Originally posted by NewjakThat's a nice way to sooth your concience for allowing a serial killer to kill more victims. People can still be indirectly responsible. "Negligent homicide" comes to mind.
People are not responsible for the actions of other people only the actions they themselves commit.Like I said if killing a murderer was so important to you would you kill your mother to prevent her from killing someone else?
IT doesn't change the fact that by allowing the serial killer to live any murders they commit will still be indirectly on your hands. Had you killed them the people they killed afterwards would still be alive. So you still gave more value to that serial killer's life than those of his victims. Because sparing his life cost those of his victims theirs.
Originally posted by NewjakSo you think there's no difference between those who kill to protect and those who kill for fun/pleasure/revenge?
If personal matters are not to be considered why have they been brought up.All that matters is if you are killing someone because you think them killing other people are wrong then you should also be expected to be killed by the same reason. You will obviously go and kill more people.
And you think we're morally bankrupt?
You'd allow a person to kill to their hearts content, because you can't stoamche the thought of killing this one person?
Bundy escaped twice. People have escaped from island prisons.
You lock them up they can escape and kill again, and again, and again.
And you wind up having people constantly dieing, all for saving the life of one person.
Originally posted by CreshoskNo I said I would give them another target to go after
You'd have them go after another target? So you do condone their killing innocent people.
That target being myself. If they are preoccupied taking care of me then they wouldn't be able to kill the other person while I fight them. 😛
Originally posted by NewjakWhat happens when you are gone and they have other people to kill.
No I said I would give them another target to go afterThat target being myself. If they are preoccupied taking care of me then they wouldn't be able to kill the other person while I fight them. 😛
Anyway killing in comics people remember that.
Originally posted by CreshoskThose that kill to protect often delude themselves thinking they are killing for the greater good. They justify it it by pretending they do it so that person doesn't kill again. Then to those who don't believe thst they say don't have the stomach for it.
So you think there's no difference between those who kill to protect and those who kill for fun/pleasure/revenge?And you think we're morally bankrupt?
You'd allow a person to kill to their hearts content, because you can't stoamche the thought of killing this one person?
Bundy escaped twice. People have escaped from island prisons.
You lock them up they can escape and kill again, and again, and again.
And you wind up having people constantly dieing, all for saving the life of one person.
What I wouldn't do is try to play Judge, Jury, and Executioner because when you do such things you are no better than they are.
So simply because you feel they can kill again justifies you killing them. It is a never ending loop that way.
But let me ask you this have you eve killed a convicted murderer before?
Have you ever watched on TV and seen someone commit a dastardly brutal kill and go that person needs to die but they aren't executed.
Well by your thinking if you were truly as noble as you say you are you would pick up a gun and every time a murderer isn't sentenced to death you should be waiting outside the Jail ready to kill them because if not then in your beliefs if that person escapes and kills again it IS YOUR FAULT FOR DOING NOTHING when you knew there was such chance.
So unless you go around killing anyone convicted of murderer then you have no right to question my beliefs on not killing anyone.