Stanley Tookie Williams III

[cobl04]

I recently did a speech in English on whether or not celebrities should become involved in politics. I used this case as an argument no, because Schwarzenegger was Governor of California and my agrument was he does not have the background or political history to sentence a man to his death, especially when he did so much to redeem himself.

I was just wondering, do you think he should have been put to death? Or should he have been granted clemency?

For those who don't know what I'm talking about

 

[U2DMfan]

Arnold didn't sentence him to death.
The jury recommends that kind of penalty and a judge can choose to accept it or not. Obviously the judge in this case accepted that penalty.

The problems in this case and others go beyond Arnold's or any other Governor's clemency power. By not using this power they are merely allowing the penalty phase to take place. From there, yes, you do have a great debate on the merits or morality of the pnealty itself. I don't mean to stick up for Arnold neccessarily, I just think the biggest problems with the system are elsewhere.

This case was a mess, I don't have a solid opinion on it because I don't understand all the ins and outs, I am inclined to think that I would have given him clemency. It's hard to say though.

 

[melon]

Whether or not celebrities should become involved in politics, there's nothing you can do to prevent them from doing so.

I also don't like the idea of singling them out with the implication that they're especially incapable of running the country, as compared to every other narcissistic moron that currently runs for office. The vast majority of people attracted to politics, unfortunately, are shrill idiots who should have nothing to do with politics whatsoever. And, yes, that list includes a bunch of lawyers and businessmen, in addition to actors.

Melon