Can we just get it over with and kill Tookie already?

... because drivel like this is getting really old. Since the Supreme Court reinstated capital punishment nearly 30 years ago, only one governor - Virginia's George Allen in 1997 - said he took someone off death row due to character reform. Now, California's governor can take this courageous stand. Yeah. Take a stand for killing the quadruple murderer. On Thursday, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) will hold a hearing to decide whether to grant clemency to Stanley "Tookie" Williams, a cofounder of the Crips, a violent Los Angeles street gang. Mr. Williams is scheduled to be executed Dec. 13. It's not just a LA gang anymore. It supposedly has a worldwide membership. The case is far from clear-cut. Hollywood celebrities, politicians, and other death-penalty opponents are urging limited mercy (life in prison without parole) because Williams has transformed into an anti-gang activist, apologized for starting the Crips, and written children's books to discourage kids from joining gangs. Oh, it's pretty clear-cut. He killed four people, was tried, convicted, sentenced to death, and has made it through nearly 25 years of appeals to get to this point. Did he apologize for killing 4 people (and by the way, is reportedly linked to several other murders) not to mention he could be held partly responsible for the 1000s or murders committed by the Crips that he helped start! Who cares if he co-writes kids books! How much of the books does he actually write vs. his co-author? But law enforcement officials, victims' rights defenders, family members of the victims, and even a grim radio show called the "Kill Tookie" hour won't accept anything less than execution for this man convicted of four murders. He hasn't accepted responsibility for the killings, and so isn't truly reformed, they say. Williams maintains his innocence. And these are the only people who make any sense here (certainly not this hippie tree hugger). Tookie still maintains that he didn't kill these four people. If there's evidence of his innocence, fine. If not let's warm up that electric chair. Were prisoner repentance to become more widely accepted as a reason to commute a death sentence, that would take the nation a welcome step closer to eliminating the immoral practice of capital punishment. They can repent all they want. That's between them and God and not for us to judge. And honestly the only people (if any) who should be able to truly judge the convicted killer's depth of repentence and grant forgiveness (not clemency) are the victims' family. What good does me forgiving the creep do? Or me saying he's repentant? He didn't kill anyone in my family. I don't know the victims. I don't know the murdering thug. Who am I (or the author, or the governor) to say or believe he's repentant? A jury of his peers deemed the crimes sufficiently ghastly (four murders by shotgun does make a bit of a mess) that they recommended the death penalty. Deal with it. The nation's support for the death penalty is waning. Over the past five years, juries handed out far fewer capital sentences and executions dropped. One reason is concern over possible execution of the innocent, reinforced by DNA technology. Another is that many states introduced life-without-parole as an alternative to execution. The Gallup Poll finds support for the death penalty drops from three-quarters to about half when life-without-parole is an option. And the Supreme Court recently ruled it unconstitutional to execute the mentally retarded and juveniles. Waning!?! We already talked about this. About two-thirds of the nation is fine with killing murdering thugs. Sure it's not the 80% of the nation that used to look forward to a good electrocution, but hey, nothing's perfect. I bet if we started making these pay-per-view we'd see a big approval spike from all those weirdos that watch wrestling. But if you'd rather blow your tax dollars paying for that killer to watch Sex in the City reruns and earn a degree from Devry online, be my guest. To me that's a waste of money. But what about character reform as cause for mercy? The Williams murders were gruesome, leaving behind deep emotional pain. That's why those opposing clemency believe he should pay with his life - and thus, they say, teach violent gang members a lesson. Yeah send a message to gang members that if they keep killing people (yes even if those people are just other gang members) we will kill them right back. If Arnold grants clemency because of this reform-via-kid-books crap we're opening a door for hundreds of other deathrow inmates to try to get clemency through. "But Governor, I wrote a kid's book! I sponsored a pop warner inner-city football league! I bought lots of Halloween candy for the kiddies last year! I donated a toy once to Toys for Tots! Please don't kill me!" Such justifications, as well as a desire for revenge, are understandable, but offbase. Capital punishment does not deter murder. States with the death penalty have a higher rate of murder than those without it. And even the brother of one of Williams's victims acknowledges that revenge is self-perpetuating. Additionally, a state's most basic duty to its citizens is to protect life, not take it. That's just because we let them sit around eating fishsticks for 25 years inbetween sentencing and execution. Again we already talked about this. If you want it to be a deterrent, you've got to put execution closer to sentencing. Think of it like training a dog. If you want to keep your dog from eating your shoes or peeing on the carpet, you can't punish them 3 hours after you saw them eat up your loafers or taking a dump on the brand new Afghan rug, you have to do it right away otherwise the dog just won't get the point. It won't know why you're yelling at it. (There's a big psycho-babble word for this. I'll have to ask the fetching Mrs. Wookie. That's her field) Think of it as a reverse Pavlovian response. If we execute enough murderers in a more timely fashion, whenever criminals hear the electric buzzing of cheap fluorescent lights trying to turn on they'll wet themselves. It's ghastly but that's why Singapore has only a small problem with drugs in their country. They kill drug dealers. And quickly. But there's a moral side to this debate, and that's where redemption comes in. Capital punishment violates the Mosaic command, "Thou shalt not kill." All lives have value, and a life redeemed - even partially - comes closer to realizing a life of purpose than one cut short. Williams's continued outreach illustrates this. Oh but since Tookie killed four people that's OK. Moses was down with that. If we put this on a sliding scale he killed four people, we're only going to kill him. That stills makes him four times worse than us, so nah-nah-nana-nah. If they want to try to come up with a number of lives Tookie's books "saved"to show the "meaning" of the bastard's life, be my guest because whatever method they use is going to be meaningless. How many accounts were altered, hyperbolized, or flat out lies told by people doing whatever they can to save the murderer's life? By reducing Williams's sentence to life-without-parole, Mr. Schwarzenegger can assure that the former gang leader still pays his debt to society, but also improves it - and himself. Such a decision can inch America toward yet another reason to end the death penalty. This practice, not a human being, deserves an execution. What Arnold can assure is that future gang banger murderers say "I always put pennies into those 'take a penny leave a penny' cups at the QwikiMart when I was bulglarizing them and shooting the owners. See I'm not that bad." Don't cave Arnold. Kill the gang banging murderer.