Is this the father's story? Maybe the newly deceased 15 year old had the goods on the old man's sexual deviances.
I would not kill someone except if I caught them in the immediate act that needed to be prevented through force. I would not kill after the act took place, no to punish. The only justified killing is a prevention.
Anyone who disagrees with that is a bloodthirsty little piglet who I refuse to respect. Killing doesn't bring people back to life. It just ends more lives and needlessly so. That is a culture I do not want to be a part of.
I would not kill someone except if I caught them in the immediate act that needed to be prevented through force. I would not kill after the act took place, no to punish. The only justified killing is a prevention.
... Killing doesn't bring people back to life. It just ends more lives and needlessly so. That is a culture I do not want to be a part of.
I disagree, I think killing is only justifiable if it's entirely accidental. You have to be bloodthirsty to kill someone on purpose no matter what the reason.
Hmm. Then WillNever II would be justified in killing WillNever to prevent him from killing some guy so as to prevent that guy from killing someone else? He's preventing you from killing that person, right? You've already said that it's a justifiable killing.
They're completely disrespected, so they have no value, right?
Ahh, idealisms are so freakin' easy to type out, aren't they?
No, the act of the first killing negates the wrongnesss of the following killing. Also, such a scenario is impossible.You can't kill a person who is in the process of killing someone else who is also in the process of killing someone. If such were taking place, you would see what was going on, and it could not all be happening at once.
Yes when they are true. This one is.
The only justified killing is a prevention.
Anyway for many reasons what this guy did was utterly moronic.
"Moronic" could be="damn,what he was thinking,he should call the police etc"Why do you say "moronic" instead of "overly emotional"? Or, in keeping with your high humanistic ideals, why didn't you use the old standby "He should now be helped by professionals."? You make the excuse for the kid, but you call the father/killer a moron. Wasn't the kid a moron to have fucked his little sister??? Oh, yeah, sure, ...HE needs help, but you're sure quick to condemn the father, ain't ya'?
@Baron
WOULD YOU kill Ur Son Cause he raped ur Daughter?Giving the exactly the present example.
Death over rape?
"Moronic" could be="damn,what he was thinking,he should call the police etc"
But if u insist:
Ye,cause he's the ADULT,cause he's the FATHER,cause its HIS SON,cause HE RAISED THE KID.
No, the principe, the ideal, remains the same as your original scenario. You're just trying to waffle your way out of answering.
If killing is wrong, then killing to prevent a killing is wrong, too. See? By placing yourself in the judge, jury, executioner position, you're putting yourself above all others ....and YOU killing is okay, but it's not justified for anyone else.
Yeah, that's what they all say!
Baron Max
Why do you say "moronic" instead of "overly emotional"? Or, in keeping with your high humanistic ideals, why didn't you use the old standby "He should now be helped by professionals."? You make the excuse for the kid, but you call the father/killer a moron. Wasn't the kid a moron to have fucked his little sister??? Oh, yeah, sure, ...HE needs help, but you're sure quick to condemn the father, ain't ya'?
Baron Max
But I never stated all kills are wrong. I stated the one scenario where it is not.
Look this guy obviously has issues as he proved that by killing his own son. ...