Are we ruled by children? It seems that way. (Bear with me: I am trying to control my anger, here–the killing of Stanley “Tookie” Williams last night is an absolute outrage, but there’s no way to bring him back).
Think about this:
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger refused to grant him clemency, citing Williams’ lack of remorse.
Is that the rationale of an adult looking carefully at a situation?
No, it’s the response of a child. It reminds me of George Bush, who purportedly made jokes about Karla Faye Tucker–executed in Texas under his watch.
Remorse?
“Tookie” Williams should have shown remorse, and then Schwarzenegger would let him live.
Huh?
Not only does that remind me of a child’s “Make her say she’s sorry,” but it’s extremely scary and depressing. It has an immature, paternalist aspect to it and shows just how shallow our politicians have become.
Suppose, just suppose, that Williams did not commit those murders (let’s leave aside anything else he may have done–they are not relevant in a court of law–though they certainly could have been taken into account in a grant of clemency, for that’s the point, to allow for an avenue of appeal that does not base the decision solely on law): if he were an innocent man wrongly convicted, could he be expected to show remorse?
“He must have done something wrong, or he wouldn’t be on that list… or been arrested… or been convicted.” Such a response is childish… as is that of many Americans to the torture accusations at Abu Ghraib: “If they hadn’t done something wrong, they wouldn’t have been arrested.”
Nuts. Many people are arrested–and convicted–for things they did not do. Any adult knows that. Only a childish mentality can believe otherwise. And it’s even infantile to then expect contrition.
Williams certainly did many things wrong in his life, but he tried as best he could to atone from inside prison and his life in prison was not one deserving of a purposeful end.
He may have killed people, yes. Certainly, he was responsible for the deaths of people.
But did he commit the murders he was convicted of? He says no; the court says yes.
Imagine he was right: not only would it be even more outrageous to kill him than it was even if he were guilty, but the idea of asking him to plead for his life by faking remorse is appalling in its infantilism.
Schwarzenegger made his decision based on the belief that Williams was guilty. Even if he were, and Williams refused to show remorse, Schwarzenegger’s action is tantamount to participation in a meaningless murder. For Williams had shown with his life that he was a new man, a valuable man.
Though making even the guilty beg is disgusting.
Shouldn’t William’s actions, his life of anti-gang activism from inside prison walls, count more than contrition? Don’t actions speak louder, as the old saw goes, than words?
Not with Schwarzenegger, apparently.
Like George Bush, he has not grown beyond pre-adolescent attitudes on punishment.
I’m sorry, oh so sorry.
