Lame to compare the case of Iraq with this piece of shit. I wouldn't cross the street to piss on his head if it was on fire. You're right it's wrong to kill him...we should put him in a building complex, glue his dick to the floor, give him a rusty butter knife and set the place on fire. let him decide

___________________
My SpaceMySpaceMUSIC
Anti-Purple Alliance.

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade The simplest question for me is, does that give the state the moral authority to kill him?

Problem #2 with Europeans; They often see the State as being a lording power over them, omnipotent and casting down edicts of it's own valition...maybe as a result of thousands of years of states having actually existed in this way...where-as in this country, we see the "state" as being a representative and servant of the PEOPLE's wishes, and the people have spoken; TOOKIE HAD TO DIE!

I think we could put this whole stupid argument about the death penalty in this country to bed by allowing the victim's families to decide whether the murderer gets life in prison or death. After-all, it happened to their family...who are a bunch of detached actors, publicity seekers and mis-guided Liberals to butt their noses in to it anyway?

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade The simplest question for me is, does that give the state the moral authority to kill him?

Well according to the Law of the Land that he was sentenced under it does. I know if I ever killed a human being please give me the gun to take my own life after said action. I have a hard time with all of the truly innocent people out there dying everyday to see this guy as some kind of reformed con that deserves a second chance after murder. If true that he had a hand in the founding of the Crips gang then he has done a whole lot to the black community that only drugs and poverty could rival.

The easiest way to have not been in Mr. Williams position is to not have killed in the first place, that is morality.

___________________
Trance = Heart, Mind, Body and Soul all in 1

Current fav. Global Experience = Madras

Last edited by NYCTrancefan on Dec-13-2005 at 17:54

Why is Europe making this guy out to be some kind of martyr,
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10450663/

Some of the most ridiculous statements I have seen. I am a pretty open guy about Europe but this is beyond me. Newsflash the reason he was on death row for 21 years is because he was allowed the opportunity to exhaust every avenue of appeal for the conviction of his crimes and in the end was guilty of them. Just because a man becomes old and has grey hair and beard doesn't make him not responsible for his crimes of murder. This is truly ridiculous that Europe is making this man look like some cult hero. My deepest repugnance and indignation are reserved for the lowest of human beings (murders, child molesters). Life is far too valuable for someone to murder and then claim they have overcome their actions and we grant them mercy for murdering.

___________________
Trance = Heart, Mind, Body and Soul all in 1

Current fav. Global Experience = Madras

quote:

Originally posted by Lepanto Lame to compare the case of Iraq with this piece of shit.

But it's the same concept. If the European nations see capital punishment as a human rights abuse - and if human rights are universal - then why shouldn't they make it their business? Can another nation question what it sees to be human rights abuses in another country or not?

quote:

Originally posted by donnybrasco Problem #2 with Europeans; They often see the State as being a lording power over them, omnipotent and casting down edicts of it's own valition...

There is no greater power that a state can "lord" over its citizens than the power to kill them. How does this fit in with your libertarian, minimization of government philosophy?

quote:

Originally posted by donnybrasco I think we could put this whole stupid argument about the death penalty in this country to bed by allowing the victim's families to decide whether the murderer gets life in prison or death. After-all, it happened to their family...who are a bunch of detached actors, publicity seekers and mis-guided Liberals to butt their noses in to it anyway?

It really doesn't matter what the "victim's families" or "detached actors, publicity seekers and mis-guided Liberals" think, there is only one question with regards to capital punishment that needs answering: from where did the government - a group of people elected by a bigger group of people - obtain the moral authority to kill its own citizens?

quote:

Originally posted by NYCTrancefan Well according to the Law of the Land that he was sentenced under it does.

No doubt. Is that law morally justifiable, though?

quote:

I know if I ever killed a human being please give me the gun to take my own life after said action. I have a hard time with all of the truly innocent people out there dying everyday to see this guy as some kind of reformed con that deserves a second chance after murder. If true that he had a hand in the founding of the Crips gang then he has done a whole lot to the black community that only drugs and poverty could rival.

I'm not trying to justify what he did, nor would I for a second argue that he shouldn't have been punished for it. But ask yourself, even from a pragmatic angle, what will killing him actually acheieve? Will it acheieve anything - other than the satisfaction of bloodlust - that lifetime imprisonment couldn't? Will it bring back the dead, or reduce the possibility of similar crimes in the future?

From a moral angle, what death-penalty advocates don't seem to understand is that it's not so much about the criminals as it is about us. It's not that a man guilty of murdering an entire family necessarily "deserves to live" (although what exactly that means and who exactly has the authority to decide that, I'm not quite sure) it's that - in our justice systems - we should not reduce ourselves to the same level of barbarism as the people we're condemning. Afterall, does facilitating the death of a murderer not make us murderers ourselves?

quote:

The easiest way to have not been in Mr. Williams position is to not have killed in the first place, that is morality.

He might have known that he faced death for what he was doing - does that, in any way, make killing him right though? Can sanctioning the death of another human being really constitute "morality"?

___________________
http://eschatonnow.blogspot.com/

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade He might have known that he faced death for what he was doing - does that, in any way, make killing him right though? Can sanctioning the death of another human being really constitute "morality"?

I see this from a completely different perspective and yet consider myself a moderate to liberal person. I believe that life is to be respected, however when an individual murders another human being then that right can be trumped by the state for that exact reason. I don't know why people murder, but nothing can get me to do it to another human being who is innocent. I firmly believe that we must all be held accountable to the hightest punishment of the land if convicted of such a crime as taking the life of an innocent individual.

Maybe it is because I look at it from my perspective and not from any moralistic viewpoint that I feel this way. If all it took was for every convicted killer to become "converted" to achieve a reprieve from death themselves for their actions of murder against society then is that justice.

___________________
Trance = Heart, Mind, Body and Soul all in 1

Current fav. Global Experience = Madras

quote:

Originally posted by NYCTrancefan I see this from a completely different perspective and yet consider myself a moderate to liberal person.

You don't have to be a conservative to support the death-penalty, nor a liberal to oppose it. I think this is an issue that transcends mere left / right politics.

quote:

I believe that life is to be respected, however when an individual murders another human being then that right can be trumped by the state for that exact reason.

But you're still not telling me where the state derives that authority from.

quote:

I don't know why people murder, but nothing can get me to do it to another human being who is innocent. I firmly believe that we must all be held accountable to the hightest punishment of the land if convicted of such a crime as taking the life of an innocent individual.

There are no greater crimes than the murder of an innocent individual and so, for this reason, you are quite right: such a crime deserves the greatest penalty a state can hand down. The only issue is - yet again - why should a state have the right to institute capital punishment as its "highest punishment"?

quote:

Maybe it is because I look at it from my perspective and not from any moralistic viewpoint that I feel this way. If all it took was for every convicted killer to become "converted" to achieve a reprieve from death themselves for their actions of murder against society then is that justice.

I'm not sure that demonstrating sings of "conversion" or remorse is much of an issue here. It's as wrong to kill a man who shows no remorse as it is to kill a man who is so consumed by grief for what he has done that he cannot even get out of bed in the morning. Killing a man for what has been done and what cannot be undone makes no sense, regardless of how much remorse he shows.

___________________
http://eschatonnow.blogspot.com/

quote:

Originally posted by NYCTrancefan Well according to the Law of the Land that he was sentenced under it does. I know if I ever killed a human being please give me the gun to take my own life after said action. I have a hard time with all of the truly innocent people out there dying everyday to see this guy as some kind of reformed con that deserves a second chance after murder. If true that he had a hand in the founding of the Crips gang then he has done a whole lot to the black community that only drugs and poverty could rival. The easiest way to have not been in Mr. Williams position is to not have killed in the first place, that is morality.

What if he didn't kill them?

quote:

Originally posted by St_Andrew What if he didn't kill them?

I believe it is fair to say that this is not the likely scenario in this case for Mr. Williams. Even his supporters couldn't go as far as saying he was innocent of or not responsible for these crimes or he received an unfair trial or poor representation in court. None of these things were a factor in his situation. The question was wether by simply saying he had renounced violence, become a speaker against gangs and understood a different path of life based on his prior actions was enough to warrant being reprieved from death, I don't think so.

___________________
Trance = Heart, Mind, Body and Soul all in 1

Current fav. Global Experience = Madras

quote:

Originally posted by NYCTrancefan I believe it is fair to say that this is not the likely scenario in this case for Mr. Williams. Even his supporters couldn't go as far as saying he was innocent of or not responsible for these crimes or he received an unfair trial or poor representation in court. None of these things were a factor in his situation. The question was wether by simply saying he had renounced violence, become a speaker against gangs and understood a different path of life based on his prior actions was enough to warrant being reprieved from death, I don't think so.

Now I'm not really into this case, at all, but you know the aweful history of the US legal system? It wouldn't be the firsttime someone innocent was killed... That's the biggest reason I'm against it, simply because if there is only slight chance that he is not quilty, then you have no right to kill him.

Then I don't really see the point in revange either, if the guy changed then why still kill him?!

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade But you're still not telling me where the state derives that authority from.

The government has a monopoly on the use of force. Perhaps the state derives the authority from we, the people, who have entrusted the state with that duty.

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade I'm not sure that demonstrating sings of "conversion" or remorse is much of an issue here. It's as wrong to kill a man who shows no remorse as it is to kill a man who is so consumed by grief for what he has done that he cannot even get out of bed in the morning. Killing a man for what has been done and what cannot be undone makes no sense, regardless of how much remorse he shows.

That is a very easy answer however to simply say that you are against any man dying, kind of akin to the idea of well God is omnipresent. It does nothing to deal with the individual's actions in society and their violation of something that is sacred as life and all the potential that comes from that existence. Just because Mr. Williams demonstrated no respect for human life in his actions, doesn't automatically mean that society is as barbaric as his actions were for holding him to the higest punishment possible for his choices in life.

In life we all have consequences for our actions, usually established by the society in which we live. The state derives the authority to execute Mr. Williams, from his peers who demed it was necessary in his case to give him said punishment as opposed to life in prison at the time he was sentenced because of his actions. Anyone who applies the concept of morality must surely understand then that society is going to be the barometer of that concept.

___________________
Trance = Heart, Mind, Body and Soul all in 1

Current fav. Global Experience = Madras