He was one of the founding members of the crips (one of the worlds most famous gangs)
After many years in prison he wrote literature for children to prevent them following his path and did more for realtions between the bloods and the crips than law enforcement or the government have ever been able to do. He even won the nobel peace prize but Arnie still made the decision to execute him cos he wanted votes,
was he right to do so?
(www.tookie.com)
2007-09-03 04:26:15 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events ➔ Other - News & Events
actually kimberly the gangs debate rages on where I live so I find this story pertinent if thats ok with you?
2007-09-03 04:36:44 · update #1
no, he may have done wrong but has changed while at prision and was a role model for kids, i am against the death sentence as man shouldn't decide when we die, but god only should
2007-09-03 06:23:46 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
No. I think that he contribute a lot from prison in educating gang members about the dangers of gangs. I think that having him alive would have saved dozens of lives. He has already turned around and regretted what he had done, and had done everything within his power to correct it. Also, executing him sends a signal to other criminals - you will never be forgiven no matter what you do. No matter how good a person you might become, and how much you might learn from your mistakes, you will still be executed. Be in prison, do all that you can to rectify what you have done, be a model prisoner and educator, but you are doomed, so why change.
2016-05-20 01:52:29 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Been under a rock for the past two years have we? This debate had a point when he was executed. Whether or not he should have been is moot now.
EDIT:
I got three thumbs down for this?!
Look, simply put, he started a gang, murdered people, destroyed lives. Sitting in prison to rot then having an epiphany and deciding to do better doesn't change anything. If keeping children out of gangs was his motive, he should have done that long before he ever even created one. I find it so perplexing that people think we should suddenly give remorse to these monsters just because they've gone good while in the slammer.
Tookie got what was coming to him. Maybe he did legitimately reform but that still does not dismiss him from paying for the lives he ruined. You guys can thumbs me down all you want for it but I have ZERO sympathy for rapists, murderers, and the rest of their ilk.
2007-09-03 04:35:21 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
Yes, he was a criminal and a murderer. He paid the price for his crimes. The fact that he was helping to keep children out of gangs is a good thing, but nothing he did makes up for the lives he stole and ruined.
Plus, do you know how much it costs to keep criminals on death row? Why should the taxpayers foot the bill so he could live? This was the proper application of the death penalty.
The Warlock
2007-09-03 04:51:53 · answer #4 · answered by The Warlock 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No. That stupid immigrant should of never pulled the plug on Tookie. He spent almost the rest of his life in and out of jail. He was never gonna come out of jail anyways. All he had to do is take ONE SECOND to sign stating not to execute him. And he didn't want to. I figure that he was thinking one less ***** on this earth.
2007-09-03 04:40:00 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
executing people for votes is a symptom of our f'd up world. executing people who are child molesters is justice. as the man concerned wasn't in this category then maybe he should have been given a change...has he been killed already ???
2007-09-03 06:39:55 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Of course he was right.
Just because the guy got clever and played the liberal game doesn't make him a little angel.
2007-09-03 06:23:21 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
No he shouldnt off. He learned from his mistake and he was teaching childern not to be on gangs
2007-09-03 04:33:43 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋