[quote]littlericky wrote:
tookie was a vicious killer, now he can BURN IN HELL![/quote]
If he truly repented, he will be sitting at the right hand.
By the looks of it, you two shall never meet
[quote]sasquatch wrote:
littlericky wrote:
tookie was a vicious killer, now he can BURN IN HELL!
If he truly repented, he will be sitting at the right hand.
By the looks of it, you two shall never meet[/quote]
redempted?..i don;t think so…he never say sorry to the family victims…he never admitted to the killings…he never help the police w/ the gans b/c like he said he is not a snitch…redempted?..HAHAHA
[quote]littlericky wrote:
sasquatch wrote:
littlericky wrote:
tookie was a vicious killer, now he can BURN IN HELL!
If he truly repented, he will be sitting at the right hand.
By the looks of it, you two shall never meet
redempted?..i don;t think so…he never say sorry to the family victims…he never admitted to the killings…he never help the police w/ the gans b/c like he said he is not a snitch…redempted?..HAHAHA[/quote]
[quote]littlericky wrote:
sasquatch wrote:
littlericky wrote:
tookie was a vicious killer, now he can BURN IN HELL!
If he truly repented, he will be sitting at the right hand.
By the looks of it, you two shall never meet
redempted?..i don;t think so…he never say sorry to the family victims…he never admitted to the killings…he never help the police w/ the gans b/c like he said he is not a snitch…redempted?..HAHAHA[/quote]
I admire how you have such a command of the English language, you invent new words like “redempted”.
Little dicky is going to do a better job of pushing the hard liners away from their position than a whole boatload of lenient folks arguing for clemency ever could.
Again, not that I was arguing for clemency. Dammit, I pine for the day that my position on issues won’t be made up by others.
[quote]Kuz wrote:
littlericky wrote:
sasquatch wrote:
littlericky wrote:
tookie was a vicious killer, now he can BURN IN HELL!
If he truly repented, he will be sitting at the right hand.
By the looks of it, you two shall never meet
redempted?..i don;t think so…he never say sorry to the family victims…he never admitted to the killings…he never help the police w/ the gans b/c like he said he is not a snitch…redempted?..HAHAHA
I admire how you have such a command of the English language, you invent new words like “redempted”.[/quote]
you got me…I’m Ricky Ricardo from “I love lucy”
[quote]vroom wrote:
Little dicky is going to do a better job of pushing the hard liners away from their position than a whole boatload of lenient folks arguing for clemency ever could.
Again, not that I was arguing for clemency. Dammit, I pine for the day that my position on issues won’t be made up by others.[/quote]
Dammit, I pray for the day you and I agree, but that probably ain’t gonna happen soon either. Or maybe we do, but because of the inherant communication issues with the internet we just can’t see that.
Wait–I agree! Littedickey ain’t helping "those"hardliners at all. It’s not about vengence dickey, it’s about punishment.
BTW–you may want to look up repent just so you have something to fall back on a little later.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
sasquatch wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
sasquatch wrote:
Most would agree there APPEARS to be bias in the system wrt race.
…
California is 44% white. 39% of the people on death row are white. 8 of the 11 people executed in California are white.
Hence my capitalization of appears sir. It is a common NAACP argument for doing away with the death penalty because it is racially biased. The info provided disputed that.
Now you further reinforced it.
I was just watching O’Reilly where the statistic is that when the victims are white and the defendant is black, the black defendant is 80% more likely to get the death penalty. I will have to look for this in writing or for a more reliable source considering where that came from.[/quote]
That wouldn’t surprise me.
There are plenty of states where black men are over-represented on death row. It appears California is not one of them.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
There are plenty of states where black men are over-represented on death row. It appears California is not one of them.[/quote]
Indeed. Historically California (and Californians) don’t tolerate racism very well and people are expected (and pressured) to go the extra mile in avoiding any racist bias.
This is the State of Political Correctness. And we’re proud of it.
Basically, I don’t think that statistic would apply over here, even though I get the feeling it does in most other places in the country.
However, in some cases it becomes a little bit over the top. Recently several officers at the SFPD got in real trouble for making a self-deprecating video that has some less Politically Correct humor. Although the humor was juvenile and could be insulting for overly sensitive people (it did have some skits that could be construed as sexist, others racist and others homophobic) the reaction of the Powers That Be was definitely over the top.
It also goes beyond that: I can also say with some level of certainty that the Rudolph Giuliani approach to cleaning up cities wouldn’t stand a chance of passing public scrutiny in either SF or Oakland.
It’s interesting that the CHP is more and more being brought in to play “bad cop” role in the “rough” neighborhoods, since the PDs of SF and Oakland are under a lot of scrutiny – which the CHP is not, believe it or not. Of course, they’re limited in what they can do, but amazingly you can get a lot of criminals by looking for traffic violations… 
and then… oooooops! What’s that white powder? And do you have a permit for that gun? And what’s that strange smell coming out of your trunk?
The great thing about criminals in general and gang members in particular is that they almost invariably are extremely stupid – so we get them that way in Northern California.
But somehow there HAS to be a balance somewhere: being unbiased without being over-the-top PC.
[quote]hspder wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
There are plenty of states where black men are over-represented on death row. It appears California is not one of them.
Indeed. Historically California (and Californians) don’t tolerate racism very well and people are expected (and pressured) to go the extra mile in avoiding any racist bias.
This is the State of Political Correctness. And we’re proud of it.
Basically, I don’t think that statistic would apply over here, even though I get the feeling it does in most other places in the country.
However, in some cases it becomes a little bit over the top. Recently several officers at the SFPD got in real trouble for making a self-deprecating video that has some less Politically Correct humor. Although the humor was juvenile and could be insulting for overly sensitive people (it did have some skits that could be construed as sexist, others racist and others homophobic) the reaction of the Powers That Be was definitely over the top.
It also goes beyond that: I can also say with some level of certainty that the Rudolph Giuliani approach to cleaning up cities wouldn’t stand a chance of passing public scrutiny in either SF or Oakland.
It’s interesting that the CHP is more and more being brought in to play “bad cop” role in the “rough” neighborhoods, since the PDs of SF and Oakland are under a lot of scrutiny – which the CHP is not, believe it or not. Of course, they’re limited in what they can do, but amazingly you can get a lot of criminals by looking for traffic violations… and then… oooooops! What’s that white powder? And do you have a permit for that gun? And what’s that strange smell coming out of your trunk?
The great thing about criminals in general and gang members in particular is that they almost invariably are extremely stupid – so we get them that way in Northern California.
But somehow there HAS to be a balance somewhere: being unbiased without being over-the-top PC.
[/quote]
Political Correctness=Free OJ
Not sure that=braggin’ rights
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
GeorgeMontyIV wrote:
sasquach, you appear to need the saving of more than just our tomfoolery. I must insist that you scurry back to your cubicle at once. It is highly likely that either George or I own some part of the company in which you are currently enslaved. Your lack of productivity in general is costing us money. Shew- Shew now you little vermin. Off you go lest I instruct your shift supervisor to scold you publicly and toss you on the street.
As for this Tookie character, he is getting the rightful spanking that he has deserved. I have spoken with governor Arnold and relish the idea to discuss politics w/ a European.
Now he is obviously guilty, i think. He has been convicted guilty of a crime. I wish he would be forgiven by his maker!
Well I think we have another Kim JongBullion. Bet its the same damn guy.[/quote]
I dunno. Not enough homosexual references, unless he changed up his style.
[quote]GeorgeMontyIV wrote:
sasquach, you appear to need the saving of more than just our tomfoolery. I must insist that you scurry back to your cubicle at once. It is highly likely that either George or I own some part of the company in which you are currently enslaved. Your lack of productivity in general is costing us money. Shew- Shew now you little vermin. Off you go lest I instruct your shift supervisor to scold you publicly and toss you on the street.
[/quote]
BIG HINT: An actual upper-crust milksop such as you are wishing you were would know how to spell the word “shoo” correctly.
Nice try, though. Keep at it, you might strike comedy gold if you mine long enough. Of course, you might also just wind up being annoying as all hell. Good luck either way.
Tookie will not be missed. The following makes good reference to the overlooked victims of this particular incident. What kind of impact would these people have had on others lives if they had lived? Even if a strong conviction is held against the death penalty for moral reasons, shouldn’t hard time be HARD time? I mean WTF?
He was writing books, getting in some good lifts, and generally enjoying a life that was denied to the victims. The state of California went out of it’s way to provide oportunities that were denied to his victims. A last meal, a chance to get on his knees to get good with god, say goodby to certain folks, etc.
Tookie should have died a long time ago.
Bigflamers two cents
[i][b]Albert Owens, Tsai-Shai Yang, Yen-I Yang and Yee-Chen Lin
Tookie Williams has been in the news quite a bit. Unfortunately, the four people he murdered over 26 years ago seem to have been forgotten, by and large, by the national press corps covering this story. In the name of fairness and justice, one would think that the media would have an obligation to balance some of the time devoted to Stanley Williams on the four people Tookie snuffed the life out of over a quarter of a century ago.
Albert Owens was a veteran and father of two young girls when he was shot in the back while lying face down on the floor of the 7-Eleven where he worked. Owens’ brother told the Kansas City Star several weeks ago:
?He did everything he was told to, he was not a threat, and they shot him to death,? Wayne Owens said. ?And then in prison, bragged about the noise he made when he died.?
The District Attorney in his rebuttal asks:
What man orders another human being to lie face down on the floor and then proceeds to shoot him two times in the back at close range with a shotgun? What man later laughs when he tells his friends how the victim gurgled as he lay dying?
One can only imagine Albert Owens? terror as he lay face down on the floor of the storage room at the 7-Eleven and heard the first shotgun blast that was fired into the security monitor. Was he hoping against hope he would not be shot to death? Was he thinking of his two young daughters and whether he would ever see them again, hold them again, tell them how much he loved them again?
Before crossing paths with Stanley Williams, Albert Owens had proudly served in the United States military. He had fathered two beautiful daughters. He had recently moved to Los Angeles to make a better life for him and his family. Stanley Williams took that dream away. He took it away from Albert, his daughters, and his entire family.
The Yang family were the other three Stanley Williams was convicted of killing in March of 1979. Here are the details of that crime from the The LA County District Attorney’s response to Williams’ petition for clemency:
Once inside the private office, Williams, using his shotgun, killed seventy-six year old Yen-I Yang; Williams also killed Yang’s wife, sixty-three year old Tsai-Shai Yang; lastly, Williams killed Yang’s daughter, forty-three year old Yee-Chen Lin. Williams then removed the currency from the cash register and fled the location.
Robert Yang was asleep with his wife in their bedroom at the Brookhaven Motel when he was awakened by the sound of somebody breaking down the door to the motel’s office. This sound was immediately followed by the sound of his mother or sister screaming, followed by gun shots.
When Robert entered the motel office he found his mother, his sister, and his father had all been shot. Robert observed that the cash register was open and money was missing. It was later determined that the robbery of the Brookhaven Motel and the murder of the three members of the Yang family netted Stanley Williams approximately $100.
Robert Yang called 9-1-1. Two deputies from the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department arrived within approximately ten minutes. When the deputies entered the motel they noticed a strong odor of gun powder. The deputies observed that the door leading from the public entrance into Yang’s private living quarters had been forced open and the doorjamb was split open and the woodwork was torn away from the doorjamb.
As they entered, they saw Yen-I Yang lying on a sofa. He was “soaked with blood,” “gasping for air, and making gurgling noises.” They also saw the bloodied body of Tsai-Shai Yang. She was making “gurgling noises” and “gasping for air,” with “her knees drawn up under her, and her face down on the floor,” as if she had been forced to bow down before being killed. Lastly, the deputies found the body of Yee-Chen Lin lying on the hallway floor.
These four murders are why the state of California executed Stanley Williams last night. Governor Schwarzenegger was quite right in justifying his denial for clemency: “Without an apology and atonement for these senseless and brutal killings there can be no redemption.” Just as important as atonement, however, is to remember that the victims and their families deserve society’s thoughts and prayers every bit as much as Stanley Williams. The glorification of Tookie by some in the press and many advocates on the left is truly disturbing.
This is not meant to be an argument for the death penalty or the denial of Tookie’s clemency, though I support both, but rather an argument that when we as society debate the right and wrongs of government executions and the merits of clemency for convicted killers, we need to always remember who the true victims are.
Posted by John McIntyre on December 13, 2005 08:58 AM [/i][/b]
Nice, bigflamer.
Is there anybody in the thread who still has a problem with this? I’ll say it again: the only problem we should have with the death penalty is using it on prisoners who we are not 120% sure of guilt.
[quote]bigflamer wrote:
Tookie will not be missed. The following makes good reference to the overlooked victims of this particular incident. What kind of impact would these people have had on others lives if they had lived? Even if a strong conviction is held against the death penalty for moral reasons, shouldn’t hard time be HARD time? I mean WTF?[/quote]
I have already written that they could have tattooed the names of the victims on his forehead and that would have made much more sense in terms of what is “good” than trying to justify murdering someone under “the law”. I mean, if that’s the case, why don’t I get to go legally steal from anyone who steals from me? Someone wrecks my car, it should be my right to destroy theirs. How is it this “eye for an eye” logic only refers to murder?
[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
Nice, bigflamer.
Is there anybody in the thread who still has a problem with this? I’ll say it again: the only problem we should have with the death penalty is using it on prisoners who we are not 120% sure of guilt.
[/quote]
Is that the only problem anyone should have with it? NO one…maybe it needs to be repeated…NO ONE has excused any crime committed. Please list for me how killing someone for one crime brings back the ones murdered by the crime. Is the family better off now that someone is dead? The victim’s families in this case now have complete closure? No more tears, huh? I already know your stance when it comes to religion…ie, when we die, that’s it. Everyone doesn’t believe the same. That opens up some accountability for even our actions on Earth even if we are following “tradition”.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Is that the only problem anyone should have with it? NO one…maybe it needs to be repeated…NO ONE has excused any crime committed. Please list for me how killing someone for one crime brings back the ones murdered by the crime. Is the family better off now that someone is dead? The victim’s families in this case now have complete closure? No more tears, huh? I already know your stance when it comes to religion…ie, when we die, that’s it. Everyone doesn’t believe the same. That opens up some accountability for even our actions on Earth even if we are following “tradition”.[/quote]
I guess this answers my question, huh? 
Let’s put it this way:
This isn’t about bringing anybody back from the dead. What we are talking about is the completion of justice. You mentioned that nobody is excusing his crime… okay. Then don’t. I sure as hell am not. You are NOT excused, Tookie… time to die.
I think that about sums it up. If he didn’t want to face the penalty in his state for capital murder, then he should have done something differently with his life besides blowing away the helpless elderly with a shotgun. Nobody forced him to do what he did.
Just wondering: when you’re watching the game, and Kobe gets fouled, do you wonder why they are letting him get a free throw? After all, it’s not going to get the game back the way it was before he was fouled, right?
This is the idea of justice. It is respecting the value of the lives of the victims… just like the free throw represents the respect we have for the rules of the game.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
I have already written that they could have tattooed the names of the victims on his forehead and that would have made much more sense in terms of what is “good” than trying to justify murdering someone under “the law”. I mean, if that’s the case, why don’t I get to go legally steal from anyone who steals from me? Someone wrecks my car, it should be my right to destroy theirs. How is it this “eye for an eye” logic only refers to murder?[/quote]
My cars and other material things are insured and can be replaced. I don’t love and protect my car my car the way I love and protect my wife and son.
That being said, I find myself moving away from the death penalty for a number of reasons. An imperfect legal system and a strong belief that society should uphold life, are a few of the reasons for my personall paradigm shift w/r/t the death penalty. But when I say hard time, I’m talking about HARD damn time. The kind of time that makes folks wish they were dead. I’m talking about locking these folks up and damn near forgeting about them. 10x10 rooms with no windows, no bed, only a shitter, etc. No working out, no tv ever again and no outside visitors. Thats the kind of life sentence I’m talking about. That would give anybody enough time to consider what was done and possibly regret their actions.
Possibly death is too good for these individuals. Maybe this kind of hard time would satisfy the need for punishment, and yet at the same time serve as a deterent.
-Bigflamer
I support the death penalty.Tookie killed four people.I’m glad he was cooked.You take a life you should have your life taken.Period.Everyone is so fast to say “I don’t support the death penalty”,but,in reality,if someone killed your brother or sister you’d want justice.
[quote]The_Grim_Reaper wrote:
I support the death penalty.Tookie killed four people.I’m glad he was cooked.You take a life you should have your life taken.Period.Everyone is so fast to say “I don’t support the death penalty”,but,in reality,if someone killed your brother or sister you’d want justice.[/quote]
What are you fucking retarded? OF COURSE you support the death penalty…
YOU’RE THE GRIM REAPER!!! (rim shot)
Thank you, thank you, I’ll be here all weekend… don’t forget to tip your waitresses and your bartenders.