Acid attack victim commits suicide

[porchrat]

How can you take a road rage incident and apply it to a domestic invasion.

Because they are both situations in which the civilian legal system would determine the appropriate penalty. Now that you guys are holding to the idea that individuals can determine their own penalties those 2 situations are linked.

The ultimate princpal remains the same tho.

Not really because in war civilian courts don't apply, military ones do and they have separate rules. Even so as far as I know if in war you execute someone that is no longer a threat and evidence of it emerges you are in trouble.

 

[porchrat]

I know what you are saying. That you have to compare cutting someone off in traffic to entering a strangers house with a knife to try to make your point says plenty lol

I purposefully chose it because it highlights the ridiculous nature of the system you guys are attempting to justify. Anarchy and lawlessness in which one can exact punishment on someone else because they feel they have been wronged.

If we wish to remain a fair and equal society we must have a way of punishing offenders that is universal and not subjective. Otherwise you may not like the consequences when someone else decides you have wronged him/her.

 

[sparticus]

Where did I say beat to death?
There is NEVER a justification for that.

Note that I have no qualms about killing someone or beating the tar out of someone to protect myself or my family.

So because you were unable to make the call you beat him bloody until he lost proper function in his legs? LOL yea that was an acceptable course of action. Pull the other one.

So where do you see bloody ? I said I gave him a hiding and I am pretty sure he walks with a limb. I never said I beat him until he cannot stand on his feet. Again you assuming when its convenient for you

You have already said he lay there paralysed with fear as you pummelled him. Sounds like a person posing no threat to you as far as I am concerned.

Yes but it was kinda looking back at the situation , I said he was probably paralysed with fear at the time. This is how I feel looking back now , not at the time. At the time he was a guy who tried to hurt me and my family in our sleep.

So... you can't make the call as to whether or not he is a person but you can take his rights away by assaulting him? Uh... what?

His baing a person is not my call , thats a higher power that decides that , no man has the power to do that in my book , I never assuslted him and yes he loses his rights when he entered my home armed to kill me in my sleep and rape my wife and 6month old daughter.

You have already said he lay there paralysed with fear as you beat him. Are you changing your story now? Was he attacking you at that point?

Nope I asked a what if question, ie , do you think if I kept him in my lounge (where he was caught) with my hands he would just sit there waiting for the cops ? Also I never said he layed there paralyzed , I said looking back he was probably paralyzed with fear. For someone who questions other people command of the English language you sure fall short on comprehension.

 

[porchrat]

So where do you see bloody ? I said I gave him a hiding and I am pretty sure he walks with a limb. I never said I beat him until he cannot stand on his feet. Again you assuming when its convenient for you





Yes but it was kinda looking back at the situation , I said he was probably paralysed with fear at the time. This is how I feel looking back now , not at the time. At the time he was a guy who tried to hurt me and my family in our sleep.

His baing a person is not my call , thats a higher power that decides that , no man has the power to do that in my book , I never assuslted him and yes he loses his rights when he entered my home armed to kill me in my sleep and rape my wife and 6month old daughter.





Nope I asked a what if question, ie , do you think if I kept him in my lounge (where he was caught) with my hands he would just sit there waiting for the cops ? Also I never said he layed there paralyzed , I said looking back he was probably paralyzed with fear. For someone who questions other people command of the English language you sure fall short on comprehension.

It seems you are saying you believed that by your actions you were defending yourself and your family. Which is fine.

As I said: if indeed you were unsure and were merely attempting to subdue the man then you are justified. Then you were merely defending yourself. It is only when you start talking about "teaching him a lesson" and "punishment" that I say you are unjustified.

If you truly believed the man to still be an immediate threat that needed to be brought under control then you are justified. However if you recall what started this entire conversation off was not this particular incident. It was your declaration that you would walk up to acid-man's house and beat the schit out of him.

So this particular incident of self defence you refer to has nothing to do with your declaration that you would assault acid-man. Two entirely separate scenarios.

 

[STS]

See lets take a step back here and work from the principles you guys are clinging to.

Are you guys saying an individual has the right to determine punishment?

I think what they are saying and what i agree with, is that we will react a certain way when threatened, and while perhaps the best way to act in a perfect world is to not get aggressive and just defend ourselves, call the police and leave it to the government, we can't help but take it personally, so we may react a certain way and not care, or have the law be a bit more lenient against us.

how DID that scenario with Sparticus work out though? I mean we could condemn it here but did he get any charges against him? Also i think having the **** kicked out of you or risking your life is also a good deterrent for breaking into a house

 

[sparticus]

It seems you are saying you believed that by your actions you were defending yourself and your family. Which is fine.

As I said: if indeed you were unsure and were merely attempting to subdue the man then you are justified. Then you were merely defending yourself. It is only when you start talking about "teaching him a lesson" and "punishment" that I say you are unjustified.

If you truly believed the man to still be an immediate threat that needed to be brought under control then you are justified. However if you recall what started this entire conversation off was not this particular incident. It was your declaration that you would walk up to acid-man's house and beat the schit out of him.

So this particular incident of self defence you refer to has nothing to do with your declaration that you would assault acid-man. Two entirely separate scenarios.

Yes I agree , like I said it was an emotional response at the time when I said I would **&% him up had he lived near me. Would I do it really ? Honestly I cannot answer that , the muslim in me says no but the husband/dad in me says never say never as I am not sure that I would be able to control myself. Thats just me being honest. Its the reason why I never got me a gun.

Re the incident , look I speak now with lots of retrospeck and looking back. At the time I did not have the luxury of rational thinking and it was not a situation where I could ask the guy do you present a threat ? Even if it happens today I would play it safe and assume the guy is here to harm me. I think most people would react like that , only few would maybe admit to it.

So what I am saying is looking back at the time I felt there was a danger , today though he probably did not pose it at the time I took him to the yard and beat him so for me today it was more like a hiding and less of a defense. However at the time it was not.

Once again , given the chance to do it over I would most likely act the very same way as confronted with the possibility that my family could be in harms way is just way too much to gamble with if's and maybe's.

 

[sparticus]

I think what they are saying and what i agree with, is that we will react a certain way when threatened, and while perhaps the best way to act in a perfect world is to not get aggressive and just defend ourselves, call the police and leave it to the government, we can't help but take it personally, so we may react a certain way and not care, or have the law be a bit more lenient against us.

how DID that scenario with Sparticus work out though? I mean we could condemn it here but did he get any charges against him? Also i think having the **** kicked out of you or risking your life is also a good deterrent for breaking into a house

When I was younger I read a book which name I forgot but I am sure some of you are familiar with it. Its about a group of English school boys that crash on a island during WWII (I think at least) and how they changed faced with harsh survival. I think one can compare that with my situation. The min you get in such a situation the rational you gets put aside and the survivor kicks in. There is really no time to pause and think , you act. Like when someone gets shot and he jumps up and runs , he is running on adreneline and not thinking. 50 meters later , he collapse due to his injuries.

There was a study done a few years ago as well how mob influences people , illegal gatherings , it takes one person to get out of control and suddenly 100's of nornal sane people riot ! The Middle East conflict shows how war can turn perfectly normal people into hard core killers that take innocent lives.

 

[porchrat]

Yes I agree , like I said it was an emotional response at the time when I said I would **&% him up had he lived near me. Would I do it really ? Honestly I cannot answer that , the muslim in me says no but the husband/dad in me says never say never as I am not sure that I would be able to control myself. Thats just me being honest. Its the reason why I never got me a gun.

Re the incident , look I speak now with lots of retrospeck and looking back. At the time I did not have the luxury of rational thinking and it was not a situation where I could ask the guy do you present a threat ? Even if it happens today I would play it safe and assume the guy is here to harm me. I think most people would react like that , only few would maybe admit to it.

So what I am saying is looking back at the time I felt there was a danger , today though he probably did not pose it at the time I took him to the yard and beat him so for me today it was more like a hiding and less of a defense. However at the time it was not.

Once again , given the chance to do it over I would most likely act the very same way as confronted with the possibility that my family could be in harms way is just way too much to gamble with if's and maybe's.

It seems we are of the same mind here and it was merely a communication failure on both our parts... and what an epic failure it was. Several pages worth.

I understand this and I can respect your actions. In your shoes I may very well have done the same thing. If you believe someone poses a threat to you or your family then you must do everything in your power to defend yourselves even if that means you must take that individual's life.

I apologise for calling you a hypocrite. It seems you are anything but.

 

[porchrat]

When I was younger I read a book which name I forgot but I am sure some of you are familiar with it. Its about a group of English school boys that crash on a island during WWII (I think at least) and how they changed faced with harsh survival.

The book you are thinking of is Lord of the Flies. It didn't explicitly specify which war it was but it can be assumed to be WWII as the war mentioned is a nuclear war.

 

[sparticus]

The book you are thinking of is Lord of the Flies. It didn't explicitly specify which war it was but it can be assumed to be WWII as the war mentioned is a nuclear war.

That's it with the PIggy character !!! Great book , must get it again.

It seems we are of the same mind here and it was merely a communication failure on both our parts... and what an epic failure it was. Several pages worth.

I understand this and I can respect your actions. In your shoes I may very well have done the same thing. If you believe someone poses a threat to you or your family then you must do everything in your power to defend yourselves even if that means you must take that individual's life.

I apologise for calling you a hypocrite. It seems you are anything but.

That's okay , this is why we have a forum , to discuss , disect and learn. I was also outa line maybe in some of my post's for which I apologies as well. I must admit , sometimes I say things very wrong especially with long post's , its the OCD in me lol.

 

[porchrat]

The ridiculous nature of taking into account degrees of intensity?

Universally and consistently applied degrees of intensity in a system in which the individual gets to subjectively decide what punishment is to be dished out in the heat of the moment in his/her backyard?

Uh... yea... totally ridiculous. Like "square circle" ridiculous. :wtf:

 

[porchrat]

That's it with the PIggy character !!! Great book , must get it again.

Yes indeed it is a great book. Everyone should read it.

That's okay , this is why we have a forum , to discuss , disect and learn. I was also outa line maybe in some of my post's for which I apologies as well. I must admit , sometimes I say things very wrong especially with long post's , its the OCD in me lol.

Thanks. Now we gather around the campfire and sing Kumbaya

 

[TheHiveMind]

Universally and consistently applied degrees of intensity in a system in which the individual gets to subjectively decide what punishment is to be dished out in the heat of the moment in his/her backyard?

Uh... yea... totally ridiculous. Like "square circle" ridiculous. :wtf:

/shrugs
I am an authoritarian, I love rules, but I don't advocate your liberal system.
Does it make sense now?

 

[porchrat]

/shrugs
I am an authoritarian, I love rules, but I don't advocate your liberal system.
Does it make sense now?

Nope. I don't know why you would think that one cryptic line would clear anything up or address any of the points I have raised.

 

[TheHiveMind]

Nope. I don't know why you would think that one cryptic line would clear anything up or address any of the points I have raised.

Your system is soft, that's why people in this thread have a preference for overriding it.
Your system doesn't even enjoy majority support in countries like England, nevermind SA. It is imposed, by a minority.

 

[porchrat]

Your system is soft, that's why people in this thread have a preference for overriding it.
Your system doesn't even enjoy majority support in countries like England, nevermind SA. It is imposed, by a minority.

Oh I agree the justice system needs to be sorted out. It needs a swift kick in the backside.

That doesn't mean you get to beat the schit out of helpless people though.

As to the system being imposed by a minority you are going to have to provide proof of that. I'm sure there are many people frustrated with elements of their justice system but wanting it scrapped completely in principle? Give me evidence.

 

[TheHiveMind]

You don't agree with capital punishment, and the ethics behind that stance run throughout the current system.
But the majority of people DO support capital punishment for specific crimes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capita...port_for_reintroduction_of_capital_punishment
See that? A loud minority, overruling a majority.

I can only assume that support within less liberal, crime ridden SA is even more pronounced.

 

[porchrat]

You don't agree with capital punishment, and the ethics behind that stance run throughout the current system.
But the majority of people DO support capital punishment for specific crimes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capita...port_for_reintroduction_of_capital_punishment
See that? A loud minority, overruling a majority.

I can only assume that support within less liberal, crime ridden SA is even more pronounced.

So as I said they are frustrated with particular elements of the current system and wish to amend it. Not surprising really as legal systems are frequently being amended. I'm still not seeing the evidence of a majority not supporting the system itself as you claimed here: "Your system doesn't even enjoy majority support in countries like England, nevermind SA. It is imposed, by a minority."