Lawrence Brewer

[TimmySmith]

Just figured this guy should get his time under the microscope.

He happens to be the "other" execution last night and a great "flip side" to the Troy Davis death penalty debate.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/09/22/MNUE1L7R5U.DTL

[Kosher Ham]

I was just thinking about this and wondering why the other was brought up but not this one.

[SkinInsite]

Consider the victim's son objected to the death of his father's murderer, I'm surprised it wasn't the sexy story.

[rockfan7224]

Lawrence Brewer didn't have Al Sharpton on his side.

[jpyaks3]

Total piece of **** human being. Still doesn't change that revenge should not be institutionalized or state sponsored. Remove him from society for the rest of his life if need be.

[Ghost of]

Consider the victim's son objected to the death of his father's murderer, I'm surprised it wasn't the sexy story.

I did bring this up in the other thread, actually. We need to make sure we're talking about what we mean we say--for those who said Troy Davis was innocent or might be, that is a legitimate discussion to have. I don't know if it holds water but it's legitimate. BUt do not confuse the issue and then bring up the death penalty itself, otherwise you open yourself up to disputing the sentence here.

But it also supports my view (not exactly with THIS case but in general) that the actual prominence of the case (for these death row cases) is determined by things like race and victim's race/status, possibly age. To a lesser extent the brutality of a crime plays a role as it probably makes people feel unseemly if they ardently support someone accused of torture-rape-murder, as opposed to a mere shooting death.

[TimmySmith]

Total piece of **** human being. Still doesn't change that revenge should not be institutionalized or state sponsored. Remove him from society for the rest of his life if need be.

Fine by me. My life did not change any from yesterday to today (unless you subscribe to chaos theory). It is just quite interesting you this scumbag has been completely ignored while another scumbag got all the attention. Especially with the racial implications being just as prevalent.

[Bang]

I'd say it's because of the open and shut nature of this case as opposed to the questions unanswered in the other one.

~Bang

[Ghost of]

Total piece of **** human being. Still doesn't change that revenge should not be institutionalized or state sponsored. Remove him from society for the rest of his life if need be.

I've heard this argument but I don't get it. In many cases, the State executes regardless of family wishes, because it's not so much revenge in the personal sense but a sign that some crimes will cost you the ultimate price. It's why people fight so hard (in many cases) death but don't put up as much of a fight on life sentences. Or in some cases, fight the death penalty, never claim innocence but only want to live.

That said, I think justice always has a component that feels like revenge. After all, throwing someone away in a cage for all time seems kinda vengeance-y to me. And did anyone REALLY think after OJ killed two people that he was hot to murder again? Do you let him walk because he's not likely a threat to anyone else because otherwise it's VENGEANCE?

---------- Post added September-22nd-2011 at 03:11 PM ----------

I'd say it's because of the open and shut nature of this case as opposed to the questions unanswered in the other one.

~Bang

There are questions in a lot of cases. Heck, to put it another way there were NO questions about Stanley "Tookie" Williams and people still wanted him to be spared death and it became fairly well-covered. Karla Faye Tucker, too, she admitted guilt. At least you could make the argument Tucker really did live her life a certain way in prison but the fact is, without her being a woman, no one would have heard of her and the appeals likely would have run out sooner.

[jpyaks3]

I've heard this argument but I don't get it. In many cases, the State executes regardless of family wishes, because it's not so much revenge in the personal sense but a sign that some crimes will cost you the ultimate price. It's why people fight so hard (in many cases) death but don't put up as much of a fight on life sentences. Or in some cases, fight the death penalty, never claim innocence but only want to live.

That said, I think justice always has a component that feels like revenge. After all, throwing someone away in a cage for all time seems kinda vengeance-y to me. And did anyone REALLY think after OJ killed two people that he was hot to murder again? Do you let him walk because he's not likely a threat to anyone else because otherwise it's VENGEANCE?

What does killing someone accomplish that imprisoning someone for the rest of their life not? The goal of the justice system should be to remove those dangerous to society from society through criminal penalties and if possible rehabilitate them. Killing someone accomplishes neither. Deterrence is pretty much a wash, so what purpose does the death penalty serve?

[AsburySkinsFan]

I was just thinking about this and wondering why the other was brought up but not this one.

Makes no difference to me.

[Bang]

What does killing someone accomplish that imprisoning someone for the rest of their life not? The goal of the justice system should be to remove those dangerous to society from society through criminal penalties and if possible rehabilitate them. Killing someone accomplishes neither. Deterrence is pretty much a wash, so what purpose does the death penalty serve?

I fail to see how executing someone does not permanently remove them from society.

If you want to argue rehab, fine, but I don't think a guy who dragged a man to his death because of the color of his skin is going to be seeing any lights of reason come on anytime.

That's a matter for debate.

what is not a matter of debate is whether or not he will do this to anyone else. He most assuredly will not. Nor will he shank anyone in a chow line, join any racist hate groups in prison, eat any more taxpayer funded meals, study to become a lawyer, become a scout leader, or eventually go to astronaut school. Oh well. Certainly he will not continue to be the scum that he is, just behind a wall and some bars.

Some people forfeit their right to life. I believe as a society we have the right to decide when that has happened. In many cases that is open to debate. But in my mind, not this one. All we did was put down a mad dog.

~Bang

[Botched]

Bang wrote what I was fixin' ta say, but more better-like.

[Ghost of]

What does killing someone accomplish that imprisoning someone for the rest of their life not? The goal of the justice system should be to remove those dangerous to society from society through criminal penalties and if possible rehabilitate them. Killing someone accomplishes neither. Deterrence is pretty much a wash, so what purpose does the death penalty serve?

What does killing someone accomplish that imprisoning someone for the rest of their life not? The goal of the justice system should be to remove those dangerous to society from society through criminal penalties and if possible rehabilitate them. Killing someone accomplishes neither. Deterrence is pretty much a wash, so what purpose does the death penalty serve?

You are articulating your vision of justice, which I deem insufficient. For example, the non-psychopath may be redeemable. The psychopath (not all murderers are psychopath, nor are most psychopaths murderers) is not someone you can rehabilitate. People who are killers can still be a threat, unless you REALLY think that your normal 'life in prison' killer gets isolated out from others the rest of his life.

I also am of the view that while some types of governments murder their own citizens with impunity (though the Chinese also execute many guilty people, including men who've gone into schools and killed kids) that this really is not a statement about the penalty itself. I suppose I have this feeling that a society that no longer says, "this far, no further" with that sentence has grown decadent and weak. I mean, the Israelis has never executed anyone in a civilian trial but they killed Eichmann.

If death were not the ultimate penalty, why do you so ardently oppose it? By opposing it so and investing so much in that opposition, you reinforce the power of the message that some crimes are beyond the pale and they must be met with death.

This used to be something most of the world believed in but I think somewhere in there we started confusing brutal and savage punishments with death itself. The reason to oppose the death penalty, if you really oppose it, is not because SOMEone might be killed who is innocent but because it is somehow wrong itself.

If someone killed your mother and no one stepped up to do anything about it, what would you do? And would that be justice or revenge? And why does putting it in the hands of an impersonal system make it more moral or high-minded?

You are guilty of, forgive my venture into Marxism, "reifying" your concept of justice or the law.

[Prosperity]

I did bring this up in the other thread, actually. We need to make sure we're talking about what we mean we say--for those who said Troy Davis was innocent or might be, that is a legitimate discussion to have. I don't know if it holds water but it's legitimate. BUt do not confuse the issue and then bring up the death penalty itself, otherwise you open yourself up to disputing the sentence here.

But it also supports my view (not exactly with THIS case but in general) that the actual prominence of the case (for these death row cases) is determined by things like race and victim's race/status, possibly age. To a lesser extent the brutality of a crime plays a role as it probably makes people feel unseemly if they ardently support someone accused of torture-rape-murder, as opposed to a mere shooting death.

anti-DP advocates aren't going to use this guy as a poster boy for obvious reasons

that is not necessarily result of bias, or hypocrisy... it's just more persuasive

[Ghost of]

eat any more taxpayer funded meals, study to become a lawyer, become a scout leader, or eventually go to astronaut school. Oh well. Certainly he will not continue to be the scum that he is, just behind a wall and some bars.

~Bang

I guess I don't get how in some cases, there is a 12 year old girl who was raped and murdered and someone who did it still breathing ANYWHERE is justice. No, she ain't coming back but it's unjust that someone who would do THAT is still allowed the pleasure of drawing another breath. And unlike some, I'm under no illusion that every killer will NOT get HBO, weights, books, etc. THEY DO, a killer of this type or Brewer's type shouldn't be able to enjoy or reflect on a good work of art, literature, philosophy or even a Maxim magazine.

Also underrated is the effect that TRUE repentance often comes BECAUSE these people face death and it hastens the speed with which they reflect (if they are capable.) Give someone life and they will delay and delay...the change may never come. They may yet die but if you care about repentance at all, only the nearness of death really provides that for people like these.

---------- Post added September-22nd-2011 at 03:44 PM ----------

anti-DP advocates aren't going to use this guy as a poster boy for obvious reasons

Well, my actual point is that it goes beyond some cases being more persuasive. That some cases are actually NOT at all, that advocates make up certain key components of their case or ignore the others and that THIS dynamic has to do with those factors I mentioned. Yes, the Davis case would be more compelling in terms of 'doubt' but if Davis were white and the off-duty cop been another race, even with the same 'doubt' or witness recanting, it couldn't generate that kind of pub.

[Prosperity]

if Davis was white he probably wouldn't be on death row...

which is one of the criticisms against the DP

personally, I'm not sure that it's wrong to kill scum, but that doesn't mean that I'm not sure about the merits of DP. I'm very sure DP is wrong, but for reasons outside of "it's always wrong to kill"

[AsburySkinsFan]

anti-DP advocates aren't going to use this guy as a poster boy for obvious reasons

that is not necessarily result of bias, or hypocrisy... it's just more persuasive

I will, I don't care who it is, in fact I believe that my case is strengthened when I point to cases like Lawrence Brewer, because it shows that it's not just about innocent vs. guilty, it's about life and the sanctity of all life and that only God gives the ultimate justice.

I didn't post this article because I didn't know about Mr. Brewer.

[jpyaks3]

I fail to see how executing someone does not permanently remove them from society.

If you want to argue rehab, fine, but I don't think a guy who dragged a man to his death because of the color of his skin is going to be seeing any lights of reason come on anytime.

That's a matter for debate.

what is not a matter of debate is whether or not he will do this to anyone else. He most assuredly will not. Nor will he shank anyone in a chow line, join any racist hate groups in prison, eat any more taxpayer funded meals, study to become a lawyer, become a scout leader, or eventually go to astronaut school. Oh well. Certainly he will not continue to be the scum that he is, just behind a wall and some bars.

Some people forfeit their right to life. I believe as a society we have the right to decide when that has happened. In many cases that is open to debate. But in my mind, not this one. All we did was put down a mad dog.

~Bang

How is throwing someone in supermax with a life w/out parole sentence not accomplishing the same thing without institutionalizes state sponsored killings? I hold the belief that no one forfeits a right to life I guess that's where we differ.

[AsburySkinsFan]

How is throwing someone in supermax with a life w/out parole sentence not accomplishing the same thing without institutionalizes state sponsored killings? I hold the belief that no one forfeits a right to life I guess that's where we differ.

Agreed.

[jpyaks3]

You are articulating your vision of justice, which I deem insufficient. For example, the non-psychopath may be redeemable. The psychopath (not all murderers are psychopath, nor are most psychopaths murderers) is not someone you can rehabilitate. People who are killers can still be a threat, unless you REALLY think that your normal 'life in prison' killer gets isolated out from others the rest of his life.

I agree some people are unable to return to society or will never be rehabilitated, that's what life without parole was created for. Supermax can separate prisoners and keep them isolated if need be.

I also am of the view that while some types of governments murder their own citizens with impunity (though the Chinese also execute many guilty people, including men who've gone into schools and killed kids) that this really is not a statement about the penalty itself. I suppose I have this feeling that a society that no longer says, "this far, no further" with that sentence has grown decadent and weak. I mean, the Israelis has never executed anyone in a civilian trial but they killed Eichmann.

If death were not the ultimate penalty, why do you so ardently oppose it? By opposing it so and investing so much in that opposition, you reinforce the power of the message that some crimes are beyond the pale and they must be met with death.

Would you support torture? Because I believe that would be the ultimate punishment?

People ardently oppose it because it is in their minds unjust and that killing someone solves absolutely nothing.

This used to be something most of the world believed in but I think somewhere in there we started confusing brutal and savage punishments with death itself. The reason to oppose the death penalty, if you really oppose it, is not because SOMEone might be killed who is innocent but because it is somehow wrong itself.

If someone killed your mother and no one stepped up to do anything about it, what would you do? And would that be justice or revenge? And why does putting it in the hands of an impersonal system make it more moral or high-minded?

You are guilty of, forgive my venture into Marxism, "reifying" your concept of justice or the law.

I have no idea how I would react if someone killed my mother, I do however know that the justice system shouldn't work simply on the emotions of the people who were wronged.

[Bang]

How is throwing someone in supermax with a life w/out parole sentence not accomplishing the same thing without institutionalizes state sponsored killings? I hold the belief that no one forfeits a right to life I guess that's where we differ.

You want to pay for sixty or so years of this guy not being rehabilitated and carrying the same hatred around?

Be my guest.

40 cents worth of windex and 20 dollars of rubber hoses and a needle accomplish the same thing.

Like I said, some people there can be debate, I'm not a cruel "kill em all" type.

But some people don't deserve any more leniency than the law already allows. This guy is one of them.

~Bang

[AsburySkinsFan]

You want to pay for sixty or so years of this guy eating and breathing and watching pay television and everything else?

Be my guest.

40 cents worth of windex accomplishes the same thing.

~Bang

You know it's more complicated and more expensive than 40 cents worth of windex, what's more is that I'm all for putting death row inmates into a permanent Special Housing Unit in a supermax prison where it isn't all TV and weight rooms, but instead 24 hours of being held in a cell with an hour of recreational time in a dog kennel like recreation area.

[rockfan7224]

Some people forfeit their right to life. I believe as a society we have the right to decide when that has happened. In many cases that is open to debate. But in my mind, not this one. All we did was put down a mad dog.

Absolutely agree. For example, If you willingly choose to take another person's life, why should you be extended the courtesy of living out the rest of your own life (regardless of whether or not it is in a prison).

If it was up to me I'd extend the death penalty to child rapists and crimes like that, but that's an issue for another day.

[Bang]

You know it's more complicated and more expensive than 40 cents worth of windex, what's more is that I'm all for putting death row inmates into a permanent Special Housing Unit in a supermax prison where it isn't all TV and weight rooms, but instead 24 hours of being held in a cell with an hour of recreational time in a dog kennel like recreation area.

People have told me it's 'more expensive to execute than to put them in prison."

I know this isn't what you're saying, but..

I do know it's more complicated than taking them out and shooting them. There are long apeals, court costs, etc. The machine they use to kill him isn't really all that complicated. It' just a pump.. the only thing that really makes it special is that it is operated to assure anonymity. I know they don't use Windex. But it doesn't take a lot of the drug mix to kill them.

As if the trials and appeal processes that put them away forever as opposed to their death penalty appeals actually make that much of a difference in costs... both processes are long drawn out expensive legal affairs. Lifers don't quit appealing either. While theyr'e alive they tend to incur further legal costs.

Now factor in salaries for guards for however many years this scumbag breathes... 3 meals a day for every single one of those days. Medical treatment that we won't give to a homeless person, education if he wants it, wattages to run a lifetime of light bulbs if he wants to (can) read, he gets paid for a 'job".. and i don't care if it's 20 cents a day. Give it to a homeless shelter instead. Give his meals to a food bank.

every single penny he will cost for however long he lives.. somehow don't add up to a lenghty legal process that happens anyway, and some window cleaner. (after that, we don't pay for anythinjg but a concrete box and a couple guys to dig a hole. Either that or he goes to his family and the funeral is their problem.) This animal was 44.. figure what, he's got 25 years left? That's a lot of pennies. Pennies that cease flowing the day his heart stops. Why prolong it when putting him in a Super Max is as implied a sort of death anyway?

to me putting him in a dog kennel for 25 years seems a bit more cruel and unusual than execution, and it sounds to me as if there's vengeance in mind there, as well.

~Bang