It is 10:05p.m eastern US time. In 1hr and 56 min. Stanley Tookie Williams as we know him will be no more. Not that I’m perturbed for this brova but one just can’t help to listen in to the arguments generated by his plea for clemency after he was scheduled to be executed for the murder of 4 people back in 1979. Today Governor Arnold Schwazneger a.k.a 'Gorvernator' denied Tookie clemency
I must admit, I took another look into my convictions for this fella. To my surprise too, I found myself scratching my head unable to make a firm stance whether this guys should be fried or let to rot in jail for the rest of his life.
I’m not convinced by his sudden repentance in jail and the fame he achieved after being nominated for Nobel Peace Price because he wrote children’s book with anti-gang messages OR because he stop the Crips gang which he started years ago. There’s nothing he could do that would replace the lives he took.
But a life is a life. When is it right to kill someone? Here’s where my dilemma lies I hope to get your opinions about this issue.
My conviction has always been that anyone who is capable of taking the life of another person should fall to the same fate, period. When you look at Tookie’s issue, who is really qualified to execute another person?
I mean, aren’t the laws of this country founded upon moral values which are guided by our religious faith in God? Isn’t this God’s own part of the deal? At the same time, I’m thinking that shit like this is the right thing to do so that ‘would be murders’ will learn what would befall them if they are caught.
I must admit, I took another look into my convictions for this fella. To my surprise too, I found myself scratching my head unable to make a firm stance whether this guys should be fried or let to rot in jail for the rest of his life.
I’m not convinced by his sudden repentance in jail and the fame he achieved after being nominated for Nobel Peace Price because he wrote children’s book with anti-gang messages OR because he stop the Crips gang which he started years ago. There’s nothing he could do that would replace the lives he took.
But a life is a life. When is it right to kill someone? Here’s where my dilemma lies I hope to get your opinions about this issue.
My conviction has always been that anyone who is capable of taking the life of another person should fall to the same fate, period. When you look at Tookie’s issue, who is really qualified to execute another person?
I mean, aren’t the laws of this country founded upon moral values which are guided by our religious faith in God? Isn’t this God’s own part of the deal? At the same time, I’m thinking that shit like this is the right thing to do so that ‘would be murders’ will learn what would befall them if they are caught.
4 comments:
My take on this....The purpose of imprisonment is to reform, this man has proved that he is reformed. I heard he has been in there for 26 years...I think that is plenty for a crime they cannot prove beyound a reasonable doubt that he committed. Its all good though, Arnold did what the Georgie and them bois told him.
True that but there are certain wrongs that cannot be corrected by mere imprisonment. This one is certainly one of them. People should should consider the cause of such agression as forming gangs and killing people in cold blood. During era in which Tookie killed those people, sentiments were riding high. Civil unrest just started declining and poverty was high as shit. These things could cause poeple to brake the law in the way he did.
This is certainly a tough nut to crack. As long as the issue of killing( human) rages, people will definitely be on both divide.
But then, if a man has killed another through maybe robbery, thuggery or other means... who is in a position to kill the murderer? (not forgetting the injunction: 'thou shall not kill')That is undoubtedly a job I won't take for anything in world!
To be honest, they should have just left him in there to serve more prison time, instead of killing him.
Politics is the name of the game
Post a Comment