Killing

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



Damborgson
What are your opinions on it? Outside of self defense, is it ever justified?

Stoic
Originally posted by Damborgson
What are your opinions on it? Outside of self defense, is it ever justified?

The powers of the world have been doing it forever under the cover of one BS reason or the other. Population control? Who knows. The very food that we eat is poisonous (in America, it's called overfed, and undernourished ha ha). Soldiers are payed to kill. Deadly viruses and new strains of those viruses pop up without warning (who's behind it? LOL). Unprotected sex is like playing Russian Roulette, why kill? If you are fortunate enough to live in a country filled with dirty Politicians, and no way to eat because they greedily hoard all of the resources, and charge a kings ransom to people for their minimal needs to live, situations often end in senseless violence. If you don't work you should not eat right? What [email protected]@ng work is there out there, no one is hiring is often the case. We call them terror mongers because of half truths the media feeds us, they may call themselves survivors.

Little children sold into prostitution or slavery by their very parents is commonplace in many countries. Drugs, weapons, liquor stores, and gangs on every other corner in ghettos is another way to funnel the less informed unto a one way street that leads to their own demise. Pick a [email protected]@ing door. Who needs Tonto to pump 14 in your head, when gunrunners are supplying bullied children with the means to execute their fellow classmates, while the cops are busting college students for Pot.

Religion is used as mass weapons of destruction, because if you can get a million morons behind your skewed cause, who will/can ever stop you? As for your question. Murder is never justified even if you are defending yourself, or someone else. Would this stop me from killing someone trying to kill me and my family? No.

Tzeentch
Define self-defense.

riv6672
Originally posted by Damborgson
Outside of self defense, is it ever justified?
Yes.

Damborgson
Originally posted by Tzeentch
Define self-defense.

You were attacked with what you legitimately saw as a threat to your life, you killed him/her/it to prevent your own serious injury or death.

Damborgson
Also, is being proactive about killing, worse than reactive? Like if you know a sexual predator is going to ruin another person's existence, or if you know a killer will strike again once he's cleared, would it be wrong to stop them from doing it?

riv6672
Morally wrong, depends in your morals. Legally wrong, probably.

Oneness
Originally posted by Damborgson
What are your opinions on it? Outside of self defense, is it ever justified? I mean, it's illegal but in order for me to win some fights I'd have to cause permanent injuries with "lethal intent" because I'm not that big or good at MMA at this point in my life. I'd have to result to innovative dirty fighting which works wonders if you can be tactical by maintaining control over the fight or flight response.

riv6672
roll eyes (sarcastic)

Oneness
Originally posted by riv6672
roll eyes (sarcastic) You'd be surprised what very select people can do when they enjoy pain or have no fear-reflex that inhibits them from doing something other than punch, kick, or grapple in a fight.

Hell they might be able to go completely limp as a survival mechanism in a fight, and the second you turn away they're going to pop up and sucker punch you in that nerve in your jaw - shutting your brain down and putting you to sleep.

Instead of a fight like this you get an assault like this.

Absolute strength is due to an imbalanced level of of fight response hormones. If the hormones aren't there to override your "don't do that it's too much" instinct which literally everyone has all the time, even MMA fighters during their most brutal fights.

Here's another example; meth increasing metabolism and activity levels to the point in which this person was hysterical and therefore able to fight harder and longer.

Hit the wrong person in the face, someone's who was repeatedly beat as a child or a non-neurotypical like myself, and they might just come back with absolute retaliation immediately and I don't care how much bigger you are or better at boxing you are, he might be able to knock you on your ass because you're just not as excited as him at that moment and you might not be quick enough to defend yourself like you should be able to.

riv6672
God you are so FULL of crap. laughing

You're the RL main character in the Twilight Zone episode Hocus Pocus and Frisby.

Oneness
Originally posted by riv6672
God you are so FULL of crap. laughing

You're the RL main character in the Twilight Zone episode Hocus Pocus and Frisby. You're just ignorant.

It's called physiology.

Pick the most one-sided fight of any two individuals with no birth-defects or debilitating illnesses (anorexia, obesity, Huntington's, narcolepsy) who're around the same age, and let the person who's likely to lose be in the right frame of mind and he can take out just about anybody.

red g jacks
yes. it is justified so long as the benefits outweigh the consequences.

Oneness
Originally posted by red g jacks
yes. it is justified so long as the benefits outweigh the consequences. From a certain moral standpoint in which the majority should deem immoral....

It's subject to who you're asking I guess.

Oneness
KUsGDVOCLVQ

riv6672
Originally posted by red g jacks
yes. it is justified so long as the benefits outweigh the consequences.
What do you mean?

Oneness
Originally posted by riv6672
... Do you concede to my argument about cunning, neurosis, and absolute strength being more beneficial in a fight than fitness, training, and skill?

"Training is nothing, will is everything. The will to act."

riv6672
I concede that your post wasnt interesting enough for me to reply to, while red g's was.
Get over yourself.

Damborgson
Originally posted by riv6672
Morally wrong, depends in your morals. Legally wrong, probably.

Legalities are jokes though.

riv6672
I agree, to an extent.
Still, I'm subject to them.
If i feel i have to do something considered illegal, i will.
If i get caught, i'm willing to suffer the consequences.

red g jacks
Originally posted by riv6672
What do you mean? if more good shit is achieved by the killing than bad shit then it is justified imo.

good shit/bad shit are obviously subjective but i'm not bothered cause so is the taboo against killing.

think about killing some shitty dictator who is trying to mix things up hitler/napoleon style. maybe attacking his troops and killing his civilians can seem like self defense in some vague way when passed though a filter of nationalistic and political brainwashing, but in many cases it's more like preventative planning. those people aren't putting you in the position where your life is in imminent danger and thus you can't claim self defense. yet the fact remains that in some cases more good than bad can come from putting them down.

riv6672
Okay.
Appreciate the explanation.

red g jacks
also charles manson types. there is really no good reason to keep these people around imo. take them out back and put one in their temple.

riv6672
yes

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by red g jacks
also charles manson types. there is really no good reason to keep these people around imo. take them out back and put one in their temple.

Then how do the rest of us tell the difference between him and you?

riv6672
Seems to me, you, being part if the "us" should already know the answer to that question.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by riv6672
Seems to me, you, being part if the "us" should already know the answer to that question.

Well, yes. That's why we have systems and laws in place.
Vigilantism is wrong for very good reasons. Is that what you were getting at?

Oneness
Laws and judgement are not the place of man. Warnings and revenge are.

Man was designed to sin.

Oneness
#total technological anarchy

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Oneness
Laws and judgement are not the place of man. Warnings and revenge are.

Man was designed to sin.

We would still be in the dark-ages with that way of thinking.

Oneness
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
We would still be in the dark-ages with that way of thinking. Nope.

Did I say scientific literacy shouldn't be practiced? It's natural, and the knowledge of one generation builds off of the prior generation automatically.

I never said be ignorant, I said live every day like it's your last get dope, have fun, and commit sins of the flesh everyday. It's not only natural, it's healthy as **** and it happens in today's society anyway. How would a lack of oppression and governmental, authoritarian enforced hammering of the modern man and woman make it any worse?

Oneness
In fact, as far as I can tell, there's no reason school should be any more mandatory than college, and there's no reason education should cost a dime either.

Oneness
The only thing modern economics, banks, and governmental agencies breed are hatred, repression of expression, and wealth disparity.

Keep kissing the Sultans' collective asses, Shakyam, keep kissing.

Lowww and behold, the meek have inherited the earth.

riv6672
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Well, yes. That's why we have systems and laws in place.
Vigilantism is wrong for very good reasons. Is that what you were getting at?
More or less.
Which is why i said earlier i'd face the consequences if caught doing something like this.
Society has rules for a reason.

Oneness
I don't blame certain murders on the accused, given the circumstances in which they were committed.

You can only ask a broken soul to tolerate a government-established life worse than death for so long.

In many ways I sympathize with groups like ISIS.

riv6672
Originally posted by Oneness
In many ways I sympathize with groups like ISIS.

**** you.

Oneness
Originally posted by riv6672
**** you. I'm flattered.

Oneness
Behold, the modern expectation of a middle-class employee.

LITERALLY

EDIT: I didn't mean what I said about ISIS, they'd be like this if they succeeded.

red g jacks
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Then how do the rest of us tell the difference between him and you? because i don't go around killing people for pleasure? also i'm not saying i am personally going to kill charles manson. but if i was in charge obvious mental cases like that would be put down humanely and discreetly.

riv6672
Originally posted by red g jacks
because i don't go around killing people for pleasure?
Thats a good sign.

Oneness
I don't believe a lot of what I say.

Like I child, I'm very, very frustrated with how pathetic society is because of how much better it could do.

Shabazz916
killing isn't justified just because your attacked

Oneness
Originally posted by Shabazz916
killing isn't justified just because your attacked I've let a guy sock me in the face 5 times (with pulled punches) because I wasn't in real danger of being hurt.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by red g jacks
because i don't go around killing people for pleasure? also i'm not saying i am personally going to kill charles manson. but if i was in charge obvious mental cases like that would be put down humanely and discreetly.

How do I know that? stick out tongue

Oneness
Shakyam, you're doing good to not respond to most of what I say.

I come on here to flabbergast and let off steam.

Shabazz916
Originally posted by Oneness
I've let a guy sock me in the face 5 times (with pulled punches) because I wasn't in real danger of being hurt.

your the idiot for letting someone hit your 5 times

riv6672
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
How do I know that? stick out tongue
Good question.
Tell us how the law covers the grey areas.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by riv6672
Good question.
Tell us how the law covers the grey areas.

Is killing a gray area?

Oneness
Originally posted by Shabazz916
your the idiot for letting someone hit your 5 times You know, I could have beat his ass.

But he wasn't worth it.

riv6672
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Is killing a gray area?
In this thread you've come down on the side of the law as the measuring stick for killing, and thats fine.
You keep asking we who think there are times where killing outside the law is an option to explain ourselves.
I'm asking you to explain YOURself.
If you cant, then you're just regurgitating things you've been taught.
A parrot can do that.
I want to know what you THINK about the different viewpoints here.
Dont just ask for explanations, explain to us why WE'RE wrong.

Oneness
Am I on your ignore list shakyam?

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by riv6672
In this thread you've come down on the side of the law as the measuring stick for killing, and thats fine.
You keep asking we who think there are times where killing outside the law is an option to explain ourselves.
I'm asking you to explain YOURself.
If you cant, then you're just regurgitating things you've been taught.
A parrot can do that.
I want to know what you THINK about the different viewpoints here.
Dont just ask for explanations, explain to us why WE'RE wrong.
You are not wrong! People like you should be killed!

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Oneness
Am I on your ignore list shakyam?

No, I'm just taking your advice. wink

riv6672
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
You are not wrong! People like you should be killed!
Haha

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by riv6672
Haha

But I will give up my need and want to kill you so law and order can protect me. wink

NemeBro
Killing is never justified. Only necessary sometimes. For something to be labeled "justified" it carries the connotations that it was morally upstanding and righteous. Yet I would declare that the very notion of depriving a man or woman of their life is a morally laudable act is in of itself morally bankrupt. Killing another man or woman might sometimes be necessary, be it for self-defense or any other reason, but to consider yourself "good" for the act of killing itself is a destructive train of thought. Death is a grim matter, and should be treated as such.

riv6672
Nicely put, though i disagree on it never being justified, thats just personal opinion.
Still, nicely put.

Time Immemorial
Originally posted by Damborgson
What are your opinions on it? Outside of self defense, is it ever justified?

Some people just need to die I guess. laughing

red g jacks
Originally posted by NemeBro
Killing is never justified. Only necessary sometimes. For something to be labeled "justified" it carries the connotations that it was morally upstanding and righteous. Yet I would declare that the very notion of depriving a man or woman of their life is a morally laudable act is in of itself morally bankrupt. Killing another man or woman might sometimes be necessary, be it for self-defense or any other reason, but to consider yourself "good" for the act of killing itself is a destructive train of thought. Death is a grim matter, and should be treated as such. i don't understand this. how can it be necessary but not justified. what makes it necessary? some good/sound reason for the action. so how does that reason not also make it justified?

riv6672
I cant speak for NameNro, but what i got from his post is something like, i might find it necessary to kill someone i personally thought deserved it (pick your poison: serial killer, rapist, child molester, etc etc), for any of several reasons.
While i may personally feel justified in doing so, in the eyes of the law i most likely wouldnt be.

Edit:
Then you have kind of the reverse.
As a Soldier, i had to kill multiple times.
To some peacenicks out there, i wasnt justified in doing so, even though i had the full backing of the government, because all life is sacred or some such philosophical belief.

NemeBro
Originally posted by red g jacks
i don't understand this. how can it be necessary but not justified.

Because those words are not synonymous.

"Necessary" just means that on some level, it "had" to be done. So, you had to kill the man who had a knife to your daughter's throat or else your daughter would die. Or, depending on what you think of capital punishment, it might be necessary to put serial killers to death because they pose a certain threat to society.

"Justified" means that it was a morally good and righteous deed. "I'm a good person because I shot that man in the head".

Damborgson
Originally posted by NemeBro
"Justified" means that it was a morally good and righteous deed. "I'm a good person because I shot that man in the head". Justified means there was a good reason for something to happen.

1.
having, done for, or marked by a good or legitimate reason.

But even with the definition you gave it, shooting the man holding the knife to your daughters throat would make you a better person than not doing it in my opinion.

Damborgson
Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Some people just need to die I guess. laughing


Well it's true lol.

red g jacks
Originally posted by NemeBro
Because those words are not synonymous.

"Necessary" just means that on some level, it "had" to be done. So, you had to kill the man who had a knife to your daughter's throat or else your daughter would die. Or, depending on what you think of capital punishment, it might be necessary to put serial killers to death because they pose a certain threat to society.

"Justified" means that it was a morally good and righteous deed. "I'm a good person because I shot that man in the head".
Originally posted by Damborgson
Justified means there was a good reason for something to happen.

1.
having, done for, or marked by a good or legitimate reason.

But even with the definition you gave it, shooting the man holding the knife to your daughters throat would make you a better person than not doing it in my opinion. ^what he said.

plus, it is meaningless to say you're a good person for any individual act. saying an act is justified doesn't raise the prestige of the actor. someone could be a sociopath who does all sorts of wrong shit and still do something else that is perfectly justified.

NemeBro
Originally posted by Damborgson
Justified means there was a good reason for something to happen.

1.
having, done for, or marked by a good or legitimate reason.

But even with the definition you gave it, shooting the man holding the knife to your daughters throat would make you a better person than not doing it in my opinion. Even under the ****** Google definition you used, "good", under similar ****** Google definitions, means "to be desired or approved of."

Why do you desire death?

Your opinion is wrong. thumb up

It probably makes him a smarter/more practical person but it doesn't make him a morally better person.

NemeBro
Originally posted by red g jacks
^what he said.

plus, it is meaningless to say you're a good person for any individual act. saying an act is justified doesn't raise the prestige of the actor. someone could be a sociopath who does all sorts of wrong shit and still do something else that is perfectly justified. Well it does, actually.

It makes sense that to be a "moral" person, whatever that means, one must take largely "moral" actions right? So the more moral actions you take, the better your moral standing.

Of course morality is a human construct and arguably arbitrary but for the purposes of discussion (And because the topic of the thread is based on whether or not killing is "justified"wink let's pretend it is a definite construct.

That "sociopath" who does all sorts of wrong shit but has the occasional standard (Doesn't harm children, w/e) is going to be a more "moral" person than one who would kill the shit out of that kid and laugh about it. If only relatively. Get it?

Damborgson
Originally posted by NemeBro
Even under the ****** Google definition you used, "good", under similar ****** Google definitions, means "to be desired or approved of."

Why do you desire death?

Your opinion is wrong. thumb up

It probably makes him a smarter/more practical person but it doesn't make him a morally better person.

Lol? Google > you. And one doesn't interfere with the other.

Because an assailant is threatening my daughter? Wanting to end the life of someone who wants to end my daughter's is an easily justifiable cause.

I have never been wrong since birth. You're obviously retarded thumb up

Morals are subjective and depending on the situation, can do more harm than good. If moral goodness prevents you from harming the attacker harming your daughter, then that makes you a piece of shit. If you shoot the man even if it doesn't give you pleasure, you've put aside your personal problems with it and focused yourself to the well being of your child. How is this not good/justifiable?

Robtard
Not reading back, but is Nemebro hating on children again?

red g jacks
Originally posted by NemeBro
Even under the ****** Google definition you used, "good", under similar ****** Google definitions, means "to be desired or approved of."

Why do you desire death?

Your opinion is wrong. thumb up

It probably makes him a smarter/more practical person but it doesn't make him a morally better person. the reason for the killing is what is being described as 'good' or legitimate in that definition, not the death itself.
Originally posted by NemeBro
Well it does, actually.

It makes sense that to be a "moral" person, whatever that means, one must take largely "moral" actions right? So the more moral actions you take, the better your moral standing.

Of course morality is a human construct and arguably arbitrary but for the purposes of discussion (And because the topic of the thread is based on whether or not killing is "justified"wink let's pretend it is a definite construct.

That "sociopath" who does all sorts of wrong shit but has the occasional standard (Doesn't harm children, w/e) is going to be a more "moral" person than one who would kill the shit out of that kid and laugh about it. If only relatively. Get it? i can accept that. but then by the same standard, if a killing is necessary than doing it necessarily makes you a slightly better person than not doing it. because for it to be necessary you have to have good reasons to do it and it has to be the right thing to do in that situation. so to not do it would be to do the wrong thing. thus killing makes you a better person.

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.