easy to be detached when the people being slaughtered are strangers.

It is much easier, but that doesn't mean it is impossible for a person to hold to his principles even if it becomes agonizing due to an emotional stake. If someone does so, I consider that admirable.

Saying punishment is obsolete is saying justice is obsolete.

No, justice should better the whote of society, not satiate the bloodlust of a few angry people. Ixabert is correct in pointing out that punishment is an inefficacious means of controlling behavior. It simply is a fact.

[Crowley]

It is much easier, but that doesn't mean it is impossible for a person to hold to his principles even if it becomes agonizing due to an emotional stake. If someone does so, I consider that admirable.

I wouldn't admire anyone who thought, for example, a murdering rapist should go free because of some prior silly "principle".

No, justice should better the whote of society, not satiate the bloodlust of a few angry people.

It certainly benefits society locking up or executing murderous thugs for their crimes.


Ixabert is correct in pointing out that punishment is an inefficacious means of controlling behavior. It simply is a fact.

Really? You believe that fear of punishment doesn't effect people's behavior?
You don't believe banks, homes, drug stores, jewelry stores, etc etc etc would be robbed more than they already are if there was no punishment for doing so? Basically dispassionate crimes are almost all committed by people, usually men, who believe they can escape punishment, not because they don't fear punishment. And there is even a larger group of people, usually youngish men, who refrain from crime simply because the fear the punishment for doing so. Not meaning to pick a fight but you must be very young indeed to say such a thing.

[Helios Panoptes]

I wouldn't admire anyone who thought, for example, a murdering rapist should go free because of some prior silly "principle".

I don't believe that opposes anything I've said, as I didn't state that criminal behavior should be tolerated or encouraged. Rather, my point was that you've assumed the hypocrisy of another poster for no good reason.

It certainly benefits society locking up or executing murderous thugs for their crimes.

It's a temporary fix that avoids examining why deviant behavior occurs and trying to correct this "why." For the sake of the discussion, I will concede that those of incorrigibly deviant natures, if such things exist, must be eradicated.

Really? You believe that fear of punishment doesn't effect people's behavior?

I believe its effect to be the avoidance of the punishment, rather than the extinction of the behavior.

You don't believe banks, homes, drug stores, jewelry stores, etc etc etc would be robbed more than they already are if there was no punishment for doing so?

I do not believe this. Punishment is effective in the short-term, but is a failure over a longer period, as it suppresses a behavior rather than removing the reinforcer for it. This leads to repeat offenses because the moment the punishment doesn't loom over the subject, the behavior will return, as it was never really eliminated in the first place.

Basically dispassionate crimes are almost all committed by people, usually men, who believe they can escape punishment, not because they don't fear punishment.

That is the effect of punishment: continuing the behavior, which is still reinforced, but avoiding the punishment.

Not meaning to pick a fight but you must be very young indeed to say such a thing.

I take no offense. I would not consider myself very young, though(21 + 3 weeks). My view on punishment is based not on my lack of age, but my exposure to the arguments of respectable behaviourists.

[Starr]

Fear of punishment works to prevent people from committing most crimes. And yes, there would be a lot more people stealing,etc. if they believed they could get away with it. And for people who think rationally, with things like murder. An example would be if you really hate someone or someone pisses you off, you realize that spending the rest of your life in prison is not worth it. but fear of punishment is not real effective for crimes of passion, since you may not be thinking rationally if you come home and find your wife:hump: another man, for example. It probably also doesn't work to well to prevent people from becoming serial killers or child molesters,etc. since they are fucked up in the head to begin with and their bizarre desires and fantasies most likely override any type of rational thought that would keep them from doing what they do out of fear of being punished.

[Felix the Cat]

Arnie's terminated (http://www.smh.com.au/news/people/arnies-terminated/2005/12/16/1134676432847.html#)

The Arnold Schwarzenegger Football Stadium in Austria's second-largest city Graz is to be renamed as a sign of displeasure with the city's most famous son.

A majority of members on Graz City Council voted to rename the stadium after the Austrian-born governor of California approved the execution of Stanley "Tookie" Williams, according to newspaper Kleine Zeitung.

The Terminator-turned-governor was born six kilometres outside Graz in the community of Thal.

"It's getting on our nerves that we're again and again being criticised for Schwarzenegger's actions in California," said SP Vice Mayor Welter Ferk.

[Starr]

So Tookie's execution is so upsetting, that they are actually going to go through with renaming the stadium. LOL. And here I was naive enough to believe talk of this was mostly just empty words. I thought it was funny at first but there isn't much doubt in my mind that these people are retarded enough to rename it in Tookie's honor. *slap smilie*

[Felix the Cat]

Arnie turns back on his home town (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,11069-1948125,00.html)

THE actor Arnold Schwarzenegger severed relations with his home town of Graz, Austria, yesterday, telling it to stop using his name on a 15,000-seat sports arena. He also sent back a “ring of honour” awarded to him in 1999.

Politicians in Graz had criticised the Governor of California for denying clemency to Stanley “Tookie” Williams, the convicted murderer and co-founder of the Crips criminal gang who was executed last week. Some said that Mr Schwarzenegger’s name should be taken off their stadium.

The former Mr Universe and Hollywood actor launched a pre-emptive strike with a letter to Siegfried Nagl, the Mayor of Graz.

“In all likelihood, during my term as Governor, I will have to make similar and equally difficult decisions,” he wrote. “To spare the responsible politicians of the city of Graz further concern, I withdraw from them as of this day the right to use my name in association with the Liebenauer Stadium.”

Referring to his ring of honour, he said that as “the official Graz appears to no longer accept me as one of their own, this ring has lost its meaning and value to me”. He added: “It is already in the mail.”

Mr Nagl begged the town’s most famous son to reconsider. “I hope that very soon we’ll hear you say, ‘I’ll be back’,” he told the governor. He went on to accuse the Social Democrats, pacifist Greens and others who had criticised Mr Schwarzenegger of orchestrating an “embarrassing farce”.

Walter Ferk, the Vice-Mayor of Graz, remained unrepentant, saying that Mr Schwarzenegger’s decision not to grant clemency to Williams made him “an unsuitable godfather for a public building”.

[Felix the Cat]

Gang-bangers, celebrities mourn Crips founder (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10542468/)

Hundreds gather for funeral of executed killer Stanley Tookie Williams

LOS ANGELES - Celebrities from hip-hop star Snoop Dogg to motivational speaker Tony Robbins lamented the execution of Stanley Tookie Williams at a funeral Tuesday that drew hundreds to the violence-wracked area where Williams founded the murderous Crips gang three decades ago.

Under heavy police presence, mourners including gang members flashing hand signs waited in line to enter the 1,500-seat Bethel AME Church for a ceremony that stretched more than four hours.

After the service, many of those outside the church dropped to the ground after hearing what sounded like three gunshots about a block away, but there were no injuries and no arrests.

Vendors sold T-shirts with Williams’ picture, and a large TV set up in the parking lot allowed the overflow crowd to watch the service. Williams was executed Dec. 13 despite clemency pleas from celebrities and others who said he had rededicated his life to peace.

“It’s nine-fifteen on twelve-thirteen and another black king will be taken from the scene,” Snoop Dogg told mourners, reciting a poem about the execution. The line “I don’t believe Stan did it” drew wild applause in the parking lot.

Williams, 51, was put to death by injection at San Quentin Prison for the 1979 shotgun murders of a 7-Eleven clerk and three motel owners.

‘I battled my demons’

“The war within me is over. I battled my demons and I was triumphant,” Williams said in a recording played to mourners, whom he asked to spread a message to loved ones.

“Teach them how to avoid our destructive footsteps. Teach them to strive for higher education. Teach them to promote peace and teach them to focus on rebuilding the neighborhoods that you, others and I helped to destroy.”

The Rev. Jesse Jackson decried the execution of Williams, who Jackson said saw himself in the end as a “healer, not a predator.”

“Tookie is dead. We’re not safer, we’re not more secure, we’re not more humane,” Jackson said.

Robbins told the mourners he knew Williams only a short time but said he had “so much rage and so much anger” after his execution.

While on death row, Williams wrote children’s books warning against gang life. Those efforts attracted supporters who lobbied for clemency, arguing Williams had redeemed himself. But Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger was unconvinced, and refused to spare his life.

Crips turn out

Several dozen gang members wearing blue attire associated with Crips gangs watched the funeral in the parking lot. One who identified himself as “Killowatt the Third,” age 33, estimated there were 20 to 30 Crips-affiliated gangs there to honor Williams.

“That’s my role model, man. That’s the CEO of the Crips,” he said.

Al Birdsong, 54, a school security officer who waited for hours to get into the funeral, said Williams did not deserve to be executed after more than two decades in prison.

“I’m here to pay my respects to humanity, and that goes to Tookie and everyone else they do in. ... What if it was your son?” Birdsong said. “He’s no different from any other human being. We all made mistakes.”

Keelonnie Roberts, 23, of Torrance, said her father was a Crip who used to tell her tales of gang life. Although Roberts never met Williams, she said, “He seemed like a sweet man to me.”

Mourner Rick Hayes, 36, of Compton, wore a T-shirt with the slogan, “What does redemption mean ...,” which he had made. If Williams was unable to earn clemency from the governor, “what can a black man do, what can he do in society, to get another chance at life?” Hayes asked.

In his will, Williams asked that his remains be cremated and the ashes scattered over South Africa.

Tuesday’s ceremony was not the first public funeral for an executed inmate.

About 300 people attended a San Francisco service for Robert Alton Harris, a murderer whose 1992 execution was the first in 25 years after a death penalty ban and became a rallying point for opponents of capital punishment.