Is "murder" justified when victim is completely evil?

[zorkuus]

Yes!
Corrupt/Murderers/Rapers/Thieves... you name it... need to be made an example off.

They are not fit to live in society with the rest of us folks. Their actions speak for themselves.

PS: All this talk of superheroes and dismissing their arguments because fiction, etc.. are the ones with lack of contact with people.

We need a Punisher type amongst us!

Sooner or later a vigilante will kill an innocent person. Probably sooner.

[Guyv3r]

Sooner or later a vigilante will kill an innocent person. Probably sooner.

I understand your reasoning but...

Sooner or later, our beloved justice system will not work. Probably sooner. oh wait.. it already has!

[Deleted]

I think that people, who are too sick to return to normal or are just born as complete psychopaths, should get the death penalty.
People like Jeffrey Dahmer, John Wayne Gacey and Ted Bundy would never be rehabilitated enough to actually live in a society without being a danger to others. Keeping people like those in prison is only a waste of money and resources which could be spend elsewhere.
Everyone can kill, but it is only a rare few whose lives resolve around killing, people who crave for blood or cannot control the impulse to hurt or kill someone. Those are the people that we need to remove permanently. If you think that such people can have some good inside them or come back from the things they've done, or just have any wish themselves to get back from such atrocities, you're blind and lying to yourself.

[zorkuus]

I understand your reasoning but...

Sooner or later, our beloved justice system will not work. Probably sooner. oh wait.. it already has!

With all of its faults the justice system still has more recources to catch the right people than a random individual does.

[Guyv3r]

With all of its faults the justice system still has more recources to catch the right people than a random individual does.

Maybe... if the system is not itself corrupt. As it stands, the more money/friends you have, the more Untouchable you are.

No system is perfect, but i think people don't take the current punishment seriously.
IMHO, we need a better method of getting rid of these people while serving as an example to the rest of our society on how to behave if we are to foward ourselves as a species.

[Yattz]

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 - - -



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?

Lol - u as a person is of no importance > You are free to call me whatever you want - If my COUNTRY deems my desires as a crime then fine, if it doesnt as most places, then im FREE to be as bloodthirsty to disgusting criminals as I want.
So basically what im saying is that as long as ppl are committing acts identified as crimes by any democratic government then they should die - killing, stealing, selling drugs, doing drugs, etc. Criminals are disgusting in any form or fashion imo - im not biased, i do not believe a killer should die while a thief lives - Kill them all!

This will never be i know but its my answer for what the OP asked so.... My opinion is my own..

[Lime]

Sooner or later a vigilante will kill an innocent person. Probably sooner.

This happens all the time in Town of Salem. That game is the shining example of why Vigilantes are illegal.

[Logwyn]

It would not be murder. Killing a rapist or murderer or somebody truly wicked would be justice.

Life is the greatest gift of them all. Some people deserve to have it taken away from them. Life in prison is such a weak concept.

Sometimes the worse punishment is letting the person live. If someone believes that after they die they get some paradise in the afterlife. Why would you rather "punish" them for sending them to their afterlife.. than having the stew for the rest of their life behind bars?

[Guyv3r]

Sometimes the worse punishment is letting the person live. If someone believes that after they die they get some paradise in the afterlife. Why would you rather "punish" them for sending them to their afterlife.. than having the stew for the rest of their life behind bars?

Because there is no such thing as an after life (that can be proven). So let's be practical and do what's best for the people that don't commit crimes.

[aevitas]

A child molestor should be a "feel free to kill" target at all times.

If I had a kid and saw someone touch it or do things with it that are inappropiate, I for sure would murder him with no regrets. People like that shouldn't be allowed to walk on this planet, let alone get protection by police like some do.

[kail]

Yes!
Corrupt/Murderers/Rapers/Thieves... you name it... need to be made an example off.

They are not fit to live in society with the rest of us folks. Their actions speak for themselves.

PS: All this talk of superheroes and dismissing their arguments because fiction, etc.. are the ones with lack of contact with people.

We need a Punisher type amongst us!

What does making an example of them do in the end? It doesn't prevent or reduce any further crimes if that's what you're thinking.

[Baracuda]

Sorry, but that's just from a guy who watches too much anime. Just based on principal, really. Nobody has the right to take another persons life, no matter what the circumstance maybe. Evil is not absolute, but death is. We can rehabilitate and correct a person, but we can't bring back the dead.

BTW, I'm Agnostic.

More absolute thinking? It's naive to believe you can change everyone.

[schwank05]

I'm an eye for an eye kind of guy. I say if someone rapes a child especially one under adulthood or age of consent, they should have the same punishment but in the case of child rape I say it should be unending until the end of their sentence. If you rape a child you should be raped in the same manner. Likewise if you kill a child you should be killed in the same manner.

[ItachiZaku]

There wouldn't be many politicians left. So, I'm kinda ok with it all.

[dragonvalor]

This seems like a playground question

[Vash The Stampede]

More absolute thinking? It's naive to believe you can change everyone.

Your thinking is limited. We invest too much in incarceration, especially in America. It doesn't work. Instead we should aim to rehabilitate and correct. By that I mean trying to remove memories. Enough that the person doesn't remember how to be bad anymore. Even going as far as removing the 'asshole gene' to get people to be more correct.

[bloodmoth13]

It's incredible how so many opinions on these threads feel like coming from guys who copy-pasted some superheros speech without having ever actually interacted with people...[/QUOTE]

Yeah because you just need to tell to a psychopath "hey man, in fact we are all equal, you are NOT above others !" and BLAM he's got an epiphany and stop being evil !

People arent ignorant because they havent been exposed to the truth, they are ignorant because they refuse to believe the truth.

Again this is the same childish, simplistic viewpoint that I've been lambasting. In the very post you answer to, in fact, which tend to show you didn't even bother to understand it.

You calling socrates childish and simplistic? Kid i think you are the one here who is simplistic and childi. Your post didnt prove shit, it was just an opinion, i didnt see any critical reasoning come from your post, it did nothing to support your argument, you were just talking shit.

First, as I explicitely said, you don't need to be a psychopath to be evil. You just need to don't give a fuck about others (and not even "everyone", you can still care for your loved ones but don't give a shit about shanking or ruining the life of some poor sod you don't know).
Plenty of regular people do just that.

You explicitly said no such thing, you just said you need to be criminally self centered, which fits in rather well with the definition of a psychopath, most psychopaths believe that they are superior to others. And regular people dont go kill others for shits and giggles, the prerequisites for a regular person to commit such an act are rather extreme, which is why i mentioned the 'sob stories' as you so delicately put it, because for a good person to commit such an extreme act, they must be in extreme circumstances.

- - - Updated - - -

More absolute thinking? It's naive to believe you can change everyone.

Its a noble goal though.

If someone is beyond saving thats on them, if we can learn ways to rehabilitate people, even if only through trial and error, then its worth looking into, if we could do that we could apply those principals to people who exhibit psychopathic tendencies.

Just because not everyone can be fixed, doesnt mean nobody should be.

[Deleted]

Okay let me settle this for everyone. What I will state is the objective truth. You won't hear an opinion but all that IS.

So lets break it down from the basic. In the cosmos/ nature/ universe/ whatever term you consider the cosmos, there is nothing called RIGHT or WRONG. We humans have created this perception, we could do this because of our brain "abilities"

To be more specific towards the question, nothing can objectively be named right or wrong. I state this considering the worst, which we consider murder. Murdering people or any alive creature is not right neither wrong.

Let's be even more specific. We humans as a species we have evovled to be relatevely wise. We have decided unanimously to create some rules. One of those rules is not to murder (humans, we can still murder other creaures).

The rule was not created because it's corrent or right. The rule and all other "major" rules were created so that humans have a better life experience. If you imagine an utopic society, you won't imagine people having the freedom to kill other people, but you will imagine people loving and not wanting to kill other people.

That is the ultimate arguement. Doesn't matter if murder is right or wrong. What matters is that anyone would prefer a murder free environment to live at

To answer OP's question I need to dumb it down alot, and answer in a "simple" way. If you can stop the evil without commiting murder, it's not justified. (but again justified is an idea created by humans....)

[Deleted]

Murder implies a heinous, unlawful killing.

Killing a completely evil 'victim' is in many places not only legal, but mandatory. So there you have your answer.

[Logwyn]

Because there is no such thing as an after life (that can be proven). So let's be practical and do what's best for the people that don't commit crimes.

There is or isn't its irrelevant still. What if that person wants to die? What if they seek joy in taking the eternal dirt nap. Its what they want. Why give them exactly what they want?