Save ourselves

Tookie was a bad man.\nStanley "Tookie" Williams co-founded the Crips, the infamous blue-wearing gang that began in south central Los Angeles. Critics accuse him of creating a legacy that extended violence throughout the country.\nWilliams is convicted of killing four people during two armed robberies and currently sits on death row in California. In one robbery, he allegedly shot a man in his back while high on PCP. In the other robbery, the death scene of the three victims was so ghastly that the investigating officer said, "I've seen a lot in my 36 years on the force, but that's one of about a half-dozen scenes that have stuck with me just because of the carnage." \nFrom these crimes, Williams and three other accomplices netted themselves about $250 in cash.\nThere has been a rush of support among anti-death penalty protestors to urge California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to grant him clemency, and Schwarzenegger has agreed to a clemency hearing Thursday. This might offer a glimmer of hope for Williams, but no California governor has granted clemency since Ronald Reagan in 1967, and I don't expect the Terminator to change that. \nMany prominent figures ranging from the Rev. Jesse Jackson to rapper Snoop Dogg have come out in favor of granting clemency to Williams. His supporters focus on what he has done since convicted. While incarcerated, Williams has authored multiple award-winning children's books that promote abstention from violence and gang life, resulting in his nomination for a Nobel Peace Prize. His supporters claim he is a changed man capable of accomplishing good things if he is allowed to live, and that executing him will snuff out a life that still offers hope and guidance.\nThe argument essentially posits that Tookie shouldn't die because he has metamorphosed from a killer into someone who can do good things. It's tempting to go along with this line of reasoning, but I won't. The problem with this argument is that it suggests Williams should not be killed because he is the wrong type of guy to be subjected to the death penalty. It implies that if Tookie had remained a savage murderer, then it would be acceptable to terminate his life. I disagree. \nWe frequently ask ourselves whether a criminal deserves to be killed. But instead ask yourself this: Do we, through the state, deserve to kill him? It's very easy to end someone's life. It's far more difficult to attempt to mitigate the culture of death that pervades society. \nI could proceed to write about commonly-cited reasons to oppose the death penalty: cases where DNA evidence has exonerated men condemned to die; the demonstrated racism of blacks receiving the death penalty more often than whites who commit the same crimes; or even the monetary costs because of lengthy appeals. I will instead part with this: I'm not sure if there is one supreme ruler of the universe who passes judgment on human souls. But if there is, it definitely is not the state.\nTookie is scheduled to die Dec. 13.