• Roll-up! Roll-up! Come one and all the fantastic Turning the World to Darkness painting competition. Welcome to any skill level, you can find out more here.
  • It's time once again to ferret out those murderous vampires in a new VAU - Vampires Amongst Us. A cross between Cluedo and a roleplay, sometimes gory and often hilarious! Find out more here.

DoN's Hypothetical Situations

Duke Danse Macabre

The Duke
True Blood
Joined
Sep 16, 2010
Messages
3,711
#51
Whereas I would agree with you on your interpretation of my view there Darvy I think that is where our thought train ends.

The rules of society are not for the betterment of everyone and you can exist outside these rules without issue for the most part because then you have the element of danger and retaliation and such action would invariably cause.
What I would argue is that if given good cause to carry out such an action you could do so which is not such a alien concept but is in fact the norm, what is different is the lack of looming punishment much like in the middle ages the threat of going to hell was sufficient to stop others from carrying out such actions.

We are animals and a poor excuse for one.
We are our own main predator, we cannot survive in a ecosystem but must continue to expand into larger areas to sustain ourselves and even in the face of starvation we continue to over populate.

Now where as you say I may be the minority in such views others do share them and allot more do than would normally admit it but many are simply scared of such thinking and concepts and lie to themselves and others about it.
I know when I think of such things that the view is mine and I have no misconceptions about it and am not deceiving myself or those around me.
 

Get of W'soran

CN's Lord of Masks
True Blood
Joined
Apr 23, 2008
Messages
9,239
#52
I'd likely lock myself up, gather friends and family if able and sit it out.

The world's filled with a lot of sick and damaged people who would completely be out to ruin lives in a situation like this.

For myself I don't particularly care if the Law/Society/Hypothetical world is saying it's alright to do what I want, the fact is that laws are in place because, for the most part, breaking them is going to cause harm to yourself or others (Can you imagine wanting to go WHOOSSHHH at 150+ MPH down the road when dozens of other people in the area have had the same idea).

That's not even addressing murder, anyone who would use the excuse that the Law would let them away with it for this one night to go and kill are simply sick and disturbed individuals. I'm not against Killing in Self-Defense but going out to kill for the lulz is bloody disgusting.
 

Duke Danse Macabre

The Duke
True Blood
Joined
Sep 16, 2010
Messages
3,711
#53
I understand where you are coming from but in a situatiuon if someone was going to pose a continued threat again myself, my well being or those I cared about I would have no problem in removing said person from the situation.

Its all a understanding of what you can do and what you can't do, the inner question of where do you draw the line?
Its going to be different for everyone but if it is an action with purpose and not for amusement.
Yes some would do it just for that very amusement but you have to think, they are just as much at risk as yourself and they unlike you are in the minority and are a threat of which you could remove.

Remember just because you can do something does not mean you would do something.
In york it is still legal shoot a Irishman with a crossbow from the battlements, does not mean you do it though you are allowed to do so.
 

Get of W'soran

CN's Lord of Masks
True Blood
Joined
Apr 23, 2008
Messages
9,239
#54
Duke Danse Macabre said:
I understand where you are coming from but in a situatiuon if someone was going to pose a continued threat again myself, my well being or those I cared about I would have no problem in removing said person from the situation.
I'm not arguing this and I don't think it fits into this hypothetical situation really, I mean if someone posed a threat to you or your loved one and you had little other options then law or no I wouldn't be able to blame you for looking out for yourself. (This is of course within certain constraints but broadly speaking.)

Its all a understanding of what you can do and what you can't do, the inner question of where do you draw the line?
Its going to be different for everyone but if it is an action with purpose and not for amusement.
Yes some would do it just for that very amusement but you have to think, they are just as much at risk as yourself and they unlike you are in the minority and are a threat of which you could remove.
Again I don't think this applies to the Question. Unless you mean being attacked on this magical night of no law by people killing for the lulz, in which case I say defend away with all the force you feel is reasonably necessary.

Remember just because you can do something does not mean you would do something.
In york it is still legal shoot a Irishman with a crossbow from the battlements, does not mean you do it though you are allowed to do so.
That was really my point. Whether the law is present or not does not give someone the right to go doing morally wrong actions. I'm not talking social norms I'm talking things that are just simply wrong.
Murder, assault, rape etc. it doesn't matter if you can freely get away with such things, they are wrong.

Aye silly old laws are silly and you wouldn't get away using them as a defence them in today courts, a lot of countries give courts the power to throw out old laws as they come up. It was in the papers quite a lot of a few years back in the UK. Had students at University going nuts to look into old laws for teh lulz.

Also Thank God those Yorkshire folks didn't realise that last time I visted their city :tongue:
 

Disciple of Nagash

The Perverted One
Staff member
Joined
Feb 12, 2008
Messages
27,908
#55
We did GoW - they had crossbows all ready but I managed to put in a good word for you xD

Yes I think there has been a slight misunderstanding. This is not would you fantasize about, or react to etc. It is literally, no laws, is there anything you would do.

If you honestly feel that you would go and murder a person who has been annoying it.....well that is what you feel :| We each have our own morales, so it depends what yours say are ok.

I would be very tempted to go to Aston Martin and nick a DB9.....:innocent:
 

Duke Danse Macabre

The Duke
True Blood
Joined
Sep 16, 2010
Messages
3,711
#56
I am writing this at work so I never have time to break it down into quotes so please excuse the fact it is always block text.

As i was saying though, if thery pse a threat you could act against them but what poses a threat is very often subjective.
If they are a drug dealer, or hang around outside school gates, or are they a burgler, did he assualt your wife, did he get you fired?
Its all subjective and you have to rationalize the level of your responce and any retaliation you may receive in return.

Justification would always apply, just because you can do something legally does not mean it is without risk.
Sodue to this you will have to take into account any other variables.

Once again, wrong is a concept, a subjective opinion impossed on a party by their envionment.
What is normal to the spider is chaos to the fly.

That may be so with old laws but if the action is carried out under a legal law, no matter how stupid, it is still in fact legal.
 

Count Darvaleth

I <3 marmite
True Blood
Joined
Apr 26, 2010
Messages
3,534
#59
Duke Danse Macabre said:
As i was saying though, if thery pse a threat you could act against them but what poses a threat is very often subjective.
If they are a drug dealer, or hang around outside school gates, or are they a burgler, did he assualt your wife, did he get you fired?
Its all subjective and you have to rationalize the level of your responce and any retaliation you may receive in return.
All of these are certainly worrying things, and I don't question that feeling threatened is subjective. But why should that mean you have to do something illegal to rectify it (even on lawless day)?

Once again, wrong is a concept, a subjective opinion impossed on a party by their envionment.
Wrong is subjective, but there is a great deal of consensus (at least within a particular society) over what is right and wrong. This is reflected in the laws of that society.

That may be so with old laws but if the action is carried out under a legal law, no matter how stupid, it is still in fact legal.
I don't know what form the law in question takes, but the courts aren't stupid. xD If you've abused something like that to kill somebody with a crossbow, you're not going to escape justice.
 

Corien Sumatris

Vampire Count
True Blood
Joined
Jul 3, 2013
Messages
1,536
#60
That may be so with old laws but if the action is carried out under a legal law, no matter how stupid, it is still in fact legal.
I don't know what form the law in question takes, but the courts aren't stupid. If you've abused something like that to kill somebody with a crossbow, you're not going to escape justice.
Well some laws are real dumb. There is indeed a law in Chicago, Illinois that you are not allowed to enter the city if you are ugly. Serious, It's there. Now who is to enforce this law? Who is to judge this law? It's a moot point that someone wrote because of 1 super specific situation that no longer means anything. I feel like the whole crossbow law established at 1 point (perhaps in a time of war or rebelion) and it just never got written out of the laws. Now if 2 laws contradict (No murder what-so-ever, and murder the irish with crossbows) which one takes precident? I would assume the whole no murder at all thing. You may not be breaking 1 law but you're breaking another.

Similar to the age of concent (which is 17 in Illinois) and rape. I have sex with a 17 year old right now and it isn't illegal, yet if it is against her will then it is illegal. This means that I completely obeyed 1 law while still breaking another.

If I have sex with a 5 year old and their okay with it I am now in the exact opposite situation. It is not rape (thus abiding by 1 law) yet it is pedophilia which is illegal. Meaning in both situations I am still going to jail for a very long time!


Also, complete side note: Not sure what it's like in other countries but if someone were to attempt to commit suicide is that attempted murder? In America yes. I personally think that if someone tries to end their own life then how about we don't add insult to injury because they are probably already pretty down on their luck. How about we instead try to help them! Weird thought, I know, Laws helping people? Oh well, just a thought.
 

Count Darvaleth

I <3 marmite
True Blood
Joined
Apr 26, 2010
Messages
3,534
#61
Here comes a law student! :clown: (Run for your lives! Darvy has no soul!)

Corien Sumatris said:
Well some laws are real dumb. There is indeed a law in Chicago, Illinois that you are not allowed to enter the city if you are ugly. Serious, It's there. Now who is to enforce this law? Who is to judge this law? It's a moot point that someone wrote because of 1 super specific situation that no longer means anything. I feel like the whole crossbow law established at 1 point (perhaps in a time of war or rebelion) and it just never got written out of the laws. Now if 2 laws contradict (No murder what-so-ever, and murder the irish with crossbows) which one takes precident? I would assume the whole no murder at all thing. You may not be breaking 1 law but you're breaking another.
If you had some old silly law and a statutory offence, then the court will read the old law as being implicitly repealed by the newer one. Murder isn't a statutory offence, but the court would have a way with dispensing proper justice in that case. I've not learned what exactly, but I know they can disapply the law if it is too conflicting with EU law (and there's probably an EU law out there saying no killing, maybe, possibly), but if worse comes to worse the court can always issue a declaration of incompatibility as per the Human Rights Act, so Parliament can sort it out (and there's definitely a right to life...!).

Similar to the age of concent (which is 17 in Illinois) and rape. I have sex with a 17 year old right now and it isn't illegal, yet if it is against her will then it is illegal. This means that I completely obeyed 1 law while still breaking another.
You've observed the law in that you've not had sex with somebody below the age of consent (which in itself isn't a law, it's just that people below that age can't give consent and therefore it's always rape), but that doesn't make the rape any less of a rape, just because you obeyed another law. I could drive very properly and well within the speed limit down a street, but still attach a spike to the front and deliberately ram the car in front so as to cause criminal damage. I've obeyed the speed limit (one law) but broken another... doesn't mean I get off the hook!

If I have sex with a 5 year old and their okay with it I am now in the exact opposite situation. It is not rape (thus abiding by 1 law) yet it is pedophilia which is illegal. Meaning in both situations I am still going to jail for a very long time!
That would still be rape as the 5 year old cannot give consent. No matter how okay they are with it, within the eyes of the law no consent has been given.



Also, complete side note: Not sure what it's like in other countries but if someone were to attempt to commit suicide is that attempted murder? In America yes. I personally think that if someone tries to end their own life then how about we don't add insult to injury because they are probably already pretty down on their luck. How about we instead try to help them! Weird thought, I know, Laws helping people? Oh well, just a thought.
Suicide used to be a crime, but this was changed in the UK. It used to be the case that it was considered self-murder, but the Suicide Act changed that. Complicity in another's suicide is a different matter, however (then you have euthanasia debates coming in to it).



... I just realised I haven't really contributed to the discussion, I've just embarked on a crusade of legal pedantry. What happened to me?! :|
 

Corien Sumatris

Vampire Count
True Blood
Joined
Jul 3, 2013
Messages
1,536
#62
You're a law student buddy lol, You don't actually add anything just justify why things have been said are true! Lol kidding! Love you Darvy!

However I agree with everything you have said! Lawyered!
 

Disciple of Nagash

The Perverted One
Staff member
Joined
Feb 12, 2008
Messages
27,908
#63
:siren:New Question:siren:

So a bit more of a fun one as it is in the season xD

You are presented with a choice - you can make one of the childhood mythical characters become real - so Santa, Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy, Boogeyman etc

Which would you choose to become real and why?
 

Duke Danse Macabre

The Duke
True Blood
Joined
Sep 16, 2010
Messages
3,711
#64
This is a hard one and would depend on what you meant by childhood chracters.
As I am still quite you in my early years i had a very soft spot for Raven fro Teen titans but would you in this case be refering more towards the old storey books/ disney movie aspect?
 

Disciple of Nagash

The Perverted One
Staff member
Joined
Feb 12, 2008
Messages
27,908
#69
Any interest in me kicking this back up again, or do you all prefer whimsy over mindbending hypothetical situations? xD
 
Top