Killing Oj Simpson

[dairygirl4u2c]

so most people say OJ simpson has confessed to the murders.
plus what if he just came right out and admitted he killed them?

would it be wrong to take justice into one's own hands, and throw him in a manmade prison, or 'execute' him, without the backing of a court?

what makes a court so inherently necessary?
if there's a bible point on topic, id like to see it.
i do know of a vaque passage that says to 'follow the laws of man'

[Hilde]

no poll?

[CatherineM]

Canada doesn't have a double jeopardy law, so if he had been here, he could have been re-tried.

I worry about you. You seem to be way too interested in finding loop-holes or justifications for committing murder. It can be difficult to leave the big things in God's hands instead of taking them into our hands. However, most of the time, it is better to leave issues of life, death, and punishment in his hands because it's in his job description, not ours.

[homeschoolmom]

I refuse to speculate. But I'm with Catherine...

[HisChildForever]

A man-made prison? Seriously? You want to chuck a human being into a sectioned off corner of the basement? Or shoot him in the backyard?

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='HisChildForever' date='23 July 2010 - 04:22 PM' timestamp='1279920150' post='2147126']
A man-made prison? Seriously? You want to chuck a human being into a sectioned off corner of the basement? Or shoot him in the backyard?
[/quote]
[img]http://www.teachwithmovies.org/guides/old-yeller-DVDcover.jpg[/img]
Apparently.

(I thought most prisons were man-made...)

[Paddington]

[quote name='CatherineM' date='23 July 2010 - 05:50 PM' timestamp='1279918245' post='2147076']I worry about you. You seem to be way too interested in finding loop-holes or justifications for committing murder. It can be difficult to leave the big things in God's hands instead of taking them into our hands. However, most of the time, it is better to leave issues of life, death, and punishment in his hands because it's in his job description, not ours.[/quote]

I think it's just her (his?) obsession with philosophy and debate.

She can read a Catholic PMer say he would kill somebody for stealing items from his car and another Catholic PMer say he digs the show Dexter about a man who goes around killing murderers who got away with it. Then there are comments galore about the existence of a difference between murder and killing, and other comments about how justice is a reason for the state to kill even when public safety is not threatened.

I think it is cold of you to make Dairy sound like she is plotting to be Dexter (re-read your post if need be.)
Do you recall the thread she made about the morality of picking things up with one's feet? I took it as a clear swipe at natural law arguments against homosexuality.
I'm pretty sure that is how she comes up with stuff. She is like Socrates (the famous one) if he were mentally ill, less smart and less zealous.

Now if Dairy kills/murders/kidnaps some people, I will just have to live with being the guy who said what I just said, but at least there is no jail time for that.

[Winchester]

[img]http://www.learningthings.com/mmLEARNINGTHINGS/Images/egs451a_100.gif[/img]

[bonkers]

[quote name='Paddington' date='24 July 2010 - 06:53 AM' timestamp='1279972388' post='2147378']
I think it's just her (his?) obsession with philosophy and debate.

She can read a Catholic PMer say he would kill somebody for stealing items from his car and another Catholic PMer say he digs the show Dexter about a man who goes around killing murderers who got away with it. Then there are comments galore about the existence of a difference between murder and killing, and other comments about how justice is a reason for the state to kill even when public safety is not threatened.

I think it is cold of you to make Dairy sound like she is plotting to be Dexter (re-read your post if need be.)
Do you recall the thread she made about the morality of picking things up with one's feet? I took it as a clear swipe at natural law arguments against homosexuality.
I'm pretty sure that is how she comes up with stuff. She is like Socrates (the famous one) if he were mentally ill, less smart and less zealous.

Now if Dairy kills/murders/kidnaps some people, I will just have to live with being the guy who said what I just said, but at least there is no jail time for that.
[/quote]

Why is she like Socrates (the famous one)?

[CatherineM]

[quote name='Paddington' date='24 July 2010 - 06:53 AM' timestamp='1279972388' post='2147378']
I think it's just her (his?) obsession with philosophy and debate.

She can read a Catholic PMer say he would kill somebody for stealing items from his car and another Catholic PMer say he digs the show Dexter about a man who goes around killing murderers who got away with it. Then there are comments galore about the existence of a difference between murder and killing, and other comments about how justice is a reason for the state to kill even when public safety is not threatened.

I think it is cold of you to make Dairy sound like she is plotting to be Dexter (re-read your post if need be.)
Do you recall the thread she made about the morality of picking things up with one's feet? I took it as a clear swipe at natural law arguments against homosexuality.
I'm pretty sure that is how she comes up with stuff. She is like Socrates (the famous one) if he were mentally ill, less smart and less zealous.

Now if Dairy kills/murders/kidnaps some people, I will just have to live with being the guy who said what I just said, but at least there is no jail time for that.
[/quote]
I wasn't meaning to be cold at all. I was serious. Dairy was leading the charge about it being okay to kill abortionists, and now this. This is the kind of thing I dislike about philosophy. When we debate things just for the "debate" of it, sometimes we discuss things that are frankly better left un-discussed.

[Paddington]

[quote name='bonkers' date='24 July 2010 - 10:53 AM' timestamp='1279979587' post='2147393']
Why is she like Socrates (the famous one)?
[/quote]

He asked people so many questions. He wanted to please the gods by making people feel stupid. Actually, he wanted to help people by exposing their lack of logic, consistency, morals and whatever. Dairy tries her best or half-best and has a cognitive disorder or something. She came out and said she was mentally ill once, IIRC.

[Paddington]

[quote name='CatherineM' date='24 July 2010 - 03:28 PM' timestamp='1279996102' post='2147473']
I wasn't meaning to be cold at all. I was serious. Dairy was leading the charge about it being okay to kill abortionists, and now this. This is the kind of thing I dislike about philosophy. When we debate things just for the "debate" of it, sometimes we discuss things that are frankly better left un-discussed.
[/quote]

I doubt she says it is okay to kill abortionists even if she sounds like it. She has come out and said she is being "devil's advocate" before. She did it for a pro-choice argument recently and got reamed.

I used to read her posts from start to finish when I joined PM, so I feel like I understand what she does. I no longer have the attention span or will-power to read them and may have missed something that you caught.

As far as some things being better left un-discussed...yes and no. It gives others a chance to make their best case for not killing an abortionist. And sometimes, a taboo topic or statement is refreshing.

[dairygirl4u2c]

thanks for the posts for me pad.
per mental illness, i've actually been thinking about that subject recently. my friend who has ADHD, thinks i also have at least a milder form of it. considering the symptoms ive read about, im definitely a little abnormal, at least. (and the half fleshed out posts, just me being lazy, to some extent) there's a little bit of a noted phenomenon, ADHD combined with stints of depression too, though, that often confuses the diagnosis. and last, there's i'll call it socretes effect, addicted to philosphy, gone mad with it like many philsophers, seeking, probing, maximizing existentially, etc.

i wouldnt kill OJ, im actually against the death penalty. i wouldnt kill by far most abortioists, just a literal handfull or two, such as George Tiller, the recent one who was killed. and that's not just a mental illness, many here have said they would too, and many other sane people. it did take a mentally ill person to actaully do it, but.
some topics are best left undiscussed, but not the ones about folks like Tiller. that's like saying it's best left undiscussed stopping nazi halocosts, or people goig out and shooting children lest we break any theoretical laws against it. and, per the OJ stuff, it should make people who are pro death penalty think about why they justify their positions- if it's about justice, really, behind the other pretense per reasons, why are courts so necessary? why would they be in any case? plus, you had a good paragraph back there, about how folks are all over the place on these things, even good catholics. 'take my taxes from my cold dead hands, with my gun that im going to try and shoot you with, too', 'steal from me and i shoot you', etc. a lot of this just boils down to what responses are socially acceptable, and what's not, what the social norms are, not things pertaining to objective truth.
but anyways, thanks for the posts.

Edited July 24, 2010 by dairygirl4u2c

[Paddington]

Dairy, did you say you were crazy once (or allude to it)? It woulda been a while ago. Sorry if not.

Do you have something where you are smart, but then something happens between your thoughts and your words?

[dairygirl4u2c]

i dont think ive come right out and said i was crazy. at least i wasn't being serious. though even in seriousness, ive said things to that effect, sure. im defintely abnormal, per mental health.
my sloppy posts, are a mix of laziness (mostly), mental illness (lastly), and just not wanting to explain every premise i have, given im so far gone into some place on the matter that most people are not. (secondly, i suppose) like jumping into the middle of a philsophy book, and not knowing what's going on cause you didn't start at the beginning, i often just start writing as if it's all been said.
people dont think grammatically. ask winchester, im not always the best. and, what's lost in translation is usually from my not putting the effort into making it formal.
as another reason per sloppy, when you personally have a topic not completely fleshed out (thought out), but still want to type stuff, it's going to show. it's not that im an imbecil, or whatever. it's that im trying to create new territory, intellectually. it's usually far more 'smart' than people who just content themselves with tired arguments, and obvious stuff.

Edited July 24, 2010 by dairygirl4u2c

[dairygirl4u2c]

i know it sounds loony, but, i might not be opposed to putting OJ in a layman jail (better term than manmade jail). it's just not right he's free right now. i dont know if courts are inherently the only way to do things. so as far as that, i might be open to entrapping him. doens't affect me, or others, such as abortionists do, and he looks to be generally not a danger to society. so i wouldnt push the issue.
i know if it was my family he killed, i might want him put in my own prison. but, would want to know why it's okay for christians to advoctate puting him in jail, for justice only, but no if it's not through the court. most people who murder are not dangers to society, they had a bad time once, yet we still do it for justice. we might in principle say it's for deterrence, or 'who knows if tey're really danger', but these are effectively just rationalizations, for 'justice'. (more appropriately.... revenge?) // plus, even if one to insist on these things i call rationalizations, why couldnt a person take it into their own hands, usuingthose very same arguments?
i do know, if a person did it themself, they might be culpable, in that, they'd be doig X, largely out of revenge. even it's it's the proper act, with good motives, there's still bad motives, making it perhaps culpable. if society does it, the bad motives problems are not there as much. --- but ifi t's the proper acct, and no one else has done it... aren't the bad motives just incidental in whether or not to ultimately do it?

Edited July 25, 2010 by dairygirl4u2c

[dairygirl4u2c]

but ifi t's the proper acct, and no one else would do it... aren't the bad motives just incidental in whether or not to ultimately do it?
(and you'd be guilty of the vengeful feelings, regardless of whether you did it anyways. though, putting action to feelings, might make it worse, just as actiosn to good thoughts, makes it all fulfilled.)
but ifi t's the proper acct, and no one else would do it... aren't the bad motives just incidental in whether or not to ultimately do it?

Edited July 25, 2010 by dairygirl4u2c

[bonkers]

Can you kill winchester too while you're at it? Or maybe just poke him with a fork.

[dairygirl4u2c]

i also have bouts of obsessive culpulssive disorder. dont think it's clinical, but. less so as i get older, too, though. that, and my friend with ADHD said that disease gives one the ability to hyperfocus. so both makes it such that im able to hyperfocus very well. probably, helped make it such that i was stunningly good at advanced math in school. (fluctuating at borderline of 'gifted' and 'genius', not solidly genius by any means

i'll stick a fork in him, if he's overcooked.

Edited July 25, 2010 by dairygirl4u2c

[Hilde]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' date='25 July 2010 - 04:19 AM' timestamp='1280020791' post='2147667']

i'll stick a fork in him, if he's overcooked.
[/quote]