They say he has redeemed himself by speaking out against violence and writing children's books on the evils of gang life. During his 24 years at San Quentin, the Crips street gang founder turned his life around to the point that a Swiss legislator, college professors and others repeatedly submitted his name for Nobel peace and literature prizes.
Anyone can be nominated for a nobel peace prize, that means absolutely squat.
yes, all one has to do is come up with a new way of looking at something in such a manner that it will completely change the way his/her peers will progress in their field of expertise.
tough call. if he has seriously been reformed, and is a 'new person' (which he appears to be) - killing him now eliminates all future good he may do. And I believe there is a lot of good he may do.
On the other hand, if he did in fact kill those 4 people execution style then that's the penalty in that state - although cases like this make me waver on the death penalty (and from what i understand the evidence wasn't too substantial - but that's not an extremely informed opinion, so I am not sure).
Hannibal wrote:I'm opposed to the death penalty, so there really isn't much for me to chew over on this one.
Indeed, but on what grounds? Questionable utility? Risk of executing an innocent person too great?
The penile system is meant to reform. He's a prime candidate for reformation.
Even if they aren't, killing someone just isn't the answer. People argue that it provides closure but really it does the exact opposite.
In this case, I really think that he IS an excellent example of reformation. Granted, he was convicted of killing those four people, but if he can't be seen as someone that shows the system actually works once in a while, where does that leave us?
Nightshade wrote:In this case, I really think that he IS an excellent example of reformation. Granted, he was convicted of killing those four people, but if he can't be seen as someone that shows the system actually works once in a while, where does that leave us?
:icon14:
if the guy has reformed then all he can do now is good
killing him now would be a waste of tax payers money
[color=red] . : [/color][size=85] You knows you knows [/size]
it cost less then keeping him alive now...his appeals r all used up...he was convicted by a jury and lost all his appeals...why should he be treated in a special way?...
a defining attribute of a government is that it has a monopoly on the legitimate exercise of violence...
Freakaloin wrote:it cost less then keeping him alive now...his appeals r all used up...he was convicted by a jury and lost all his appeals...why should he be treated in a special way?...
maybe u could explain how it would be smart? if thats smart then why isn't smart to just let all the criminals in the us out of prison today? why even have laws?
a defining attribute of a government is that it has a monopoly on the legitimate exercise of violence...
Freakaloin wrote:maybe u could explain how it would be smart? if thats smart then why isn't smart to just let all the criminals in the us out of prison today? why even have laws?
what?
It's smart because the man is obviously at least partially reformed. He shouldn't be killed because of bureocracy (sp). Why the fuck does that mean we should let everyone out of prisons and have no laws?
Granted I think the prison system needs to be completely overhauled. The whole retributive paradigm just does not work.
wtf u talking about? what about the victims and their families? maybe someone should kill ur family then the state should free him and give him an award...moron alert!!!
a defining attribute of a government is that it has a monopoly on the legitimate exercise of violence...
[color=#408000]seremtan wrote: yeah, it's not like the japanese are advanced enough to be able to decontaminate any areas that might be affected :dork:[/color]
