Right. Have you known anyone who's been murdered? I have, and I'll tell you, I wouldn't trust myself to be on that dude's jury (if the little bastard hadn't have killed himself), and I doubt I'll ever be objective on the matter, because to me he's always gonna be the guy that took away a friend of mine. Our legal system is based in objectivity, so I don't take the opinions of the friends and family for much, because as someone who's been through this, I know they're not reliable as far as objectivity.
I can't help it man, my ass is just that smart
If you want to make it a money issue, you'll lose again, because it's more expensive to execute someone than it is to let them spend the rest of their lives in prison.
For one, one of the first things you learn when you study law is that eyewitness accounts are pretty much worthless, because people tend to be amazingly unreliable. And physical evidence can be misleading, especially when paired with eyewitness accounts.
That being said, I'm not saying that I doubt that Williams killed those people. What I am saying is that the appeals process is integral, because there have been many cases where there has been overwhelming evidence that turns out to be wrong due to police corruption. If we're gonna execute people, I don't think that there area to be cutting corners is the part making sure that they did it.
Maybe we could save on the alcahol swab before injecting the needle, since I don't think infection is really a big worry for the dead.
Would admitting to killing them make the people he killed any less dead? You're asking for pointless gestures to determine the quality of the person. His writings very well may have been a ploy to get off death row, doesn't change the fact that they're important, a lot more important than admittance of guilt.
Right, that's why since the reinstitution of the death penalty murder rates have been significantly higher than beforehand. It's not a deterent, not an effective one at least.
Also, as you can see
here
See, in death, he went out as a gangster. Maybe you don't know any of these "gansta" kids, but I've known a lot, and you'd be amazed on how far they'll go to be "gangsta", and the chance of the death penalty isn't gonna be a deterent. A deterent is someone who is universally recognized as "gangsta" coming out and saying "No, this is a stupid thing to do, don't do it, read a book", because he has authority and respect amongst the people that need to hear that.
And yes, yes I can blame the death penalty, and I am right about it too. He started it, yes. That being said, the situation is as it is, and considering that we know that killing him will lead to more gang members and more murders, and so, considering that these are people that would not have been killed if he hadn't've been killed, but now will be killed because he's dead, the deciding factor is the death penalty.
You planning on joining PETA anytime soon? Cause if not, I don't think comparing humans to animals is something that either of us can really take seriously.
He murdered 4 people because he made a horrible decision, and once again, you and I don't need to debate that, we're in agreement, it was horrible, and just about as unforgivable as you can get. But it's the jump to killing him is where we're in disagreement.
Rock and roll
You know what scores of people looking up to him guarantees him? He's one of the few people there who weren't anally raped, probably, and that's about it. He has respect amongst the inmates, I doubt he has that much respect amongst the guards, who have more power in making his life miserable than the inmates (except for the whole anal rape thing). He has a tiny cell, probably not that great food, no real access to his family, it's not the Ritz, it's not the Holiday Inn, it's not even my shitty apartment, it's not a fun place to be.
All society lost was the man in the unique position to help turn around the gang problem, along with far more money than it would've taken to keep him in prison for the rest of his life. He's not a liability in prison.