[John Tyler Connoley,
Wednesday December 14, 2005 at 7:18pm]
Redemption and Death
I don't know enough to say whether Governor Schwarzenegger should have commuted Stanley "Tookie" Williams sentence to life in prison. (An NPR story this week said there's historical precedent for Governors commuting sentences based on a prisoner's rehabilitation, while Schwarzenegger said he wasn't convinced of Williams' redemption.) However, the Williams case demonstrates my main objection to the death penalty.
Once someone is executed, the hope of their redemption is ended, and there's no chance they'll ever add anything to society again. Imagine Tookie Williams had been executed quickly -- as used to happen in death penalty cases. He wouldn't have been able to write the books he published, or do the anti-violence work he did. Whether or not one finds great value in Williams' post-conviciton work, it certainly has more value than the complete nothingness that is now Williams' work.
Do we really believe it's our responsibility to place certain people permanently beyond redemption? Is there a value in killing someone that is not served by sentencing them to life in prison without the possibility of parole? And, even if there is, does that value outweigh the finality of execution?
Of course, my answer to all three of those questions is, "No." If you think you have a good reason to answer, "Yes," say so in the comments. (I'm turning them on for the first time with this post.) Of course, uncivil comments, ad homonym attacks, and the like will not be allowed. I don't believe in killing, but I do believe in deleting.
Once someone is executed, the hope of their redemption is ended, and there's no chance they'll ever add anything to society again. Imagine Tookie Williams had been executed quickly -- as used to happen in death penalty cases. He wouldn't have been able to write the books he published, or do the anti-violence work he did. Whether or not one finds great value in Williams' post-conviciton work, it certainly has more value than the complete nothingness that is now Williams' work.
Do we really believe it's our responsibility to place certain people permanently beyond redemption? Is there a value in killing someone that is not served by sentencing them to life in prison without the possibility of parole? And, even if there is, does that value outweigh the finality of execution?
Of course, my answer to all three of those questions is, "No." If you think you have a good reason to answer, "Yes," say so in the comments. (I'm turning them on for the first time with this post.) Of course, uncivil comments, ad homonym attacks, and the like will not be allowed. I don't believe in killing, but I do believe in deleting.
- anything - than the victom... Tookie has left a legacy of death, and other terrible social disorders for all of us to enjoy (in the crips, and other "cool" gang's). He is not helping anyone with his books. He was nothing more than a coward doing his best to avoid the consiquences of his actions. It is sad that all anti-death penalty beleivers never seem to stand up for the DEAD!!! But only for the person who did the killing. Remember the dead never have a chance for - anything else in life... It only seems fair that - what goes around should come around - Even if you got off the ride you started and you don't want to ride anymore...
How do you define redemption? Upon what have you based your understanding of the death penalty as a legal concept? What is the value (if any) of justice in a society?