Man Kills Child Molester

[CutsieMarie89]

Do you place the same value on murderers and vicious rapists as you place on others in your society?

In your statement above, I have to assume that you place the same value on your mother as that of a vicious, convicted murderer. ...that killing your mother would be the same as killing the murderer. Given the choice, Marie, which would you rather see killed -- your mother, or the vicious murderer?

Idealisms are so nice to claim, aren't they? But they're impossible to live with in the real world. Humans have emotions, which most often will interfere with those ideals. And that's why they call them "ideals", ain't it?

Baron Max

Unless the vicious murderer was my mother of course not, there isn't anyone who has the exact same value to me. But whether I killed my mother, an innocent classmate or a crazed murderer it still wouldn't be right.
Ideally I don't kick squirrels, but when my boyfriend got attacked by one I kicked it. That doesn't make kicking squirrels a righteous thing to do in my book.
It is an ideal. And like most ideals, it doesn't mean anything when it comes to real life scenarios. I'm well aware of that. But since you know it's an ideal, why argue against it as if I meant it as anything else? I just disagreed with WillNever, I don't think killing is justifiable under any other circumstances. Doesn't mean it doesn't happen or that I myself wouldn't do it in certain circumstances, but it still wouldn't be okay.

 

[jpappl]

Max, you're taking your own lower order thought patterns and trying to transpose them onto normal, higher minded individuals and assuming they would act in the same way you do. That just doesn't fly.

And what derogatory comments have I made..? I think I've been civil.

Well then with your higher minded brain, would you kill the guy for molesting your child in front of you ? Would you reason with him ? Would you forgive him ?

After he gets out and does it to my kid, what are you going to say to me ?

 

[Baron Max]

In custody he is not in the immediate act of killing, so none of what you just said applies here.

Trying to skirt the question, Will? ...LOL! See what stating idealisms will do for you when I'm around? ...LOL!

Here is your previous post on this very thread (which shows that it does apply here!):

"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 (EDIT for the idiotic) during the immediate act.

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."

So now ...let's try it again, okay?

In your little scenario, where you'd kill to prevent someone from killing someone else, ....How can you tell when someone is trying to kill someone else?
How can you tell that they're just not going to beat the shit outta' them and not kill them?

Try answering the question, Will, or are you going to try to waffle out of it right here in front of everyone?

Baron Max

 

[Ellie]

in some instances, not spanking can be viewed as bad parenting. suppose a kid runs into the street and get hit by a car. then you realize that the kid does it all the time and what did you do? you asked the kid not to run in the street but guess that didnt work.

 

[WillNever]

Trying to skirt the question, Will? ...LOL! See what stating idealisms will do for you when I'm around? ...LOL!


In your little scenario, where you'd kill to prevent someone from killing someone else, ....How can you tell when someone is trying to kill someone else?
How can you tell that they're just not going to beat the shit outta' them and not kill them?

If they are beating the shit out of someone, they aren't killing them. The proper response would be to beat the beater up, not kill the beater. If they have a gun or knife aimed however, then they're either planning to kill or planning to injure with the risk of killing, in which case what I said holds true.

 

[jpappl]

in some instances, not spanking can be viewed as bad parenting. suppose a kid runs into the street and get hit by a car. then you realize that the kid does it all the time and what did you do? you asked the kid not to run in the street but guess that didnt work.

Wrong thread

 

[Baron Max]

Well then with your higher minded brain, would you kill the guy for molesting your child in front of you? Would you reason with him? Would you forgive him?

Will would be a nicer and a far more moral guy than all of us - it would be rude to interrupt the guy, so he'd wait until he was finished, then he'd explain that fuckin' little girls wasn't a nice thing to do. I'm sure he'd then ask the man to turn himself in to the local police and confess!

Baron Max

 

[WillNever]

Well then with your higher minded brain, would you kill the guy for molesting your child in front of you ? Would you reason with him ? Would you forgive him ?

After he gets out and does it to my kid, what are you going to say to me ?

Why not restrain him some other way, or simply injure him?

According to the story, this murder of his son was premeditated. It was not in the heat of the moment, but instead a planned killing.

 

[Baron Max]

If they are beating the shit out of someone, they aren't killing them.

You've never heard of people being beaten to death????

The proper response would be to beat the beater up, not kill the beater.

Which one? How can you decide which is the good guy and which is the bad guy?

If they have a gun or knife aimed however, then they're either planning to kill or planning to injure with the risk of killing, in which case what I said holds true.

So you'd kill the man with the knife or gun ....without ever knowing for sure that he was going to kill the other? How can you know what he's going to do, Will? Maybe he's just threatening the man? Or maybe he just took the knife or gun away from the bad guy ....and you're getting ready to kill the good guy just because he now has the gun?

Oooooh, Will, you'd best quit while you're ....well, only this far behind!! Your idealism just don't hold water, Will, .....admit it.

Baron Max

 

[Baron Max]

Why not restrain him some other way, or simply injure him?

What? And let your little daughter lay there injured and crying? ...while you screw around trying to subdue the man??? Wow, you're a real emotional wonder, aren't you? Mr. Spock would be proud, Will.

According to the story, this murder of his son was premeditated. It was not in the heat of the moment, but instead a planned killing.

Yes, but now we've taken your ideal and extended it a little bit. You don't mind, do you? I mean, if your ideal is a good one, it should stand up to examination and scrutiny.

Baron Max

 

[WillNever]

Oooooh, Will, you'd best quit while you're ....well, only this far behind!! Your idealism just don't hold water, Will, .....admit it.

Everything I've said is sound and sensible. If your goal is merely to physically separate two brawling people, then it matters little who is the aggressor.

So you'd kill the man with the knife or gun ....without ever knowing for sure that he was going to kill the other?

Why kill? Just injure. The minimal amount of force adequate for the job should be used, and there is no reason to be more forceful than necessary. You're presenting simple scenarios as being more complex than they really are.

 

[jpappl]

Why not restrain him some other way, or simply injure him?

Sure, but to the point, are you suggesting that you would remain in such a logical state while witnessing such an act on your child ?

This is where we are in apparent dis-agreement. I am suggesting that I would react in such a way to protect my kid that I don't know exactly what I would do.

Again, he is bound to repeat, what are you going to say to the parent that he re-offends with.

I mean we are talking about a tragic failure here. There isn't really any good answers only not as bad answers. But I agree with Baron that life isn't so orderly. When someone is molesting a child, I wouldn't call that ideal to start with, how can we have an ideal answer for such an event.

Like I said, don't kill em, then what. It's just a matter of time before they do it again and then what.

 

[WillNever]

Sure, but to the point, are you suggesting that you would remain in such a logical state while witnessing such an act on your child ?

This is where we are in apparent dis-agreement. I am suggesting that I would react in such a way to protect my kid that I don't know exactly what I would do.

Again, he is bound to repeat, what are you going to say to the parent that he re-offends with.

I mean we are talking about a tragic failure here. There isn't really any good answers only not as bad answers. But I agree with Baron that life isn't so orderly. When someone is molesting a child, I wouldn't call that ideal to start with, how can we have an ideal answer for such an event.

Like I said, don't kill em, then what. It's just a matter of time before they do it again and then what.

It's his own kid though. Honestly killing my own child would never even cross my mind, regardless of the statistics for repeaters. Something had to have caused him to want to molest somebody. I'd be more interested in getting at the source.

 

[jpappl]

It's his own kid though. Honestly killing my own child would never even cross my mind, regardless of the statistics for repeaters. Something had to have caused him to want to molest somebody. I'd be more interested in getting at the source.

Yeah and the source might be the father. So he is protecting his ass by killing his son who might have been on the verge of saying so.

The family obviously has some issues. I am more interested in the issue as a whole. It is a conversation that we need to have as a nation.

I am in favor of locking up molestors and murderers and letting out the low risk drug offenders.

I also think if we did that and stuck to the sentences or made them for life in more cases, this wouldn't be as much of an issue.

 

[Baron Max]

Everything I've said is sound and sensible. If your goal is merely to physically separate two brawling people, then it matters little who is the aggressor.

What if they're so very much larger than you and from their fighting, they both know how to fight .....and you'd be no match for one of them, much less both. Now what?

... You're presenting simple scenarios as being more complex than they really are.

No, Will, you're actually skirting the questions or comments without actually answering them. And others can see that as well. Your idealism simply won't hold up to reality, Will, and you skirting the questions is simply proof of that fact.

Baron Max

 

[Orleander]

Yeah and the source might be the father. So he is protecting his ass by killing his son who might have been on the verge of saying so. ...

How is he protecting himself by opening committing murder? :shrug:

 

[WillNever]

What if they're so very much larger than you and from their fighting, they both know how to fight .....and you'd be no match for one of them, much less both. Now what?

Shoot them in the legs, problem solved.

No, Will, you're actually skirting the questions or comments without actually answering them. And others can see that as well. Your idealism simply won't hold up to reality, Will, and you skirting the questions is simply proof of that fact.

Baron Max

But I've answered all of them and given very sound solutions to every single remote, unlikely, and nonrealistic scenario you have so far put forth. You getting frustrated at trying to come up with even weirder and more unlikely scenarios doesn't change that. I'm thinking you're close to the limit of your argument, here.

 

[jpappl]

How is he protecting himself by opening committing murder? :shrug:

Because he would rather commit murder than allow the information to come out that he molested the molester.

Lots of people have killed to avoid secrets to come out. Obviously, they view the person they killed so low on the scale of humanity that their own embarrassment was worse than the person being dead.

If that is the case here, which I am of course only speculating. That says alot about what he thought of or cared for his son. That he killed.

 

[jpappl]

You getting frustrated at trying to come up with even weirder and more unlikely scenarios doesn't change that. I'm thinking you're close to the limit of your argument, here.

Ok, what if the two men were fighting and they were both too big to tangle with. And your friend was trying to stop them and they were swinging around and around together. Do you still shoot ?

LOL.

 

[Orleander]

Because he would rather commit murder than allow the information to come out that he molested the molester.....

You made that up! How do you go from the molester admitting to his Mom what he had done to the father molesting him?!