Staredit Network

Do you guys think that Stanley [Tookie] Williams deserved to be executed? He was ultimatly put to death after Arnold Schwartzenagger or how ever u freakin spell it he ultimitly had Tookie put to death. This man was the leader of the crips for a while. he was put on trail for the murder of a couple people and was found guilty. since him being on death row he has written some children books and made some announcments saying not to join gangs like the crips because they are bad and stuff.

So, do you guys think he should of gotton life in prison or death?

Full Article

I think that he should have life in prision, not because it seems he turned around and wrote childrens books that sent the message about not joining gangs or any of that good stuff, but because I am opossed to the death penalty. I have done my research (as a project in 8th grade) and based on that life inprisonment is a more effective and cheaper way of punishment.

I think he deserved a reduction of his sentence, I don't support the death penalty.


Wow... that's just pathetic...

He killed four people, I think he deserved what he deserved. At least I don't sympathise for his death. It's resonably just.

well no one deserves to die. no matter how much crimes and murders they commited. people should be given a chance to repent in prison and do good for the community to pay off some of the wrong that they have done. i do not support the death penalty. no one has a right to kill not even the government.

Crime fit the punishment. He also assualted many of the prison gaurds while in jail. So it wasn't like he was an angel during his prison time either. And I find it interesting how so many people on death row suddenly have changes of life and want to do good and etc...

Also, all the evidence pointed to him that he killed those people, there wasn't anything that showed he was innocent.

I'm also surprised that the 9th circuit didn't do anything to stop this.

Sufferign is worse than death. So mainly he should stay in prison without parole. He can never see his family, his friends, his bruthas, and anyone he loved in the past. When your dead...Who knows. We don't know the afterlife.

Preventing a few ghetto kids from doing drugs and joining gangs does NOT make up for murdering four people who actually had lives.

In less harsh and biased terms:

Writing a children's book doesn't hide that fact that he murdered four people.


Firsthand experience is after all, the best experience.

Repenting doesn't make a crime go away, even if he cried his eyes out it still doesn't change the fact that he killed four other people. Four, does that sound like a small number to you? But how old are you? Chances are the people he killed were around two times older than you. Imagine living life and all it's experiences up untill now, all over again, and then repeat that again. That would only make two of those people. Four doesn't sound so small anymore does it?

Oh well, then it's ok for him to be on death sentence because he didn't kill one person, he killed four.

I agree, I would consider the electric chair a haven compared to sitting in the same room for five times my age.

no... jet you obviously didn't read what he said... NO ONE has the right to kill, not even the government. No matter the crime. Remember, an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Suffering in prison is 10 times worse then just dying and thats it. Unless you can prove to me hell exists, you have no argument against this.

I DO support the death penalty. I believe someone can do something so awful that they should pay for it with their lives. He was found guilty of the murders and despite many strong efforts, no evidence to support his innocence plea was ever found.

Right after the execution, his supporters said "California just murdered an innocent man." In the off chance that he actually WAS innocent of the murders and was wrongfully convicted for them, I have to laugh when people say he was an INNOCENT man. He was one of the founders of the CRIPS gang, one of the deadliest street gangs in the country, how could he POSSIBLY be an innocent man? The poignancy of that statement fails to reach me becuase it is totally untrue.

He claimed to be a "redeemed" man because of his time in jail. Well, everytime my son's mom goes to jail she claims to have found god and says she'll stop smoking crack, but she's doing it all over again only HOURS after getting out of jail each time. I cannot believe anything a career criminal says. Just because you claim to be all better does not mean you get a free pass for your crimes.

Heheheh... After doing all kinds of things like drugs and throwing knives at me while holding the baby, my son's mom would say stuff like "Why are you mad at me? I haven't done anything to you TODAY?" The pleas of a criminal no longer move me.

Well duh no one has the right to kill, but my point was that he should use that statement as an argument because the person we are talking about killed four people.

He killed four people, he should suffer in prison.

Hey well everyone loves children's books...

i said repent for SOME of his wrongs. i did not say it can equal what he did. im saying that he has the choice to do good instead of lying in a coffin. seriously you guys like to flame dont you?! or do you not read the posts correctly?

He gets what he did. Although if he was innocent, denied killing the 4 people. Never admitted once then he just spend 25 years in jail for no reason. Anyways, Arnold could not grant him clemency or else it could hinder his future.

Wow, I can't believe what some of the people here are saying... Two wrongs don't make a right, he kills four people, so the government makes things better by killing him? I think life in prison would have been suffecient, there was no need to kill the man. Not to mention he wrote childrens books that saved many troubled kids. He saved their lives so that they don't grow up and commit four of their own murders. If killing four people makes him a murderer, then why doesn't killing him make Arnold Schwarzenegger a murder? I seriously can't believe they actually went through with killing him.

Also, I think he changed while in jail, believe it or not, people mature in 21 years and realize what they have done wrong. If it's worth anything, he also wrote an apology:

http://www.tookie.com/apology.html

I don't know about you, but I don't want my tax money going to a murderer of 4.



At the moment yes, long term, no. We are talking Electric bills, water bills (his toilet and sink), food, heating bills, etc...

A needle of poisen is cheaper then paying for a human life to live, plus me and you both don't know how long he would have lived in jail.

And again I don't want my tax money going to him.

So for causing pain and suffering, we should cause him pain and suffering? This makes us better than him... how?

yeah i read this when i was in school, apparently he was caught for something he did some 15 years ago... its good that hes being executed, these people are a bad section of society. anyways yeah, arnold sentenced him to die from poison.

Where in that post did I flame you?

This may be new news to you but, this guy caused four people to die, so technically you are saying no one deserves to die, not even people who cause others to die, that my friend, is a paradox.

Bah, who says we need to pamper him? All he needs is food and water.
Are you saying that he should get a get out of jail free pass and get pampered by a shrink, then he should go out and be able to kill again? If that happened then there would literally be no consequence for killing others. Oh perhaps we should lessen the sentence, as if we don't have enough people killing, this would literally tell the public that killing isn't as bad as they thought.

What happens if somehow we find evidence out later that he was innocent. He just died for no reason...

Then we play a funny cartoon joke song (think Butter's song from south park)

Corrus: "Well that's our government!!"

Government Officials: "Well thats us!"

Ha, well those four people died for no reason, he was the creator of the crips, that's evidence enough.

ok... say i create a gang to do good, but they end up doing really bad things. That justify my death?

It really depends on the case. In general, I do not support the death penalty. However, in the case of genocide, I find it necessary. This was not the case. The death penalty actually isn't very good for our economy, since it's expensive. This man killed people, began writing children books, and saying to stay away from gangs. He said stay away from gangs. Had he not been put on the death penalty, wouldn't it be possible that gang related violence could have killed him in prison? It's possible, probably more possible than before advocating to stay away from gangs. I don't agree that his execution was necessary, but I felt though it saved time and the inevitable happened quicker.

C'z up!


I think he just wrote books cuz he knew there was a chance that he could get out of death penalty by fooling foolish america.