Man Kills Child Molester

Is this the father's story? Maybe the newly deceased 15 year old had the goods on the old man's sexual deviances.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The poll question is:
"Could you kill someone who molested your child?"

If we assume its a stranger.
And we already assume that he HAS molested ,that there are 100% evidence.
Considering the above ye,why not

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

He was his son =/ even if he raped her its still his child....the thing is.....Do u consider rape worse than death? Death is worse,much worse than raping.
I mean when the girls goes 15 she wont even remember it,she will just live her life proly,at least she Will live.
If my son did that...i would use psychological help etc etc.
Well,the death/rape ratio i mentioned has to do with ur kids.
U have 2 kids,in one case both live and u strive to make things better with any possible action.
In the other case u are left with 1 kid cause u killed one.
In this situation death is not a good option since u do lose something -ur kid- if u kill.

If its a stranger then its ok ,do him, no second thoughts ;D
Ofc without revealing urself

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Why leave ur kid with no father ;/

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

At 15 she will likely still be rather affected by what happened.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I read about Britains most evil man today, apparently he's a racist paedophile, but still, at least some of the kids are safe.

 

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.

 

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.

It's interesting, too, that you've set yourself up as the judge, jury and executioner in a particular scenario. How do you know that the person in your scenario above is not killing that other guy to prevent him from killing someone else? He's following the very same idealist principles as you, yet you set about to kill him?!

Ahh, idealisms are so freakin' easy to claim, ain't they?

You're already part of that culture whether you want it or not.

What I find interesting is how people like you make idealist judgements about the great and wonderful worth of any and all humans ...while knowing full well that there are millions of murderers and vicious rapists in the world right now. How can you place such value on them? ...just because they're humans???

Yet you also denigrate some of those humans that disagree with you! ...calling them "bloodthirsty little piglets" that you won't respect. So if you don't respect them, would you still save them from being killed? If so, why? They're completely disrespected, so they have no value, right?

Ahh, idealisms are so freakin' easy to type out, aren't they?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Baron Max

 

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

 

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.

Huh?

Yes when they are true. This one is.

 

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

 

Well no in this case it was the guys son he should have gotten the Kid help as it was likely the Kid learned the behavior from being abused himself. If the guy felt the urge to kill anybody it should have been himself for not providing a safe environment for the kids. How ever with that said this guy it is possible that he may have been abused himself or suffered from some other mental condition that he did not see the signs that his kids were indeed in trouble. And be fore you go condemning my statement above I know of a person in this similar situation with their Kids not the killing part but the rest of it and they are fairly close in age. And there is not a day that goes by that these people do not blame themselves for what happened.

 

Thank you. Since no dead man commited any other crime, thanks for agreeing with the father... Otherwise you are well, an idiot...(BaronMax already pointed out the fallacy in your reasoning, if we could actually call that)

 

Anyway for many reasons what this guy did was utterly moronic.
He Could get some help from professionals cause he was Still young and could be 'fixed'.
When someone -not ur family- rapes one of ur family it doesnt need much thinking before the kill

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

But in THIS case the father PREFERRED DEATH OVER RAPE.
Would u want to be dead or raped?
In THIS case the father was a puritan moron.

 

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

 

@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.

 

What? ....trying to make excuses for you unrealistic idealism?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

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. With that said yes he does need help just as the son needed help and the little Girl is going to need help not only due to her Brother but what her Father did to her brother. She is going to feel like it is her fault that she no longer has a brother or a father. There is no excuse that you can give that will make this OK by any stretch of the imagination this guy should have stopped and thought before he grabbed the gun.

 

Nope, sorry, but your original post made it abundantly clear that "killing is wrong" ....EXCEPT.... (your little scenario). See?

But what I want to know is ....how can you know what the assailant is trying to do with the victim in your scenario? How can you know that he's going to kill the victim instead of just beat the shit outta' him? And yet you're willing to jump in and kill the assailant? ...without knowing?

Seems to me, Will, that your silly idealism has gotten you into some deep trouble with reality .....and you can't get out of it without waffling around in the muck (and making it worse!).

Baron Max

 

So humans should not have or act on emotions that they were born with? We should all be like Mr. Spock, never smiling, never happy, never doing anything that isn't absolutely logical and reasonable?

And you never forgive any emotional responses? ...like a man jumping into a raging fire to save a little kid who's screaming in agony? If he stopped to think about it, he wouldn't jump into that fire, would he?????

Nope, perhaps you're right ...humans should all be automatons, thinking, acting, talking, exactly alike, always the same in all situations.

Baron Max