Tookie

So they are going to kill another man because of something he did (or didn't) some 25+ years ago. Uh huh.

As I understand it, he has never shown remorse or admitted guilt. But the case against him appears to have been relatively solid ... but not a lock. If it were a lock, then the failure to show remorse could act as the trigger to deny clemency. By "lock" I mean more or less incontrovertible evidence that he did it. But there's no lock. And no remorse. Therefore the possibility that he didn't do it? How can you have remorse for something that you didn't do?

Arnold, you are screwing up here.

But where do we draw the line? Most people that are against the death penalty would without hesitation fry a child molester, or terrorist. But, where that is not a lock ... would they? Or what is the strength of their belief in the notion that killing another human, even as the state is wrong? Should the people that arm teenagers with suicide bombs be put to death? Should a founder of a gang that preaches violence and practices it today be put to death -- for murder? Tookie is photogenic and media savvy. Does that mitigate the crime of which he is convicted?

Do civilized people put other people to death?