Visit the U.S. Politics Online Discussion Forum Archives!

Sponsored by:

U.S. Politics Online: A Political Discussion Forum  

Bookmark Us! E-Mail DONATE NOW! Photo Gallery Document Archives Quiz! Register to Vote!!!
Go Back   U.S. Politics Online: A Political Discussion Forum > Issue Politics > Humanities Issues
Register Blogs FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Humanities Issues Religion, Philosophy, Sociology, Political Theory

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 07-10-2007
Dilettante's Avatar
Dilettante Dilettante is offline
Secretary of Defense
Hoping to one day be a Secretary of Offense.

 
Member Since: Sep 2006
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 2,595

Pennsylvania     United_States

Re: Murder Park

Quote:
Originally Posted by liberty1776 View Post
But what if someone agrees to it?
Agreed to what? Being murdered?

I'm willing to classify murder (along with a few other things such as slavery) under the title of "Things which you cannot legally accept."
Or, perhaps a better way to put it would be that the state does not (and should not) legally recognize contractual agreements that surrender certain rights (the right to life among them) except possibly in exceptional circumstances.
Thus, after killing someone in "Murder Park" you would still be charged with murder and the "waiver" the victim signed going in would carry no legal significance.
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 07-10-2007
Mark_Twain's Avatar
Mark_Twain Mark_Twain is offline
Secretary of Defense

 
Member Since: Dec 2006
Location: Citizen of the World
Posts: 3,005

Vatican    
Re: Murder Park

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dilettante View Post
Agreed to what? Being murdered?

I'm willing to classify murder (along with a few other things such as slavery) under the title of "Things which you cannot legally accept."
Or, perhaps a better way to put it would be that the state does not (and should not) legally recognize contractual agreements that surrender certain rights (the right to life among them) except possibly in exceptional circumstances.
Thus, after killing someone in "Murder Park" you would still be charged with murder and the "waiver" the victim signed going in would carry no legal significance.
Does anyone remember the story from a couple of years ago when a married woman met a man online who wanted to "snuff" her in some weird S&M fantasy game? She willingly went along with it. The results were predictable.
__________________


"The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God. It neither breaks my leg, nor picks my pocket."

Thomas Jefferson
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 07-10-2007
partofme's Avatar
partofme partofme is offline
Moderator

 
Member Since: Apr 2004
Location: Murray Kentucky
Posts: 15,475

Earth     United_States

Re: Murder Park

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark_Twain View Post
Surely, I post in jest.
I would hope so.
__________________
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 07-10-2007
Donkey_Left's Avatar
Donkey_Left Donkey_Left is offline
President
Sinner

 
Member Since: Jan 2005
Location: Northeast Ohio
Posts: 13,311

United_States     Colombia

Re: Murder Park

Quote:
Originally Posted by liberty1776 View Post
But what if someone agrees to it?
Then they are stupid, thus validating Mark's point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark_Twain View Post
Surely, I post in jest.
Don't call him Shirely!
__________________
"Jesus said: I have cast fire upon the world, and behold I guard it until it is ablaze."
Gospel of Thomas
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 07-10-2007
Jihad4Beer's Avatar
Jihad4Beer Jihad4Beer is offline
Joint Chiefs of Staff Member
Thread Killer

 
Member Since: Apr 2005
Location: The Great Satan
Posts: 1,897

   
Re: Murder Park

Quote:
Originally Posted by liberty1776 View Post
What does everyone think of this:

There is a park, it has 10 foot thick bullett-proof walls. People go into this park, pay their money, and kill eachother. It is kind of like Paitball, but with real guns.

Is there anything legally wrong with this? If not, what do you think about smoking bans in restaraunts and bars, or other things of that nature?
I think the people who get shot would be wishing they could start over.

Also does the state have to pay their medical bills if the uninsured get shot but do not die?


I am under the impression that the reason why motorcycle helmet laws exist is not just so Big Brother can meddle in the affairs of riders, but to lower the cost to the state of having to underwrite the medical bills of riders who sustain major head trauma.
__________________
One day, I will sneak across the border into Canada and be an illegal alien. It will be fun.

Last edited by Jihad4Beer; 07-10-2007 at 04:19 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 07-10-2007
AjaxPress's Avatar
AjaxPress AjaxPress is offline
Secretary of State

 
Member Since: Aug 2006
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 4,567

United_States     Ethiopia

Re: Murder Park

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jihad4Beer View Post
I think the people who get shot would be wishing they could start over.

.
No do-over's and no time-outs.
__________________
Is our children learning? -George W. Bush

"I think—tide turning—see, as I remember—I was raised in the desert, but tides kind of—it's easy to see a tide turn—did I say those words?"—Washington, D.C., June 14, 2006

"[T]he illiteracy level of our children are appalling."—Washington, D.C., Jan. 23, 2004
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 07-10-2007
Zeus's Avatar
Zeus Zeus is offline
County Council Member

 
Member Since: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 277

United    
Re: Murder Park

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark_Twain View Post
Does anyone remember the story from a couple of years ago when a married woman met a man online who wanted to "snuff" her in some weird S&M fantasy game? She willingly went along with it. The results were predictable.
I can't say I know of that particular case, Mark, but you did remind me of something else, which I thought might be of interest:

Quote:
Originally Posted by BBC
A German man who killed and ate an apparently willing victim has been sentenced to life in prison after he was found guilty of murder. Armin Meiwes, 44, was sentenced to eight-and-a-half years in prison in 2004 after being found guilty of the manslaughter of Bernd Juergen Brandes. But a judge ordered a retrial after ruling the sentence was too lenient...

...Mr Brandes, a 43-year-old computer engineer, apparently agreed to the idea of being eaten after making contact with his killer on an internet chatroom. This led the court to convict Meiwes of the less serious charge of manslaughter at his trial in 2004. The pair met at Meiwes's home in Rotenburg in March 2001, where they had sex before Meiwes cut off Brandes's penis, which the men then cooked and attempted to eat. Meiwes later stabbed and killed Brandes, before cutting him to pieces and freezing parts of his body, some of which he later ate.
BBC NEWS | World | Europe | German cannibal guilty of murder

Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 07-10-2007
AjaxPress's Avatar
AjaxPress AjaxPress is offline
Secretary of State

 
Member Since: Aug 2006
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 4,567

United_States     Ethiopia

Re: Murder Park

I wonder if a judge could order a retrial here in the states? Considering it's never happened I don't think so, but that's a scary thought.
__________________
Is our children learning? -George W. Bush

"I think—tide turning—see, as I remember—I was raised in the desert, but tides kind of—it's easy to see a tide turn—did I say those words?"—Washington, D.C., June 14, 2006

"[T]he illiteracy level of our children are appalling."—Washington, D.C., Jan. 23, 2004
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 07-10-2007
liberty1776 liberty1776 is offline
Secretary of Defense
A libertarian first, a Libertarian second

 
Member Since: Mar 2004
Location: Liberty
Posts: 2,518

   
Re: Murder Park

Do you have any reason for this calssification?
__________________
"Sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the form of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question."
-Thomas Jefferson in his first inauguration address
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 07-10-2007
Dilettante's Avatar
Dilettante Dilettante is offline
Secretary of Defense
Hoping to one day be a Secretary of Offense.

 
Member Since: Sep 2006
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 2,595

Pennsylvania     United_States

Re: Murder Park

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dilettante View Post
I'm willing to classify murder (along with a few other things such as slavery) under the title of "Things which you cannot legally accept."
Or, perhaps a better way to put it would be that the state does not (and should not) legally recognize contractual agreements that surrender certain rights (the right to life among them) except possibly in exceptional circumstances.
Thus, after killing someone in "Murder Park" you would still be charged with murder and the "waiver" the victim signed going in would carry no legal significance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by liberty1776 View Post
Do you have any reason for this calssification?
Several.

But the first to come to mind would be the susceptibility to abuse if it were legally possible give someone the right to murder or enslave you. Imagine the power of "fine print" in such a scenario. Past events have demonstrated that 1) When people are desperate enough they can be convinced to agree to just about anything, no matter how stupid, and 2) There are always people willing to take maximum advantage of such desperation, regardless of the ruining effect on other people's lives.
IMO, society would suffer substantially if slavery and murder became legally acceptable activities (provided the victim had, at some past point, agreed to accept them).

Second, when it comes to giving away some rights, there's almost a Catch-22 regarding "soundness of mind". For example, considering the case of the German cannibal, one might convincingly argue that agreeing to be abused, murdered and eaten is, in-and-of-itself, sufficient evidence that you are not of sound mind and therefore unable to enter into a legally binding agreement.
Regarding contracts that accept one party's murder by the other, it would be a legal nightmare to establish that the victim-party entered into the agreement, not only "of sound mind", but also free from duress or compulsion: after all, the victim-party cannot testify on his own behalf.

The entire scenario is a moral, social and legal nightmare.

EDITED:
This entire discussion, however, does make me wonder precisely how many (and which) rights, in our existing system, it is impossible to give away. I hadn't really thought about it before.
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 07-10-2007
liberty1776 liberty1776 is offline
Secretary of Defense
A libertarian first, a Libertarian second

 
Member Since: Mar 2004
Location: Liberty
Posts: 2,518

   
Re: Murder Park

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dilettante View Post
Several.

But the first to come to mind would be the susceptibility to abuse if it were legally possible give someone the right to murder or enslave you. Imagine the power of "fine print" in such a scenario. Past events have demonstrated that 1) When people are desperate enough they can be convinced to agree to just about anything, no matter how stupid, and 2) There are always people willing to take maximum advantage of such desperation, regardless of the ruining effect on other people's lives.
IMO, society would suffer substantially if slavery and murder became legally acceptable activities (provided the victim had, at some past point, agreed to accept them).

Second, when it comes to giving away some rights, there's almost a Catch-22 regarding "soundness of mind". For example, considering the case of the German cannibal, one might convincingly argue that agreeing to be abused, murdered and eaten is, in-and-of-itself, sufficient evidence that you are not of sound mind and therefore unable to enter into a legally binding agreement.
Regarding contracts that accept one party's murder by the other, it would be a legal nightmare to establish that the victim-party entered into the agreement, not only "of sound mind", but also free from duress or compulsion: after all, the victim-party cannot testify on his own behalf.

The entire scenario is a moral, social and legal nightmare.

EDITED:
This entire discussion, however, does make me wonder precisely how many (and which) rights, in our existing system, it is impossible to give away. I hadn't really thought about it before.
How can you say that one has a right to life if he cannot decide to end that life? This would be like saying that you have a right to own your car, but you cannot sell it. In what sense do you own your car?

My life is mine, and I can decide to keep it, or give it away.

Furthermore, one does not have to die in Murder Park. Are you going to make all risky acts illegal?
__________________
"Sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the form of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question."
-Thomas Jefferson in his first inauguration address
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 07-10-2007
Non Sequitur's Avatar
Non Sequitur Non Sequitur is offline
Joint Chiefs of Staff Member

 
Member Since: Jun 2006
Location: Saginaw
Posts: 1,067

United_States     Netherlands

Re: Murder Park

I'm against the idea because it seems so much like the Colosseum and gladiator battles in Rome. People killing for entertainment... The sheer barbarism of it is something I could not stand.
__________________
"A dog barks when his master is attacked. I would be a coward if I saw that God's truth is attacked and yet would remain silent."
-John Calvin
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 07-10-2007
Porras's Avatar
Porras Porras is offline
Joint Chiefs of Staff Member
I'm your god now.

 
Member Since: Apr 2004
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 1,224

United_States     Wyoming

Re: Murder Park

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jihad4Beer View Post
I am under the impression that the reason why motorcycle helmet laws exist is not just so Big Brother can meddle in the affairs of riders, but to lower the cost to the state of having to underwrite the medical bills of riders who sustain major head trauma.
Nonsense. Fewer motorcycle riders not wearing helmets means fewer medical expenses after motorcycle accidents.
__________________
During the journey we commonly forget its goal. Almost every profession is chosen as a means to an end but continued as an end in itself. Forgetting our objectives is the most frequent act of stupidity.
-Friedrich Nietzsche, The Wanderer and his Shadow

All good socialists have villas in Southern France. That's not the point.
-Eurosocialist
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 07-10-2007
iTaliAN_ICe's Avatar
iTaliAN_ICe iTaliAN_ICe is offline
Joint Chiefs of Staff Member

 
Member Since: Apr 2007
Location: US&A
Posts: 1,208

United_States     Virginia

Re: Murder Park

Quote:
Originally Posted by liberty1776 View Post
What does everyone think of this:

There is a park, it has 10 foot thick bullett-proof walls. People go into this park, pay their money, and kill eachother. It is kind of like Paitball, but with real guns.

Is there anything legally wrong with this? If not, what do you think about smoking bans in restaraunts and bars, or other things of that nature?
Did you come up with this yourself?

No, I don't really think it should be legal. It might make an interesting death sentence for criminals though...
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old 07-10-2007
Mark_Twain's Avatar
Mark_Twain Mark_Twain is offline
Secretary of Defense

 
Member Since: Dec 2006
Location: Citizen of the World
Posts: 3,005

Vatican    
Re: Murder Park

I'm sitting here contemplating this:

how does one allow another to cut off one's penis, and then you both "attempt" to eat it?
__________________


"The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God. It neither breaks my leg, nor picks my pocket."

Thomas Jefferson
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0 Release Candidate 2
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.0.0 RC6
Copyright © 2000 - 2009 U.S. Politics Online