Welcome to the Free Talk Live bulletin board system!
This board is closed to new users and new posts.  Thank you to all our great mods and users over the years.  Details here.
185859 Posts in 9829 Topics by 1371 Members
Latest Member: cjt26
Home Help
+  The Free Talk Live BBS
|-+  Free Talk Live
| |-+  The Polling Pit
| | |-+  An eye for an eye?

Poll

An eye for an eye? Does anyone have the right to kill a murderer in revenge?

Yes
No

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 8   Go Down

Author Topic: An eye for an eye?  (Read 18265 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

MacFall

  • Agorist
  • FTL AMPlifier Silver
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2295
  • No king but Christ; no law but liberty!
    • View Profile
Re: An eye for an eye?
« Reply #15 on: June 29, 2008, 09:46:51 PM »

If its murder does that mean you can then do whatever you want?

A person who violates the rights of another forfeits their own rights to the extent that the victim was violated. Ergo, a murderer has no justly enforceable rights - assuming that guilt has been proven beyond doubt.

That's what I believe, morally. Practically, however, it is rare that guilt can be so firmly established. I'd stick to indentured servitude.
Logged
I am an anarchist! HOOGA BOOGA BOOGA!!

MacFall

  • Agorist
  • FTL AMPlifier Silver
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2295
  • No king but Christ; no law but liberty!
    • View Profile
Re: An eye for an eye?
« Reply #16 on: June 29, 2008, 09:49:48 PM »

then there is the turn the other cheek.  The whole idea of forgiveness.

That is and should remain a matter of individual conscience, not law.
Logged
I am an anarchist! HOOGA BOOGA BOOGA!!

thomasjack

  • Guest
Re: An eye for an eye?
« Reply #17 on: June 30, 2008, 04:40:52 PM »

Say I commit a crime and it's decided I must pay the victim $200,000 in damages. If some rich guys gives me $200,000 to give to the victim, has justice been served? What if the rich guy gives the money directly to the victim in my name?

What's the purpose of justice?
Logged

mikehz

  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8033
    • View Profile
    • Day by Day
Re: An eye for an eye?
« Reply #18 on: June 30, 2008, 10:58:20 PM »

I've heard it said that the trouble with "an eye for an eye" is that eventually everyone is blind.
Logged
"Force always attracts men of low morality." Albert Einstein

Taors

  • Guest
Re: An eye for an eye?
« Reply #19 on: June 30, 2008, 11:24:47 PM »

I've heard it said that the trouble with "an eye for an eye" is that eventually everyone is blind.

Gandhi was a faggot.
Logged

hellbilly

  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6664
  • Pogue Mahone.
    • View Profile
Re: An eye for an eye?
« Reply #20 on: July 01, 2008, 12:03:34 AM »

I've heard it said that the trouble with "an eye for an eye" is that eventually everyone is blind.

I've heard that as well. But I prefer to think that if enough people get gouged then those with remaining sight will "see the light".
Logged
Give me Liberty or give me Meth!

"We are profoundly dissatisfied with pretty much everything but we can’t articulate why, and are unable to offer any viable alternative." - Nathaniel Weiner

NHArticleTen

  • Guest
Re: An eye for an eye?
« Reply #21 on: July 01, 2008, 09:29:55 AM »


Let's look at an example of empowering Individual Sovereign Human Beings to be equipped and responsible for their own security and safety...

When Florida first enacted their concealed carry law the MSM was awash with dire predictions of a "return to the wild west"...which never occurred...of course...
Then the thieves and robbers turned to the tourists and out-of-town visitors because they were easier "marks" and were thought to be unarmed...
So Florida made it very easy to get a non-resident permit and also they changed the license plates for rental cars to make them inconspicuous...
The success in Florida paved the way for dozens of states to enact CCW in the following years and, in doing so, facilitated the empowerment and potential empowerment of millions against the common criminal(looters, bureaucrats, jackboots, and mercenaries...not so much)...

So...

We can see, witness, and easily prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the empowerment of the Individual Sovereign Human Being is paramount to both a significant reduction in victims and an overall reduction in the criminal element...

The most effective "justice" is the immediate repelling, destruction, and elimination of all the variations of perpetrators...

Better to be judged by 12...than carried by 6...

Rape victims who arm themselves after the first rape...and then repell, destroy, and eliminate a second rapist...don't consider the second outcome more traumatic than the first...






-randwasright-

Logged

DogOn

  • Guest
Re: An eye for an eye?
« Reply #22 on: July 01, 2008, 12:03:26 PM »

So...

We can see, witness, and easily prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the empowerment of the Individual Sovereign Human Being is paramount to both a significant reduction in victims and an overall reduction in the criminal element...

The most effective "justice" is the immediate repelling, destruction, and elimination of all the variations of perpetrators...

Better to be judged by 12...than carried by 6...

Rape victims who arm themselves after the first rape...and then repell, destroy, and eliminate a second rapist...don't consider the second outcome more traumatic than the first...


What's that got to do with eye for an eye? Self defense is completely non comparable to actively seeking to revenge kill when it would not help save or protect anyones life.

Moral relativism is a sham, killing someone is always wrong unless its in self defense. Even if they rape and murder you're whole family, its not okay to track the murderer down and shoot them in the head in the middle of the night.

Now you'd still be a hell of alot more moral than the murderer, but who wants to live a life merely at the relativity of others actions. Either an action is immoral or its not, whats going on around and what happened before doesn't change that (except for in your head).

Killing becomes moral in self defense because your rights are being directly infringed and the only way to reinforce your right to life is to expel the infringer, from life or from your general vicinity. As long as someone is directly threatening your life then it stays in the self defense zone, as soon as they put their weapon down and walk away it becomes plain murder if you want to kill them.

Revenge murders/death penalty takes away all our rights to life. If its okay to murder a man in cold blood, then certainly it can be okay to kill 1 man to save 10 men, or invade a small country to save the world. If eye for an eye is based on doing bad things means its okay for bad things to be done to you, then doing "good" things is always preferable to the "bad", and then it is left entirely to the person in question to decide who gets to die and who gets to live.

Either there are an objective set of morals and rights that don't change on the circumstance or there are non, and it is merely what you, me, "society", religion, or whoever decides it is. Self defense is not a case of murder being okay in a different situation. Its a defense of your rights, murder is any time when you kill when it wasn't to defend your (or anothers) life from direct aggression.

Self defense = moral. Restitution = moral. murder = always immoral
Logged

BonerJoe

  • Guest
Re: An eye for an eye?
« Reply #23 on: July 01, 2008, 12:06:38 PM »

Even if they rape and murder you're whole family, its not okay to track the murderer down and shoot them in the head in the middle of the night.

Ignored.
Logged

trollfreezone

  • Guest
Re: An eye for an eye?
« Reply #24 on: July 01, 2008, 12:21:22 PM »

For the record, here's the Gandhi quote as I recall it, and found it via Google:

"If we practice and eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, soon the whole world will be blind and toothless."-Mahatma Gandhi.

The point is that an "eye for an eye" has the same negative effect as crime itself.  It destroys wealth and/or well-being, and propagates hatred.  A better policy is just compensation.  Since it always costs more than the proceeds of wrongdoing to fully compensate those harmed, there is a built-in "punishment."  In the case of "just taking of life" there can be no benefit.
Logged

DogOn

  • Guest
Re: An eye for an eye?
« Reply #25 on: July 01, 2008, 12:31:15 PM »

Even if they rape and murder you're whole family, its not okay to track the murderer down and shoot them in the head in the middle of the night.

Ignored.

oh boo hoo, if you want to act like an ignorant brute and think just because someone does something that makes you feel bad or feel angry its okay to kill them, fine, but don't ever think you're using reason over emotion.

why don't you go out killing pedarists if you're so convinced murdering bad people is good? those kiddy rapers make me so mad! I'm a man, hear me roar!  :x

you're not even gonna engage in discussion cause i wont beat my chest and loudly proclaim anyone who touches "my blood" is going to "pay"? thats pretty fucking pathetic.

 If someone was trying to kill me or someone i liked (incidentally not my family) then i'd kill them in a heartbeat, but going past that point I actually keep my thinking cap on and work out whether just because I feel like doing something should I actually do it.

don't kid yourself you're any better than the kind of savages who actually commit murder, you're no different, at least in ethics
Logged

NHArticleTen

  • Guest
Re: An eye for an eye?
« Reply #26 on: July 01, 2008, 02:55:18 PM »

Even if they rape and murder you're whole family, its not okay to track the murderer down and shoot them in the head in the middle of the night.

Ignored.

straight from the horses mouth, spoken by the fatcat raping murderer of someone's whole family...
and since it's not okay to shoot him in the head in the middle of the night...

we'll do it in the middle of the day...

Dear Fatcat...
I don't care who you are, where you are, or what you are...
If you rape and/or murder me and/or any of "mine"...
You WILL be hunted down and humanely extinguished...
If they don't put you down during the perpetration...

Don't care what you think about it...
What your friends and family think...
Or anyone else for that matter...

Food for thought...
Indeed...








-randwasright-

Logged

thomasjack

  • Guest
Re: An eye for an eye?
« Reply #27 on: July 01, 2008, 03:26:28 PM »

Self defense = moral. Restitution = moral. murder = always immoral

I agree. I wouldn't patronize any justice system which allowed revenge murder.

A person who violates the rights of another forfeits their own rights to the extent that the victim was violated. Ergo, a murderer has no justly enforceable rights - assuming that guilt has been proven beyond doubt.

That's what I believe, morally. Practically, however, it is rare that guilt can be so firmly established. I'd stick to indentured servitude.

I agree that a person who violates the rights of another forfeits their own rights, but only so that the original violation may be repaired as much as possible.

Imagine I burn down your house, causing $200,000 in damages. You take me to court and the court orders that my house be burnt down so that I too suffer $200,000 in damages, and that's it—you get no retribution. Wouldn't this be totally insane? Why is murder any different? If someone seriously wounds me, do I have a right to seriously wound them later in revenge?

It occurs to me that if the only heir of a murdered person murders the murderer in revenge, everybody would be even under a justice system based on restitution. So, I guess if you want to murder the person who murdered your father, the justice system I envision wouldn't punish you. You'd just be giving up a whole lot of money.
Logged

Taors

  • Guest
Re: An eye for an eye?
« Reply #28 on: July 01, 2008, 03:45:07 PM »

You wouldn't need to patronize such a system. If you don't want to go after the murderer that killed your family, don't. But don't fucking stop me from doing it, because I will.
Logged

NHArticleTen

  • Guest
Re: An eye for an eye?
« Reply #29 on: July 01, 2008, 04:42:47 PM »

You wouldn't need to patronize such a system. If you don't want to go after the murderer that killed your family, don't. But don't fucking stop me from doing it, because I will.

chime

Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 8   Go Up
+  The Free Talk Live BBS
|-+  Free Talk Live
| |-+  The Polling Pit
| | |-+  An eye for an eye?

// ]]>

Page created in 0.019 seconds with 36 queries.