war is the real example of "hunting".

Is it? ...

It's more like hiden seek and you don't want to get an enemy that plays too much computer (and newer owns somebody elses but, but must rely on cheats to win)


"Damn, the target got out of sight, where is my little boy*?"

* little boy, one of the A-bombs, IIRC
Posted on 2003-06-30 11:34:17 by scientica
Originally posted by dion
so human hunting? shall it trigger somekind like a war?
I'm talking about hunting humans on everyday life.

Imagine, there's a burglar on your home and tries to kill you when you saw him... long story short, you escaped from the situation. Should you have the right to kill the person if you see him again? or should he be placed in court and spends time in prison?

here's some possible answer:

if you kill him, you're denying your intelligence, your morals...
if you don't kill him and sends him to court, your practicing a double standard against animals(non humans) who did the same thing(harming your life) yet they were killed anyway because they were harmful... then you become a hypocrite, you're practicing discrimination(see previous posts above)...

which path do you choose? either path will determine what kind of person you are... that's why i said 99.98% of humans are hypocrites and are practicing indirect discrimination, including me, you and a majority of everybody.... ok maybe 99.98% is way too big of a percentage but anyway...

if you're thinking of choosing the path of lesser evil, think again. On my book, either path will discredit you at the same weight... ;)

:grin:
Posted on 2003-06-30 13:27:02 by arkane
our morals teaches us to respect each other... Where's our bleeding heart when it comes to other animals?

oh poor baby, my baby died... my friend's baby died... another human baby died...

but when it comes to other animals... hmph! don't care... no sad feelings...



what a f***ed world I am living in... :grin:
Posted on 2003-06-30 13:53:19 by arkane
intelligence = abillity to solve previously unencoundtered problems.



if you kill him, you're denying your intelligence, your morals...

If he tries to kill me I have teh right (indirect) to kill him, in self defence, so it's hir life or mine, not too hard to choose, I'm sure I'd be able to sue the bastard (in the "all mighty country eastern of china and Sweden ;) ) for the burgalery after I've killed him, in self defence.

I am a man, I don't have feelings, I only expericene things like a desire for hunting, women, teritorial claimes and the need to code. (And occasionally a voice from HLL tells me to 'Human->Kill->(&Animal, "For Fun");' )


Arkane, what do you think women are for? Their purpose is (other than -we men know what- :P ) to feel sorry for those futile beeings, women are always so, emotional...
Posted on 2003-07-01 07:37:53 by scientica
If he tries to kill me I have teh right (indirect) to kill him, in self defence, so it's hir life or mine, not too hard to choose, I'm sure I'd be able to sue the bastard (in the "all mighty country eastern of china and Sweden ) for the burgalery after I've killed him, in self defence.
I don't know, but to me that is not self defense. Self-Defense gives you the right to defend your life but not the right to kill, the result of death of the attacker because you defended yourself depends on your motive. If you kill the attacker because you feel hatred, anger... for him AND you think that you have the need for bloodlust then that is not self defense, that is murder.

There are several ways to subdue the attacker without resorting to killing.

our moral values says that it is not our right to take the life of another. In self-defense, you defended your right to live but even if the result is the death of the attacker AND as long as your motive is not bloodshed, then your OK - like you said "indirect" but not "the life of your attacker or yours" ... Intelligence plays part during these events. Should you follow the moral "code" and use your intelligence to find a solution to solve the problem without breaking the moral "code"? well, yes.

In actuality, we can get away with *"Self-Defense"*, anyway. Don't you agree? ;)
I am a man, I don't have feelings, I only expericene things like a desire for hunting, women, teritorial claimes and the need to code. (And occasionally a voice from HLL tells me to 'Human->Kill->(&Animal, "For Fun");' )
You have feelings. A feeling that is diverse, complicated... A part what made you "human", not in light of superiority but in uniqueness.

So by stating that, you traveled back to the "stone age period"? :grin:
Arkane, what do you think women are for? Their purpose is (other than -we men know what- :P ) to feel sorry for those futile beeings, women are always so, emotional...
Women can be anything they want to be...

it's not always emotional, it's about being a hypocrite... et al ... When we heard some friends of ours that lost their baby. We feel sorry and sad for them... When you see your friend being a hit and run victim. We feel sorry, we feel sad...

what about countless animals out there that were killed by a car. At least some humans gets a few minutes of airtime on the news trying to get everyone's sympathy but zero for other animals.
Posted on 2003-07-01 10:19:47 by arkane
self-defense means exactly that: one assaults you and you defend yourself. The amount of force with which you defend yourself should be irrelevant. The main thing is that it was not you who initiated nor triggered the attack (intentionally).

Defense is mainly about who's the victim in any given situation, something courts tend to forget these days.

burglar: "he beat me up, your honour! I want reparations!" (sadly they often get it as well)

If you'd break into my house and you'd threaten me or took my stuff and I could kill (without hassles) you then I would. I don't see why I should respect the life of someone that clearly has no respect for mine.
Posted on 2003-07-01 10:43:13 by Hiroshimator
self-defense means exactly that: one assaults you and you defend yourself. The amount of force with which you defend yourself should be irrelevant. The main thing is that it was not you who initiated nor triggered the attack (intentionally).
in practice, that is correct but "technically" and I mean considering all the motives since this is where that is truly judge, it depends. But most of the time, I would say 98%, it's purely self-defense.

like I said, you can always get away with self defense. It's like a white-lie sometimes, half truth, half-lie. Since you are the victim, the favor goes to you. Isn't this something like revenge in "some" situations... for example, a robber robs you, tries to take your life but didn't and got away. Should you be a vigilante to get justice done and kill the robber? cause if you kill the robber, who didn't respect your life, then you are simply a murderer, you are the same as the robber who tried to kill you except for the robbing part. Should you also go down that low? if yes, then so be it. Like in my previous examples. Which path do you choose, either path will determine what kind of person you are.

What if the robber is one of your past enemies and you have a "grudge", "hatred" on him... ;)

remember, murder is "the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought" ;)
If you'd break into my house and you'd threaten me or took my stuff and I could kill (without hassles) you then I would. I don't see why I should respect the life of someone that clearly has no respect for mine.
so you will abandon the moral code that "it's not our right to take the life of another" which we continually preach... there are several ways to subdue the attacker.
burglar: "he beat me up, your honour! I want reparations!" (sadly they often get it as well)
sadly, you are right. This is happening most of the time.
Posted on 2003-07-01 11:07:54 by arkane
have any of you seen the movie "enough" I saw it on HBO

watch it, it's one of those few rare examples of self-defense, taken for granted.



.... spoiler ....


j. lo with the help of her friend planned on trying to kill j. lo's abusive husband and present it to the police as "Self-Defense". In the end, the abusive husband, was out of strength.... j. lo couldn't do it(kill him). She said, "she wasn't like him" but her husband tried to attack her.... long story short, the husband fell off the blacony... then died.

if j.lo killed his abusive husband when she had a chance to kill him, then she would be a murderer but the the result in the end was simply true self-defense... ;)





ok maybe murder was too harsh, probably homicide would fit the bill on our someone-you-knew-hated-but-got-to-you-first-robbery-self-defense example... :grin:
Posted on 2003-07-01 11:26:20 by arkane
don't project your moral code on me is all I can advise you.
Posted on 2003-07-01 11:48:31 by Hiroshimator
I'm not trying to project my moral code on you, I'm simply arguing the technical facts that we all share(which I safely assume that you also uphold that virtue - based on my impressions on a majority of people including you), the contradictions of our different beliefs we apply on specific situations... and why is this happening. that's all. I'm not trying to gain anything from this aside from understanding. Even I am guilty of what I'm saying. I'm just trying to understand.

the main question is a paradox, there's no comprehensible solution/answer I can think of... that's why I presented this thread to make light of this, since this is very rarely discussed. I know this kind of topic will go against the common thinking of humans and would offend them in some way. Which I hoped someone would explain, why is this happening.
Posted on 2003-07-01 11:58:16 by arkane
I'm of the believe that if someone robs you on the street even if it is for only $10 that they can be killed if you're able to.


they determine their life is worth $10, not you. The reason they do it is because they know they're likely to get away with it in the first place.


What 'virtue' were we talking about again? :)
Posted on 2003-07-01 12:02:30 by Hiroshimator

What 'virtue' were we talking about again? :)
nevermind!!! :grin:

hiro, If I'm going to test that belief of yours, here's a scenario:

if your "friend" steals some money(because I would kill him if he doesn't and will kill him and you if he tells you about me - assume that you don't know this), would you also kill your "friend"? ;)



just a little harsher.... replace friend with someone dear to you... ;)





assuming you say no to the question above, you see this is the contradictions(the actions we do, double standards, being a hypocrite, discrimination on non-humans....) of our beliefs I'm talking about. Even I think of myself as the worst offender of what I'm saying here... I'm trying to understand why is this happening... I'm talking here about nearly all humans not just you and me.... I would even dare to say 100% of humans, of course there are always exceptions. But I do believe that in every facet of human life, everybody in one way or another, do it.

it does have a "nice" concept of injustice against animals, inequality in society and similar events.... that goes along with the main topic. :grin:

the first post was just a headstart to bring this question into light... and succesive posts was there to support what I'm trying to say, this whole thread proves all of my points....


oh well just another mystery of the human life.... it seems I have exhausted everything... I'll leave this thread to all you suckerz.... :grin: :grin:
Posted on 2003-07-01 12:14:46 by arkane
well if my 'friend' held me at knife-point he clearly wouldn't be a friend would he?

the deciding factor is threat and/or pain
Posted on 2003-07-01 12:57:24 by Hiroshimator
It's called Darwins theory of evolution.... Survival of the fittest being the key. We are on the top of the foodchain so naturally we consume animals. The fact that we are sentient beings and have selfconsiousness and know what we do we have developed moral and ethics which from early days stated that killing another man without reason is not suitable.
Posted on 2003-07-01 12:59:45 by SFP
yes good idea, he will threaten you but of course he will not kill you because that is not what I ordered him... probably slash you on the arm... or shoulders... whatever...
because I would kill him if he doesn't and will kill him and you if he tells you about me - assume that you don't know this
Posted on 2003-07-01 12:59:50 by arkane
one point to remember the examples I gave are too specific, remember there are thousands of scenarios, events that are not related to death, robbery.... where there is a possibility of contradicting your beliefs - ...
Posted on 2003-07-01 13:02:30 by arkane
giving that my friends do have an IQ of over 120, how plausible would your scenario be? :rolleyes:

"I can't tell!!!" :eek:

yeah right :p
Posted on 2003-07-01 13:03:49 by Hiroshimator
SFP,

it would be awesome to go against that theory, even though we can't deny human nature. That's why I said, I think I'm the biggest offender... :grin:

Hiro,

Assuming, that's just it, he's powerless, while I have snipers on buildings at my command... ;)
Posted on 2003-07-01 13:05:52 by arkane
the main point of beliefs is not that they can be contradicted, it's that you stand behind them for yourself. They're yours not something someone else pushed onto you (hopefully :tongue: )

-- assuming that my superhero mega-deathray hasn't killed you yet you mean --
Posted on 2003-07-01 13:06:33 by Hiroshimator
how about

"you enter a Mc Donalds and people whom you do not know make fun of you behind your back because you're bald" :tongue:


what would you do then? :)
Posted on 2003-07-01 13:10:27 by Hiroshimator