Arnie terminates Crips founder
Arnie terminates Crips founder
Author
Discussion

CupraR

Original Poster:

676 posts

259 months

Tuesday 13th December 2005
quotequote all
Buh bye Tookie. It's good to see Arnie showing no mercy for this scumbag despite every moron jumping on the bandwagon to "save" him. We need his kinda justice over here!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4523502.st

ledger

1,063 posts

313 months

Tuesday 13th December 2005
quotequote all
I'm undecided about this. Whilst I admit his behaviour whilst in the Crips was worthy of the death sentence, his anti gang work since and Nobel peace prize nomination do offer some form of redemption.

GregE240

10,857 posts

297 months

Tuesday 13th December 2005
quotequote all
But, Nobel prize nominations or not, he has shown no remorse at all for murder.

I'm sure the worms will be eternally grateful.

Einion Yrth

19,575 posts

274 months

Tuesday 13th December 2005
quotequote all
GregE240 said:
But, Nobel prize nominations or not, he has shown no remorse at all for murder.

I'm sure the worms will be eternally grateful.

Claimed to the end that he didn't commit the murders, given that if he had admitted it and shown remorse he might have received clemency I find that a bit odd.

ledger

1,063 posts

313 months

Tuesday 13th December 2005
quotequote all
GregE240 said:
But, Nobel prize nominations or not, he has shown no remorse at all for murder.

I'm sure the worms will be eternally grateful.


In the interviews I have read with him he has shown remorse for his behaviour and muders, but has always maintained his innocence regarding the 4 murders he was actually convicted for. Why still deny the murders after 25 years, why not play the game and feign remorse ?. Personally it's not a black and white decision for me, but I don't know all the facts of the original convictions.

>> Edited by ledger on Tuesday 13th December 09:48

victormeldrew

8,293 posts

307 months

Tuesday 13th December 2005
quotequote all
He won't be back.

Sorry, couldn't help it

anniesdad

14,589 posts

268 months

Tuesday 13th December 2005
quotequote all
Good!

Carrera2

8,352 posts

262 months

Tuesday 13th December 2005
quotequote all
So given his current focus on peace, is society better off with him dead or alive?

I'd say alive personally.

Arnie was too scared to look soft IMO as there hasn't been a clemency in that state since '67 iirc.

Always a tricky one the old death sentence but this is one of those rare cases where it really makes me question the point of it...

anniesdad

14,589 posts

268 months

Tuesday 13th December 2005
quotequote all
What difference has he actually made? Has he ended gang violence in LA? Surely a man of such influence would be able to achieve this?

It's sickening, to me anyway, that these celebs are all jumping on the bandwagon. Hell, it's just like the time the Toyota Prius came out.

968

12,439 posts

278 months

Tuesday 13th December 2005
quotequote all
Carrera2 said:
So given his current focus on peace, is society better off with him dead or alive?

I'd say alive personally.

Arnie was too scared to look soft IMO as there hasn't been a clemency in that state since '67 iirc.

Always a tricky one the old death sentence but this is one of those rare cases where it really makes me question the point of it...


Quite right. I can't see what has been gained by ending his life. He has had an enormous influence on a number of bad kids, to change their ways. I would've thought a life sentence might be enough.

More worringly for residents of LA, I heard an interview with members of rival gangs, who said his execution could lead to an escalation in gang violence......

GregE240

10,857 posts

297 months

Tuesday 13th December 2005
quotequote all
968 said:
Carrera2 said:
So given his current focus on peace, is society better off with him dead or alive?

I'd say alive personally.

Arnie was too scared to look soft IMO as there hasn't been a clemency in that state since '67 iirc.

Always a tricky one the old death sentence but this is one of those rare cases where it really makes me question the point of it...


Quite right. I can't see what has been gained by ending his life. He has had an enormous influence on a number of bad kids, to change their ways. I would've thought a life sentence might be enough.

More worringly for residents of LA, I heard an interview with members of rival gangs, who said his execution could lead to an escalation in gang violence......
So the gang members are holding the state to ransom over whether some brother buys it or not? I'd dare them then go out and take a couple out, preferably with quicker means than a syringe full of shit.

Honestly, who the hell is in charge in California?

Carrera2

8,352 posts

262 months

Tuesday 13th December 2005
quotequote all
GregE240 said:
968 said:
Carrera2 said:
So given his current focus on peace, is society better off with him dead or alive?

I'd say alive personally.

Arnie was too scared to look soft IMO as there hasn't been a clemency in that state since '67 iirc.

Always a tricky one the old death sentence but this is one of those rare cases where it really makes me question the point of it...


Quite right. I can't see what has been gained by ending his life. He has had an enormous influence on a number of bad kids, to change their ways. I would've thought a life sentence might be enough.

More worringly for residents of LA, I heard an interview with members of rival gangs, who said his execution could lead to an escalation in gang violence......
So the gang members are holding the state to ransom over whether some brother buys it or not? I'd dare them then go out and take a couple out, preferably with quicker means than a syringe full of shit.

Honestly, who the hell is in charge in California?


Not sure what your point is here. The decision is not based on the likelihood of violence as far as I can tell.

Anyone who's got strong views on the death penalty should read The Chamber, John Grisham - makes you realise that it's a complete load of bollox as by the time it actually happens the prisoner is a completely different person to who he was when he commited the crime.

968

12,439 posts

278 months

Tuesday 13th December 2005
quotequote all
GregE240 said:
So the gang members are holding the state to ransom over whether some brother buys it or not? I'd dare them then go out and take a couple out, preferably with quicker means than a syringe full of shit.

Honestly, who the hell is in charge in California?


No, that's not the case. It was merely an expression of how this chap had brokered some sort of peace between the gang factions, in California. With his death, that truce becomes more uneasy.

Besides which, the most important legacy from this chap will be the work he did to try to prevent violence and educate kids.

zaktoo

1,401 posts

270 months

Tuesday 13th December 2005
quotequote all
Oooo ooo, CupraR, you are just soooo butch. *twitter*

Jinx

12,022 posts

290 months

Tuesday 13th December 2005
quotequote all
Carrera2 said:
makes you realise that it's a complete load of bollox as by the time it actually happens the prisoner is a completely different person to who he was when he commited the crime.


So are the victims....

TBH the whole "let's not have the death sentence in case we murder someone innocent" is losing its appeal - balance of probabilities should be enough. One innocent death is probably worth a hundred re-offends (especially in murder cases).
And if the money saved keeping convicted murderers alive was spent saving non-offenders instead (health care, food aid etc) then surely the utilitarian arguments hold?

let the arguments begin


>> Edited by Jinx on Tuesday 13th December 10:24

CupraR

Original Poster:

676 posts

259 months

Tuesday 13th December 2005
quotequote all
968 said:
I can't see what has been gained by ending his life. He has had an enormous influence on a number of bad kids, to change their ways. I would've thought a life sentence might be enough.
Rubbish. Live by the sword, die by the sword. He deserves the maximum punishment, and in California that's the death penalty.

968

12,439 posts

278 months

Tuesday 13th December 2005
quotequote all
CupraR said:
968 said:
I can't see what has been gained by ending his life. He has had an enormous influence on a number of bad kids, to change their ways. I would've thought a life sentence might be enough.
Rubbish. Live by the sword, die by the sword. He deserves the maximum punishment, and in California that's the death penalty.


Except he didn't live by the sword for perhaps that last half of his life. He tried to promote peace from his jail cell, in San Quentin.

fido

18,918 posts

285 months

Tuesday 13th December 2005
quotequote all
Definitely, should not have been executed, as i strongly disagree with the death penalty. Perhaps they should have let him continue his anti-gang work and rot in jail.

CupraR

Original Poster:

676 posts

259 months

Tuesday 13th December 2005
quotequote all
968 said:
CupraR said:
968 said:
I can't see what has been gained by ending his life. He has had an enormous influence on a number of bad kids, to change their ways. I would've thought a life sentence might be enough.
Rubbish. Live by the sword, die by the sword. He deserves the maximum punishment, and in California that's the death penalty.


Except he didn't live by the sword for perhaps that last half of his life. He tried to promote peace from his jail cell, in San Quentin.
That won't bring his victims back though will it.

968

12,439 posts

278 months

Tuesday 13th December 2005
quotequote all
fido said:
Definitely, should not have been executed, as i strongly disagree with the death penalty. Perhaps they should have let him continue his anti-gang work and rot in jail.


Oh no, that wouldn't be hard enough for the hard men here..........