Is "murder" justified when victim is completely evil?

[Shadowferal]

I'm not sure how you managed to get "holocaust denying" out of that.

The evil of the Holocaust isn't a matter of perspective...it is what it is.

Nazi Germany was...frightening. The re-education and conditioning of children was a part of the horror. There isn't any subjectivity here. It was a matter of evil, period.

[Akka]

No man on earth, however heartless and cruel they may be, can be said to be evil, for there is no such thing as absolute evil.

You should read less childish and pompous rosy fiction and look more at the real world. Evil certainly does exist and plenty of people are exactly it.
So many people in this thread sounds like mindless drone repeating the typical hero movie mantra...

[Arikara]

My basis for that statement is psychology, not fiction.

Perhaps you ought provide an argument of your own rather than merely pointing at what is happening in the world and saying 'this is evil'. I look at that every day, and my conclusion is different from yours.

[skannerz22]

No. "Murder" is never justified in my opinion.--And you are asking for our opinion, right, and not about the legal situation in various countries?
(Note that not all cases of homicide are "murder".)

someone is going to kill you then kill your 1 year old baby after you're dead

what would you do????????????????

[Deleted]

Depends on you believing the death sentence to be a good thing or not.
Do you believe people can be "fixed"?

You should read less childish and pompous rosy fiction and look more at the real world. Evil certainly does exist and plenty of people are exactly it.
So many people in this thread sounds like mindless drone repeating the typical hero movie mantra...

I think you got it wrong.
Almost noone does things we perceive as evil to be evil.
For example Hitler didn't think killing Jews was evil, he thought that killing them was doing the world a favor, it was actually a good thing for him.

someone is going to kill you then kill your 1 year old baby after you're dead

what would you do????????????????

Lie on the ground beeing dead?!
If you are asking before that; it's self defense and not murder.

[bloodmoth13]

Ok i think i have an answer

It may be the morally correct option to you at the time if the only option to stop evil is to commit an evil act, the purpose of your evil act is to prevent evil and it is the only way known to you at that time to stop it AND the person, as far as you know, is completely unrepentant and has only evil characteristics

But it is not universally justified to ever commit evil. If you are too weak to prevent evil, or too emotionally unstable to prevent it safely, then those are flaws you should overcome.

So perhaps evil can never be truly justified morally, but it can be accepted that it was the right action for a specific person with limited knowledge at a specific time under specific circumstances.

This does not absolve that person of punishment for their crime, but the punishment could be lessened by understanding the situation the person was in and the intent of their actions.

While the action was justified for that person, they acted without having full knowledge of the situation and acted under the assumption that the person was completely beyond saving, which they may very well have been right on, but if i kill a random person who turns out to be an unrepentant evil sonofabitch, i am still guilty of first degree murder as that knowledge wasnt known to me and my motivations were not to prevent anything but rather just purely out of malicious intent.

As little as i value the lives of some criminals, i must respect that one set of laws should apply to all, if i make exceptions for one person to commit evil because its justified to them, then i must make that same exception for all or else i engage in double standards. For instance one gang member may assume and truly believe that everyone from his rival gang is evil beyond redemption and sets out to kill them, it is just as justified in his head as the aforementioned person, and the people he kills may very well be just as evil, but that person lacks any effort in trying to understand the people he hates, if he did he would understand that they are probably the same as him, violent and vengeful and making exceptions to hurt and maim other people based on their dehumanised view of that person built on ignorance and hatred.

Evil actions are the result of ignorance, if we truly understood the motivations of all others we could correct them on their mistaken beliefs and cause them to turn to a more righteous path. Truth is universal, and if someone is wrong then it should be proven wrong to them.

[Akka]

My basis for that statement is psychology, not fiction.

"evil" is not about psychology, it's about morality.

I think you got it wrong.
Almost noone does things we perceive as evil to be evil.
For example Hitler didn't think killing Jews was evil, he thought that killing them was doing the world a favor, it was actually a good thing for him.

Your definition of "evil" is straight from a bad cartoon book it seems. Obviously few people think "hey, I'm gonna be evil today, because being evil is so fun !". Many people, on the other hand, think "hey, this thing benefit me, so I'll do it, and don't give a shit about how others might be negatively impacted by it". There is also a number of people who actually enjoy inflicting pain/distress/whatever (though they can still have a proper morality and refrain from doing it).
Someone murdering a family to grab their money through greed doesn't do it "for the evulz". He does it because he gains from it and don't care for others. It's still being evil and it's still something pretty common in the world.

- - - Updated - - -

Evil actions are the result of ignorance, if we truly understood the motivations of all others we could correct them on their mistaken beliefs and cause them to turn to a more righteous path. Truth is universal, and if someone is wrong then it should be proven wrong to them.

No it's not. Evil actions are the result of people putting themselves disproportionally above others. You don't need some sob stories or being mentally ill or some convoluted ignorance situation for that (though obviously, such situations do also happen). You just need to be criminally self-centered.

[Deleted]

I doubt justice exists as general term. But in the common used terms where morality and taboo are defined by social collectives anything goes and will look rational. Even the holocaust can be justified by this definition as "rational" or "just". It's wrong to ask others, like religion or any kind of artificial institution what justice is - if you go by this you are easily swayed and just a tool within a closed space. Some philosophers demanded a "moral fantasy" developed by yourself because humanity by their species and consciousnesses is completely lost on their own due to the mere possibility to think about it. We cannot even fathom nature anymore, nor some original law that a natural being follows - hence we mirror our justice by looking at others, socializing yourself into artificial systems with artificial laws and definitions. Some basic anthropology.

[Acidbaron]

As long it's called the Justice system and not the revenge system, it won't ever be justifiable since it makes the person who performs the act and those who demand it to be of the same wrong mindset as the person they intend to kill.

[Deleted]

Your definition of "evil" is straight from a bad cartoon book it seems. Obviously few people think "hey, I'm gonna be evil today, because being evil is so fun !". Many people, on the other hand, think "hey, this thing benefit me, so I'll do it, and don't give a shit about how others might be negatively impacted by it". There is also a number of people who actually enjoy inflicting pain/distress/whatever (though they can still have a proper morality and refrain from doing it).
Someone murdering a family to grab their money through greed doesn't do it "for the evulz". He does it because he gains from it and don't care for others. It's still being evil and it's still something pretty common in the world.

Your first sentence sounds like you are disagreeing with me but the rest really doesn't.

However, evil still is a relative term.
The US Army looks evil from the perspective of those that end up as collateral damage but are heroes to others.

[Shadowferal]

My basis for that statement is psychology, not fiction.

Perhaps you ought provide an argument of your own rather than merely pointing at what is happening in the world and saying 'this is evil'. I look at that every day, and my conclusion is different from yours.

The Holocaust wasn't fiction.
And if you think in some small fantasy that it was neither evil or never needed to be fought because "psychology" or "perspective" then you should examine your own morality or lack thereof.

[Yattz]

Was watching a television show about this whole pay evil unto evil deal. It's only labelled murder because killing someone like this would fall under it, but what if the victim is complete, unrepentant, unadulterated evil? Think Mexican drug lords, rapists, and worst of all, animal abusers. Like, I recall that incident where a poor boy was RAPED by his martial arts teacher and his normal father schemed an assassination on the guy and eventually succeeded! And you know what? Despite being caught on the spot, no one mourned the rapist but lament why the dad would do such a thing. Why? Because in my opinion, the evil motherfucker had to die and that's what he said word for word in a more somber tone.

Its very justified imo as i hate all of those types of criminals. I think simple thieves should die. No1 should be allowed to prey on others!
Kill ALL criminals - Kill them all! (Imo)

[Deleted]

Was watching a television show about this whole pay evil unto evil deal. It's only labelled murder because killing someone like this would fall under it, but what if the victim is complete, unrepentant, unadulterated evil? Think Mexican drug lords, rapists, and worst of all, animal abusers. Like, I recall that incident where a poor boy was RAPED by his martial arts teacher and his normal father schemed an assassination on the guy and eventually succeeded! And you know what? Despite being caught on the spot, no one mourned the rapist but lament why the dad would do such a thing. Why? Because in my opinion, the evil motherfucker had to die and that's what he said word for word in a more somber tone.

It is surely justified in self-defense or in defense of your family or such. It's also justified in special cases like the Hitler assassination attempt (though, it was anyway too late, too much damage was done already). But it is surely not justified as a method of prevention. You must not punish someone for things he or she has not done (yet). To prevent crimes you are expecting, you have to be vigilant, install guards or such things. You could possibly try to get the person imprisoned, if the evidence is strong enough that a crime will happen. But killing someone is just too harsh.

- - - Updated - - -

Its very justified imo as i hate all of those types of criminals. I think simple thieves should die. No1 should be allowed to prey on others!
Kill ALL criminals - Kill them all! (Imo)

Punishment must fit the crime. For stealing, this would be a monetary punishment. What if I call you a criminal because you are so bloodthirsty, so you have to be killed as well?

[hellinter201]

I only think it is justifiable when the target did something directly/indirectly agaisnt you. I think that people that feel they should kill other people who did absolutely nothing agaisnt them are simply another bunch of murderers.

Also, animal abusers are worse than rapists and drug traffickers? Wow, really, I'm pretty sure you are part of the bunch that thinks that rape is worse than murder, too.

[Akka]

Your first sentence sounds like you are disagreeing with me but the rest really doesn't.

However, evil still is a relative term.

It's only very, very loosely relative. Obviously the details are pretty different depending on the culture, but basically any kind of morality can be more or less traced back to the Golden Rule.

And yes I disagree with you, because you claim "nobody is evil", which is factually and blatantly false. It's not because people don't do thing "to be evil" that they don't do evils things and aren't evil. Evil is just the propension to put yourself disproportionnally above others, and plenty of people do just that.

[bloodmoth13]

No it's not. Evil actions are the result of people putting themselves disproportionally above others. You don't need some sob stories or being mentally ill or some convoluted ignorance situation for that (though obviously, such situations do also happen). You just need to be criminally self-centered.

that doesnt disprove what i said because they could both be the case

Psychopaths will believe that they are above others, that will be what they truly believe, but they are not above others, therefore their belief that they are above others is based in ignorance, so ignorance is the root of that evil.

being criminally self centered will generally be a result of ignorance

[Total Crica]

if no one thought it was justified, no one would ever go to war, so yes, alot of people think it is justified to kill evil people

[Tempguy]

You know. One could make the argument that being gay is evil if they see it as against God.

...

Just sayin.

- - - Updated - - -

if no one thought it was justified, no one would ever go to war, so yes, alot of people think it is justified to kill evil people

I think most wars were not fought over ideals, but instead over resources.

[Shadowferal]

I think most wars were not fought over ideals, but instead over resources.

WWII...some things should never be tolerated.

[Xar226]

Assuming you mean yourself, outside of a justice system, I would say that "justified" is a loaded term, but my answer is no. The only justification to kill somebody is because they're going to kill or seriously harm you or somebody else.

Even if you could contrive some situation where killing the person extrajudicially was in the interests of justice, so too would it be justice to punish you for having done so.