I immediately recognize why some would be in favor of clemency. What sort of example would it send to society as a whole when a man who has clearly changed his ways is still denied clemency? Giving him clemency may seem to advance society in a way that encourages correcting your mistakes and promoting what is morally right. Giving Williams clemency could be seen as an opportunity for him and others to advance society in anti-gang awareness.
However, capital punishment for Williams can be seen as the stronger example of utilitarian punishment, or punishment that is allowed if the harm to be afflicted on the person being punished is overridden and justified by the overall positive results following the punishment. Williams made a complete change in his character and made significant strides in the anti-gang movement for the youth. However, the fact that he was sentenced to capital punishment in spite of his great efforts demonstrates just how unforgivable the act of murder is. It completely eliminates any hopes of a potential murderer of sliding his way out of death sentences. It makes many criminals think twice before committing murder. It sends a very strong message to ignorant criminals/murderers who plan to commit such atrocious acts, a message of a no tolerance policy towards any type of intentional murder. This message is the social benefit that is gained from capital punishment of Stanley Tookie Williams, which makes it a strong case for utilitarian punishment. It should go without saying that this capital punishment is also a strong example of retributive punishment, where the convicted receives the punishment that he or she deserves. The decision to sentence Stanley to execution covers both sides and benefits of punishment, on the benefits side and the realm of morality.
It can be seen as a harsh decision to a man who is no longer same criminal that he once was, but the message that it sends out to dangerous gangs is a great benefit to the whole of society. It is not just about him, it is about the safety of the society as a whole.
Austin, you made some real great on points & connections between capital punishment & the concept of utilitarian punishment. How ever in the concept of utilitarian justice, the system of government wants to satisfy the majority group of society. Punishment is measured by the impact of crime & damage, in this concept. Society its self has a huge impact on the laws. so when you mentioned the concept of ''no tolerance'', which is enforced by the government through capital punishment, this all comes from the demand for justice from society. So if this was created by the influence of society, shouldn't society also have an influence if they feel an individual deserves a second chance at life? Mr.Williams did have a strong following advocating for his clemency.
ReplyDeleteTookie Williams will still be serving this retributive punishment of serving the rest of his life in jail but if he would be allowed clemency his life would have a great purpose. No amount of life's that he could save by influencing teens away from gangs, would ever make his actions ok. How ever I feel we must look at the greater good by analyzing his influential on his crip gang and how many life's he could save just by influencing his former gang members.
Mr.Williams did in fact murder people and deserves punishment. However i do not agree that capital punish is the best choice. Granting him clemency can be much more effective toward the youth and our future. Punishing Mr. Williams would be having him serve a life sentence in prison. The purpose of arresting murders is to keep them off of the street. Therefore,keep him alive and continung as an anti-gang activist can be much more rewarding. Encouraging the youth to make better choices and keep away from gangs can be a great exampled shown.
ReplyDeleteAustin, you make a very strong case by acknowledging that the utilitarian view can be used for both sides, and you argue that the deterrent effect outweighs the positive effect of granting clemency. You also make a valid point based on retributivism. Jairo presents a good rebuttal by claiming that the positive effect on society is greater by granting clemency, and Karen agrees with that.
ReplyDelete