Im not saying that its the right way, but its one option. My point still stands. No point to kill them if they pose no threat to you. Op was talking about killing them simply for being what they are, even if they didnt cause any actual harm to you, but you know what they are. His logic is "they are bandits, they deserve to die/suffer" while my reasoning is "if they pose no threat to you, leave them be"
Your point isn't applicable. Yes, it's true, but you don't know if they pose a threat. You know they may pose a threat.
I understand your point about letting them live, but I also understand the OP's point. They do bad things, it's just as understandable to kill them and let others who they could come across have more chance to survive as it is to let the bandits themselves live and have more chance to survive. More so since after whatever happened between the bandits and the user (you, OP, me, etc) would no doubt put you in an emotionally darker place than just meeting them.
In the end I wouldn't do either of your proposed ideas, I would do as I said I would do. (Likely)
Im not saying that its the right way, but its one option. My point still stands. No point to kill them if they pose no threat to you. Op was… more talking about killing them simply for being what they are, even if they didnt cause any actual harm to you, but you know what they are. His logic is "they are bandits, they deserve to die/suffer" while my reasoning is "if they pose no threat to you, leave them be"
I understand your point about letting them live, but I also understand the OP's point. They do bad things, it's just as understandable to kill them and let others who they could come across have more chance to survive as it is to let the bandits themselves live and have more chance to survive.
op is killing for wrong reasons imo and torture is never good thing, which he seems quite fond of.
I would count on them not being complete idiots and not try to track me down after i show them kindness by sparing their lives. Who knows, maybe they might even change for better and stop being pricks. If you want to change things, someone has to start it first. Sounds rather stupid, but i would prefer if people didnt unnecessarily kill others.
Your point isn't applicable. Yes, it's true, but you don't know if they pose a threat. You know they may pose a threat.
I understand your… more point about letting them live, but I also understand the OP's point. They do bad things, it's just as understandable to kill them and let others who they could come across have more chance to survive as it is to let the bandits themselves live and have more chance to survive. More so since after whatever happened between the bandits and the user (you, OP, me, etc) would no doubt put you in an emotionally darker place than just meeting them.
In the end I wouldn't do either of your proposed ideas, I would do as I said I would do. (Likely)
My guess is he had implied they had attacked him, so I guess it depends on your view of the right reasons. I can stand beside someone who kills for avengement if it is deserving. I can even stand beside someone who tortures for such things as rape. Does that make me a bad person? I don't think so. But it's who I am. I'm mostly rational and logical, but there are things which I find unforgivable. If they attacked and killed someone I loved, or if I knew they had raped anyone, or something of the caliber then yes, I would probably kill them off the bat.
I wouldn't count on anyone but myself and the ones I trust. I don't trust bandits who (presumably) came at me. They might change, but chances are they wouldn't. You can change things for the better by killing them and allowing other groups, who can potentially be good/better people, to live on in their absence. It goes both ways. By letting them live you may do good, by killing them you may do good and you may keep them from killing/hurting/stealing from you. Law of interconnectivity. Whether you do or do not do, you change things. Whether they be for better or worse, you wouldn't know either way. I prefer people didn't kill unnecessarily also, but what signifies necessity in this situation? The chance they may come back to kill you, the chance if you kill them others may live, the chance they may change for the better?
I understand your point about letting them live, but I also understand the OP's point. They do bad things, it's just as understandable to ki… morell them and let others who they could come across have more chance to survive as it is to let the bandits themselves live and have more chance to survive.
op is killing for wrong reasons imo and torture is never good thing, which he seems quite fond of.
I would count on them not being complete idiots and not try to track me down after i show them kindness by sparing their lives. Who knows, maybe they might even change for better and stop being pricks. If you want to change things, someone has to start it first. Sounds rather stupid, but i would prefer if people didnt unnecessarily kill others.
I can even stand beside someone who tortures for such things as rape. Does that make me a bad person? I don't think so
It does.
They might change, but chances are they wouldn't. You can change things for the better by killing them and allowing other groups, who can potentially be good/better people, to live on in their absence
That is rather hilarious statement. "kill all the evil ones so good ones can live". Sure, you might think the world is better place if you kill all the "evil" ones who dont have a place in your world, but after that, you would just be one of them. You might remember certain person who thought this way and caused bunch of people to die.
Whether they be for better or worse, you wouldn't know either way. I prefer people didn't kill unnecessarily also, but what signifies necessity in this situation? The chance they may come back to kill you, the chance if you kill them others may live, the chance they may change for the better?
Its up to your own judgement, if they are a threat or not i suppose.
My guess is he had implied they had attacked him, so I guess it depends on your view of the right reasons. I can stand beside someone who ki… morells for avengement if it is deserving. I can even stand beside someone who tortures for such things as rape. Does that make me a bad person? I don't think so. But it's who I am. I'm mostly rational and logical, but there are things which I find unforgivable. If they attacked and killed someone I loved, or if I knew they had raped anyone, or something of the caliber then yes, I would probably kill them off the bat.
I wouldn't count on anyone but myself and the ones I trust. I don't trust bandits who (presumably) came at me. They might change, but chances are they wouldn't. You can change things for the better by killing them and allowing other groups, who can potentially be good/better people, to live on in their absence. It goes both ways. By letting them live you may do good, by killing them you may d… [view original content]
Perhaps. But you can hardly be the one to label me as such. That's "rather hilarious."
It's not really hilarious, and I never said I would kill them all. I'm saying your argument that they could change is not only flawed, but intrinsically as likely to cause the opposing (Law of Interconnectivity again). Besides, killing evil doesn't make you evil. But I'm not here to argue a moral dilemma, God knows that's the last thing I want with you.
I can even stand beside someone who tortures for such things as rape. Does that make me a bad person? I don't think so
It does.
… more They might change, but chances are they wouldn't. You can change things for the better by killing them and allowing other groups, who can potentially be good/better people, to live on in their absence
That is rather hilarious statement. "kill all the evil ones so good ones can live". Sure, you might think the world is better place if you kill all the "evil" ones who dont have a place in your world, but after that, you would just be one of them. You might remember certain person who thought this way and caused bunch of people to die.
Whether they be for better or worse, you wouldn't know either way. I prefer people didn't kill unnecessarily also, but what signifies necessity in this situation? The chance they may come back to kill you, the chance if you kill them others may live, the chance… [view original content]
So only emotional people are justified to murder others? Ok.
Well yeah, if someone murders a innocent person with full control of themself then they did it in cold blood, if someone murders a guilty person out of uncontrollable rage then it is understanable, its why I forgave Kenny for trying to kill Jane, yeah I still shot Kenny but I forgave him, he just thought that someone murdered a baby that he loved and cared about in cold blood, Most people wouldn't be able to contain that anger either.
Killing someone to save yourself isnt bad, causing pain to satisfy your own selfish needs is bad and pretty sick.
The person themself is not sick for doing that, our natural instincts are sick. if you've ever been attacked, seen your own kid be kidnapped, see someone you care about about to get raped (this list goes on and on) you would likely know what its like to go into an uncontrollable rage, its what your body does in order for you to survive and protect others that you care about, its all instincts that take away your self control and the best way to satisfy those instincts are to often get brutal.
I think Ricks a good person because he never does anything really evil and if you brutally murder someone for no reason and have complete se… morelf control at the time then your a bad person
So only emotional people are justified to murder others? Ok.
but if someone attacks you, tries to both rob and kill you as well as attempts to rape someone you care about and you get mad and brutally slaughter them, that doesn't make you a bad person
Killing someone to save yourself isnt bad, causing pain to satisfy your own selfish needs is bad and pretty sick.
Well yeah, if someone murders a innocent person with full control of themself then they did it in cold blood, if someone murders a guilty person out of uncontrollable rage then it is understanable, its why I forgave Kenny for trying to kill Jane, yeah I still shot Kenny but I forgave him, he just thought that someone murdered a baby that he loved and cared about in cold blood, Most people wouldn't be able to contain that anger either.
If he actually saw Jane killing the baby, then yes, losing control is understandable, but he didnt know what happened.
if you've ever been attacked, seen your own kid be kidnapped, see someone you care about about to get raped (this list goes on and on) you would likely know what its like to go into an uncontrollable rage, its what your body does in order for you to survive and protect others that you care about, its all instincts that take away your self control and the best way to satisfy those instincts are to often get brutal.
Seems like im missing these instincts then, or you are just trying to justify something by saying its out of your control.
So only emotional people are justified to murder others? Ok.
Well yeah, if someone murders a innocent person with full control of th… moreemself then they did it in cold blood, if someone murders a guilty person out of uncontrollable rage then it is understanable, its why I forgave Kenny for trying to kill Jane, yeah I still shot Kenny but I forgave him, he just thought that someone murdered a baby that he loved and cared about in cold blood, Most people wouldn't be able to contain that anger either.
Killing someone to save yourself isnt bad, causing pain to satisfy your own selfish needs is bad and pretty sick.
The person themself is not sick for doing that, our natural instincts are sick. if you've ever been attacked, seen your own kid be kidnapped, see someone you care about about to get raped (this list goes on and on) you would likely know what its like to go into an uncontrollable rage, its what your body does in order f… [view original content]
If he actually saw Jane killing the baby, then yes, losing control is understandable, but he didnt know what happened.
considering she had the baby, then didn't have it and Kenny went out looking, I think its safe to assume that she killed it, yeah she said it was an accident but Kenny thought Jane was a huge liar
Seems like im missing these instincts then, or you are just trying to justify something by saying its out of your control.
A lot of people have this instinct even if they dont know about it, I thought I had lots of control but then I was attacked and went crazy for a minute or so, even look at other animals, if you go near a bear cub and the mother sees you, she will tear you to shreds
Well yeah, if someone murders a innocent person with full control of themself then they did it in cold blood, if someone murders a guilty pe… morerson out of uncontrollable rage then it is understanable, its why I forgave Kenny for trying to kill Jane, yeah I still shot Kenny but I forgave him, he just thought that someone murdered a baby that he loved and cared about in cold blood, Most people wouldn't be able to contain that anger either.
If he actually saw Jane killing the baby, then yes, losing control is understandable, but he didnt know what happened.
if you've ever been attacked, seen your own kid be kidnapped, see someone you care about about to get raped (this list goes on and on) you would likely know what its like to go into an uncontrollable rage, its what your body does in order for you to survive and protect others that you care about, its all instincts that take away your self control and the best way to satisfy those i… [view original content]
considering she had the baby, then didn't have it and Kenny went out looking, I think its safe to assume that she killed it, yeah she said it was an accident but Kenny thought Jane was a huge liar
There no reason to assume anything and you especially dont try to murder someone based on assumption. If Kenny was actually rational and tried to talk with Jane, her plan would have failed, because Kenny would have shown signs of intelligence. But this of course isnt how Kenny works and he just jumps into conclusions and acts upon those assumptions.
A lot of people have this instinct even if they dont know about it, I thought I had lots of control but then I was attacked and went crazy for a minute or so, even look at other animals, if you go near a bear cub and the mother sees you, she will tear you to shreds
I've been in few fights and never had that. Sure, adrenaline will go flow through my veins, but i didnt stop thinking straight. People who lose control like you are most likely the ones murdering others in rage and calling it accident afterwards.
If he actually saw Jane killing the baby, then yes, losing control is understandable, but he didnt know what happened.
considering s… morehe had the baby, then didn't have it and Kenny went out looking, I think its safe to assume that she killed it, yeah she said it was an accident but Kenny thought Jane was a huge liar
Seems like im missing these instincts then, or you are just trying to justify something by saying its out of your control.
A lot of people have this instinct even if they dont know about it, I thought I had lots of control but then I was attacked and went crazy for a minute or so, even look at other animals, if you go near a bear cub and the mother sees you, she will tear you to shreds
considering she had the baby, then didn't have it and Kenny went out looking, I think its safe to assume that she killed it, yeah she said i… moret was an accident but Kenny thought Jane was a huge liar
There no reason to assume anything and you especially dont try to murder someone based on assumption. If Kenny was actually rational and tried to talk with Jane, her plan would have failed, because Kenny would have shown signs of intelligence. But this of course isnt how Kenny works and he just jumps into conclusions and acts upon those assumptions.
A lot of people have this instinct even if they dont know about it, I thought I had lots of control but then I was attacked and went crazy for a minute or so, even look at other animals, if you go near a bear cub and the mother sees you, she will tear you to shreds
I've been in few fights and never had that. Sure, adrenaline will go flow through my veins, but i didnt stop thinking s… [view original content]
People who lose control like you are most likely the ones murdering others in rage and calling it accident afterwards.
If you understood what its like you would understand it doesn't make you a bad person.
People who lose control like you are most likely the ones murdering others in rage and calling it accident afterwards.
If you understood what its like you would understand it doesn't make you a bad person.
Im sure thats what every man who murdered their wife in anger thinks. I suppose we shouldnt blame drunk people for driving over kids either, since it was out of their control? Not blame pedophiles, because they have urges and cant help themselves.
There's a difference between stabbing a rapist/murderer/thief in the apocalypse and slaughtering your spouse because you were mad at her. If you're going to be drinking then simply don't drive, its your fault if you do, its completely fine to be thirty years old or so and have a sexual attraction to children, however its wrong to act on those urges and try to rape children. For some reason you don't understand that im talking about slaughtering rapists/murderers/thieves in the post apocalypse, you seem to think im saying its acceptable to murder people for small issues.
Im sure thats what every man who murdered their wife in anger thinks. I suppose we shouldnt blame drunk people for driving over kids either, since it was out of their control? Not blame pedophiles, because they have urges and cant help themselves.
You happen to stumble upon a basement, inside lie many rotting corpses. The smell is thick and horrible, you peer into the room to see a young child (we'll say ten or eleven) chopping a body up on an operation table. There is evidence of necrophilia, canniablism, and rape. Some victims are half eaten but alive in dog cages. The boy finally looks up to see you standing in the doorway, he notices the glock your holding and throws his blade aside. He drops to his knees and begs for mercy. You notice the person he was cutting up was a close friend of yours. What do you do? He may not have been the one to commit all the henious crimes, but he was definitely a knowing and willing contestent to the sick shit.
Show valor by giving him mercy in exchange for information, a swift death, or a taste of his own sick medicine? Personally, I'd chop him up peice by peice.
I'm sure most people who murder their wives in rage, if they return to a sound state of mind, regret it. Lee wasn't a bad person, he couldn't control himself. There is a difference between voluntarily consuming alcohol and driving than being uncontrollably put into a position where you lose yourself. Perhaps we shouldn't blame pedophiles. It is a proven problem with the psyche after all. But that doesn't negate the fact that they can't be free to roam among the populace. They may not be bad people, they just can't adhere to laws/rules set for them by the majority of the population. Lee was on his way to prison for not being able to adhere to the law. Most "good" people who preform acts marked as severely bad don't get a second chance. Doesn't make them bad people.
Im sure thats what every man who murdered their wife in anger thinks. I suppose we shouldnt blame drunk people for driving over kids either, since it was out of their control? Not blame pedophiles, because they have urges and cant help themselves.
No, you are here justifying brutal murders of others because "i was angry". You would be no better than the bandits you are torturing. Its wrong to brutally murder others because you are angry, just as its wrong to rape children and blame it on uncontrollable urges.
There's a difference between stabbing a rapist/murderer/thief in the apocalypse and slaughtering your spouse because you were mad at her. If… more you're going to be drinking then simply don't drive, its your fault if you do, its completely fine to be thirty years old or so and have a sexual attraction to children, however its wrong to act on those urges and try to rape children. For some reason you don't understand that im talking about slaughtering rapists/murderers/thieves in the post apocalypse, you seem to think im saying its acceptable to murder people for small issues.
There is a difference between voluntarily consuming alcohol and driving than being uncontrollably put into a position where you lose yourself
Alcoholism? I live in Finland, this country is full of people who are addicted to alcohol and my father is huge drinker, so dont tell that people voluntarily drink.
Most "good" people who preform acts marked as severely bad don't get a second chance. Doesn't make them bad people.
I'm sure most people who murder their wives in rage, if they return to a sound state of mind, regret it. Lee wasn't a bad person, he couldn'… moret control himself. There is a difference between voluntarily consuming alcohol and driving than being uncontrollably put into a position where you lose yourself. Perhaps we shouldn't blame pedophiles. It is a proven problem with the psyche after all. But that doesn't negate the fact that they can't be free to roam among the populace. They may not be bad people, they just can't adhere to laws/rules set for them by the majority of the population. Lee was on his way to prison for not being able to adhere to the law. Most "good" people who preform acts marked as severely bad don't get a second chance. Doesn't make them bad people.
Alcoholism? I live in Finland, this country is full of people who are addicted to alcohol and my father is huge drinker, so dont tell that people voluntarily drink.
And that covers half of the situation. If they know they are going to drink then they shouldn't be driving. This is common sense. Call a taxi, hide the keys, don't get in your car. But I can tell you they voluntarily drink. The definition of involuntary is done without will or conscious control, before drinking both of these are present.
There is a difference between voluntarily consuming alcohol and driving than being uncontrollably put into a position where you lose yoursel… moref
Alcoholism? I live in Finland, this country is full of people who are addicted to alcohol and my father is huge drinker, so dont tell that people voluntarily drink.
Most "good" people who preform acts marked as severely bad don't get a second chance. Doesn't make them bad people.
They still dont fit the society.
And that covers half of the situation. If they know they are going to drink then they shouldn't be driving. This is common sense. Call a taxi, hide the keys, don't get in your car. But I can tell you they voluntarily drink. The definition of involuntary is done without will or conscious control, before drinking both of these are present.
Dont you have any close ones who is an alcoholic? Its addiction just as any other and they cant help it.
I... said that......
Give me a break. Its 6 am. Been up for over 30 hours.
Alcoholism? I live in Finland, this country is full of people who are addicted to alcohol and my father is huge drinker, so dont tell that p… moreeople voluntarily drink.
And that covers half of the situation. If they know they are going to drink then they shouldn't be driving. This is common sense. Call a taxi, hide the keys, don't get in your car. But I can tell you they voluntarily drink. The definition of involuntary is done without will or conscious control, before drinking both of these are present.
They still dont fit the society.
I... said that......
And that covers half of the situation. If they know they are going to drink then they shouldn't be driving. This is common sense. Call a tax… morei, hide the keys, don't get in your car. But I can tell you they voluntarily drink. The definition of involuntary is done without will or conscious control, before drinking both of these are present.
Dont you have any close ones who is an alcoholic? Its addiction just as any other and they cant help it.
I... said that......
Give me a break. Its 6 am. Been up for over 30 hours.
No, you are here justifying brutal murders of others because "i was angry". You would be no better than the bandits you are torturing. Its w… morerong to brutally murder others because you are angry, just as its wrong to rape children and blame it on uncontrollable urges.
Dont you have any close ones who is an alcoholic? Its addiction just as any other and they cant help it.
Yes. He chooses to pick up … morethat drink every time. Addiction is a term for the weak of mind. I would know.
EDIT: But this is getting off topic. I have the definition of the word on my side, therefore I can use it in aforementioned context.
Give me a break. Its 6 am. Been up for over 30 hours.
Then go to sleep and stop being so rude to the other forum users.
Yes. He chooses to pick up that drink every time. Addiction is a term for the weak of mind. I would know.
Yes, those damn weak addic… morets, so weak in mind. Its not like these things cause physical dependence.
Then go to sleep and stop being so rude to the other forum users.
But daaaaddd... I dont want to sleep
Yes they are. Physical dependency can be overcome if the addict truly wants to quit and isn't.. well... weak of mind.
Its not as easy as you say and i just gave the examples, you're the one that took this conversation off-topic.
Most definitely don't share your genes. But, some friendly advice, I think some sleep would do you well.
I take that as an insult but wont report you. And yes, i will most definitely not try to make anyone pergnant in any point of my life, so dont you worry about that. I will get more than enough sleep once i die.
Its not as easy as you say and i just gave the examples, you're the one that took this conversation off-topic.
Not really. I did take it off subject, then immediately put it back on track. "Yes. He chooses to pick up that drink every time. Addiction is a term for the weak of mind. I would know. EDIT: But this is getting off topic. I have the definition of the word on my side, therefore I can use it in aforementioned context."
I take that as an insult but wont report you.
It simple logic. We don't share the same genes, so calling my "daaaadd" was derogatory. So there's that.
And yes, i will most definitely not try to make anyone pergnant in any point of my life, so dont you worry about that.
Lol, wait what?
I will get more than enough sleep once i die.
You don't sleep when you die. You just die. Sleep will do you good now, not after you no longer exist.
Yes they are. Physical dependency can be overcome if the addict truly wants to quit and isn't.. well... weak of mind.
Its not as eas… morey as you say and i just gave the examples, you're the one that took this conversation off-topic.
Most definitely don't share your genes. But, some friendly advice, I think some sleep would do you well.
I take that as an insult but wont report you. And yes, i will most definitely not try to make anyone pergnant in any point of my life, so dont you worry about that. I will get more than enough sleep once i die.
Its not as easy as you say and i just gave the examples, you're the one that took this conversation off-topic.
Not really. I did tak… moree it off subject, then immediately put it back on track. "Yes. He chooses to pick up that drink every time. Addiction is a term for the weak of mind. I would know. EDIT: But this is getting off topic. I have the definition of the word on my side, therefore I can use it in aforementioned context."
I take that as an insult but wont report you.
It simple logic. We don't share the same genes, so calling my "daaaadd" was derogatory. So there's that.
And yes, i will most definitely not try to make anyone pergnant in any point of my life, so dont you worry about that.
Lol, wait what?
I will get more than enough sleep once i die.
You don't sleep when you die. You just die. Sleep will do you good now, not after you no longer exist.
It should be sad but there is a sense of bliss when conceptualizing the nothingness that follows life. No more fears or needing, no more hunger or hate, no more sadness or anger. Just, nothing. I plan to fully enjoy my life while I'm here. Do the things others don't dare dream. But when my time comes, I'll have no quarrels with letting go.
Most definitely don't share your genes.
I thought you meant "do not get offspring" by that.
You don't sleep when you die. You … morejust die. Sleep will do you good now, not after you no longer exist.
You know what i meant. Its peaceful emptiness, just like before i was born. If there is an afterlife for some reason, im going be rather annoyed.
It should be sad but there is a sense of bliss when conceptualizing the nothingness that follows life. No more fears or needing, no more hun… moreger or hate, no more sadness or anger. Just, nothing. I plan to fully enjoy my life while I'm here. Do the things others don't dare dream. But when my time comes, I'll have no quarrels with letting go.
Well, first I would demand to know what the fuck happened there. Who is he, what his relationship to the group that was there was, where they are now, etc. Then I'll probably shoot him, then euthanize any of the remaining victims who are maimed beyond help. Torturing a disturbed child isn't going to help anything except and I'd want to leave that place as soon as I could.
I'd like to set up a scenirio.
You happen to stumble upon a basement, inside lie many rotting corpses. The smell is thick and horrible, y… moreou peer into the room to see a young child (we'll say ten or eleven) chopping a body up on an operation table. There is evidence of necrophilia, canniablism, and rape. Some victims are half eaten but alive in dog cages. The boy finally looks up to see you standing in the doorway, he notices the glock your holding and throws his blade aside. He drops to his knees and begs for mercy. You notice the person he was cutting up was a close friend of yours. What do you do? He may not have been the one to commit all the henious crimes, but he was definitely a knowing and willing contestent to the sick shit.
Show valor by giving him mercy in exchange for information, a swift death, or a taste of his own sick medicine? Personally, I'd chop him up peice by peice.
Comments
Well you interrogate them of course, or you could be lazy and kill them.
Now isn't that pretty much what I started with?
Im not saying that its the right way, but its one option. My point still stands. No point to kill them if they pose no threat to you. Op was talking about killing them simply for being what they are, even if they didnt cause any actual harm to you, but you know what they are. His logic is "they are bandits, they deserve to die/suffer" while my reasoning is "if they pose no threat to you, leave them be"
Are you assholes?
Clem- I'M not an asshole
Your point isn't applicable. Yes, it's true, but you don't know if they pose a threat. You know they may pose a threat.
I understand your point about letting them live, but I also understand the OP's point. They do bad things, it's just as understandable to kill them and let others who they could come across have more chance to survive as it is to let the bandits themselves live and have more chance to survive. More so since after whatever happened between the bandits and the user (you, OP, me, etc) would no doubt put you in an emotionally darker place than just meeting them.
In the end I wouldn't do either of your proposed ideas, I would do as I said I would do. (Likely)
op is killing for wrong reasons imo and torture is never good thing, which he seems quite fond of.
I would count on them not being complete idiots and not try to track me down after i show them kindness by sparing their lives. Who knows, maybe they might even change for better and stop being pricks. If you want to change things, someone has to start it first. Sounds rather stupid, but i would prefer if people didnt unnecessarily kill others.
My guess is he had implied they had attacked him, so I guess it depends on your view of the right reasons. I can stand beside someone who kills for avengement if it is deserving. I can even stand beside someone who tortures for such things as rape. Does that make me a bad person? I don't think so. But it's who I am. I'm mostly rational and logical, but there are things which I find unforgivable. If they attacked and killed someone I loved, or if I knew they had raped anyone, or something of the caliber then yes, I would probably kill them off the bat.
I wouldn't count on anyone but myself and the ones I trust. I don't trust bandits who (presumably) came at me. They might change, but chances are they wouldn't. You can change things for the better by killing them and allowing other groups, who can potentially be good/better people, to live on in their absence. It goes both ways. By letting them live you may do good, by killing them you may do good and you may keep them from killing/hurting/stealing from you. Law of interconnectivity. Whether you do or do not do, you change things. Whether they be for better or worse, you wouldn't know either way. I prefer people didn't kill unnecessarily also, but what signifies necessity in this situation? The chance they may come back to kill you, the chance if you kill them others may live, the chance they may change for the better?
Anyways.
It does.
That is rather hilarious statement. "kill all the evil ones so good ones can live". Sure, you might think the world is better place if you kill all the "evil" ones who dont have a place in your world, but after that, you would just be one of them. You might remember certain person who thought this way and caused bunch of people to die.
Its up to your own judgement, if they are a threat or not i suppose.
Perhaps. But you can hardly be the one to label me as such. That's "rather hilarious."
It's not really hilarious, and I never said I would kill them all. I'm saying your argument that they could change is not only flawed, but intrinsically as likely to cause the opposing (Law of Interconnectivity again). Besides, killing evil doesn't make you evil. But I'm not here to argue a moral dilemma, God knows that's the last thing I want with you.
Exactly.
Well yeah, if someone murders a innocent person with full control of themself then they did it in cold blood, if someone murders a guilty person out of uncontrollable rage then it is understanable, its why I forgave Kenny for trying to kill Jane, yeah I still shot Kenny but I forgave him, he just thought that someone murdered a baby that he loved and cared about in cold blood, Most people wouldn't be able to contain that anger either.
The person themself is not sick for doing that, our natural instincts are sick. if you've ever been attacked, seen your own kid be kidnapped, see someone you care about about to get raped (this list goes on and on) you would likely know what its like to go into an uncontrollable rage, its what your body does in order for you to survive and protect others that you care about, its all instincts that take away your self control and the best way to satisfy those instincts are to often get brutal.
If he actually saw Jane killing the baby, then yes, losing control is understandable, but he didnt know what happened.
Seems like im missing these instincts then, or you are just trying to justify something by saying its out of your control.
considering she had the baby, then didn't have it and Kenny went out looking, I think its safe to assume that she killed it, yeah she said it was an accident but Kenny thought Jane was a huge liar
A lot of people have this instinct even if they dont know about it, I thought I had lots of control but then I was attacked and went crazy for a minute or so, even look at other animals, if you go near a bear cub and the mother sees you, she will tear you to shreds
There no reason to assume anything and you especially dont try to murder someone based on assumption. If Kenny was actually rational and tried to talk with Jane, her plan would have failed, because Kenny would have shown signs of intelligence. But this of course isnt how Kenny works and he just jumps into conclusions and acts upon those assumptions.
I've been in few fights and never had that. Sure, adrenaline will go flow through my veins, but i didnt stop thinking straight. People who lose control like you are most likely the ones murdering others in rage and calling it accident afterwards.
If you understood what its like you would understand it doesn't make you a bad person.
Just keep lying to yourself then. I dont care.
Say whatever you want, I know that I'm not a bad guy
I've had it happen as well. I just call it a blood rage.
Im sure thats what every man who murdered their wife in anger thinks. I suppose we shouldnt blame drunk people for driving over kids either, since it was out of their control? Not blame pedophiles, because they have urges and cant help themselves.
There's a difference between stabbing a rapist/murderer/thief in the apocalypse and slaughtering your spouse because you were mad at her. If you're going to be drinking then simply don't drive, its your fault if you do, its completely fine to be thirty years old or so and have a sexual attraction to children, however its wrong to act on those urges and try to rape children. For some reason you don't understand that im talking about slaughtering rapists/murderers/thieves in the post apocalypse, you seem to think im saying its acceptable to murder people for small issues.
I'd like to set up a scenirio.
You happen to stumble upon a basement, inside lie many rotting corpses. The smell is thick and horrible, you peer into the room to see a young child (we'll say ten or eleven) chopping a body up on an operation table. There is evidence of necrophilia, canniablism, and rape. Some victims are half eaten but alive in dog cages. The boy finally looks up to see you standing in the doorway, he notices the glock your holding and throws his blade aside. He drops to his knees and begs for mercy. You notice the person he was cutting up was a close friend of yours. What do you do? He may not have been the one to commit all the henious crimes, but he was definitely a knowing and willing contestent to the sick shit.
Show valor by giving him mercy in exchange for information, a swift death, or a taste of his own sick medicine? Personally, I'd chop him up peice by peice.
I'm sure most people who murder their wives in rage, if they return to a sound state of mind, regret it. Lee wasn't a bad person, he couldn't control himself. There is a difference between voluntarily consuming alcohol and driving than being uncontrollably put into a position where you lose yourself. Perhaps we shouldn't blame pedophiles. It is a proven problem with the psyche after all. But that doesn't negate the fact that they can't be free to roam among the populace. They may not be bad people, they just can't adhere to laws/rules set for them by the majority of the population. Lee was on his way to prison for not being able to adhere to the law. Most "good" people who preform acts marked as severely bad don't get a second chance. Doesn't make them bad people.
No, you are here justifying brutal murders of others because "i was angry". You would be no better than the bandits you are torturing. Its wrong to brutally murder others because you are angry, just as its wrong to rape children and blame it on uncontrollable urges.
Alcoholism? I live in Finland, this country is full of people who are addicted to alcohol and my father is huge drinker, so dont tell that people voluntarily drink.
They still dont fit the society.
And that covers half of the situation. If they know they are going to drink then they shouldn't be driving. This is common sense. Call a taxi, hide the keys, don't get in your car. But I can tell you they voluntarily drink. The definition of involuntary is done without will or conscious control, before drinking both of these are present.
I... said that......
Dont you have any close ones who is an alcoholic? Its addiction just as any other and they cant help it.
Give me a break. Its 6 am. Been up for over 30 hours.
Yes. He chooses to pick up that drink every time. Addiction is a term for the weak of mind. I would know.
EDIT: But this is getting off topic. I have the definition of the word on my side, therefore I can use it in aforementioned context.
Then go to sleep and stop being so rude to the other forum users.
Well clearly you lack emotion if you wouldn't get uncontrollably pissed if someone who meant the world to you was about to be raped before your eyes
Yes, those damn weak addicts, so weak in mind. Its not like these things cause physical dependence.
But daaaaddd... I dont want to sleep
Cybernet.....
[removed]
Of course i would be angry, but thats about it.
Its not as easy as you say and i just gave the examples, you're the one that took this conversation off-topic.
I take that as an insult but wont report you. And yes, i will most definitely not try to make anyone pergnant in any point of my life, so dont you worry about that. I will get more than enough sleep once i die.
Not really. I did take it off subject, then immediately put it back on track. "Yes. He chooses to pick up that drink every time. Addiction is a term for the weak of mind. I would know. EDIT: But this is getting off topic. I have the definition of the word on my side, therefore I can use it in aforementioned context."
It simple logic. We don't share the same genes, so calling my "daaaadd" was derogatory. So there's that.
Lol, wait what?
You don't sleep when you die. You just die. Sleep will do you good now, not after you no longer exist.
I thought you meant "do not get offspring" by that.
You know what i meant. Its peaceful emptiness, just like before i was born. If there is an afterlife for some reason, im going be rather annoyed.
Kill them.
It should be sad but there is a sense of bliss when conceptualizing the nothingness that follows life. No more fears or needing, no more hunger or hate, no more sadness or anger. Just, nothing. I plan to fully enjoy my life while I'm here. Do the things others don't dare dream. But when my time comes, I'll have no quarrels with letting go.
Same here, but i just hope im the one ending my life and not some accident or disease.
Myself would be my least preferable way to go. I want to die doing something crazy
Best way to go imo would be by falling from high altitude. Such lovely adrenaline rush before dying.
Well, first I would demand to know what the fuck happened there. Who is he, what his relationship to the group that was there was, where they are now, etc. Then I'll probably shoot him, then euthanize any of the remaining victims who are maimed beyond help. Torturing a disturbed child isn't going to help anything except and I'd want to leave that place as soon as I could.