why that was nice

[konechiwa 10+ year member]

But can't we gain some knowledge based on the conversation and his subsequent actions?

sure you can gain some knowledge. But not until he actually tells or confesses his thoughts will you actually know what really went through his mind.

If i am doing one over the speed limit and a drunk driver crashes into me and kills me, am i responsible for my own death?
I was breaking the law and speeding is inherently dangerous.

So i must be responsible for my death.

yes you actually are. once again i would say, a weak comparision. If you would have been going the speed limit you would have been more aware, as you would have more reaction time, and the collision would have not occured.

If you go 50 and run the red and get hit by a drunk driver, then you die. If you went 35 and stopped, he'd blow through the green and nobody would die. Then you would call the cops and they would arrest him.

If you eat cheeseburgers everyday for all your life and die young due to bad cholesterol is it your fault?

If you drown because you decide to jump into the ocean even though you can't swim is it your fault?

if you eat some dog shit because your friend dared you to and you get e coli and die is it your fault?

hmm?

 

[konechiwa 10+ year member]

You are making the same assumption.

you have to fight fire with fire. Besides, every believes what they want to believe, so it is inevitable. I'm just saying you shouldn't be hypocritical. That's all.

I like how you cut and paste certain sections of quotes to make it look better for your cause. Right after the end of the section you quoted, i said "You can't. Nobody can. "

so don't tell me something i already know.

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

Tell that to OJ.
that argument does not hold in our legal system

loL.

Nonetheless, if it doesn't hold true then why don't we have capital punishment for those convicted of theft over a certain amount or being indebted beyond a certain amount?

 

[konechiwa 10+ year member]

loL.
Nonetheless, if it doesn't hold true then why don't we have capital punishment for those convicted of theft over a certain amount or being indebted beyond a certain amount?

capital punishment means he killed on purpose. For all we know it was accidental.

 

[hoxie08 5,000+ posts]

if you eat some dog shit because your friend dared you to and you get e coli and die is it your fault?

boy do i wish.

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

yes you actually are. once again i would say, a weak comparision. If you would have been going the speed limit you would have been more aware, as you would have more reaction time, and the collision would have not occured.

If you go 50 and run the red and get hit by a drunk driver, then you die. If you went 35 and stopped, he'd blow through the green and nobody would die. Then you would call the cops and they would arrest him.

what if i am doing 31 in a 30 mph zone and the drunk blows through the red and kills me?

If you eat cheeseburgers everyday for all your life and die young due to bad cholesterol is it your fault?

If you drown because you decide to jump into the ocean even though you can't swim is it your fault?

if you eat some dog shit because your friend dared you to and you get e coli and die is it your fault?

Yes, yes, and yes.

you have to fight fire with fire. Besides, every believes what they want to believe, so it is inevitable. I'm just saying you shouldn't be hypocritical. That's all.
so don't tell me something i already know.

I thought we were both trying to make a more solid argument than the other, which would encompass the intent of the shooter. If this isn't the case, than why are you trying to debate?

 

[staypuff 10+ year member]

he should be prosecuted for simply being foolish..... grab a brain....

don't admit to going after them on a 911 call.... and after you blow their brains out send the bodies to Aruba..... everyone knows they can really hide bodies down there....

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

capital punishment means he killed on purpose. For all we know it was accidental.

That is irrelevant to the point i was making.

 

[konechiwa 10+ year member]

what if i am doing 31 in a 30 mph zone and the drunk blows through the red and kills me?



Yes, yes, and yes.

I thought we were both trying to make a more solid argument than the other, which would encompass the intent of the shooter. If this isn't the case, than why are you trying to debate?

1) Well then you just have shitty luck. Sometimes things just happen. like if you go to steal shit from someones house, there may just be a trigger happy neighbor next door.

and

2) I'm trying to argue that you make no sense in your arguments. I've dropped the "he shouldn't be punished" clause because that's going nowhere.

So.....

yep.

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

1) Well then you just have shitty luck. Sometimes things just happen. like if you go to steal shit from someones house, there may just be a trigger happy neighbor next door.

So the drunk driver should be released with no charges filed?

and

2) I'm trying to argue that you make no sense in your arguments. I've dropped the "he shouldn't be punished" clause because that's going nowhere.

So.....

yep.

You arent doing too well.

 

[tRidiot 10+ year member]

Following your reasoning to its conclusion would indicate that every victim of crime is ultimately responsible for being a victim. There is inherent risk in everything. There is a risk that i could die in my sleep. Should i avoid sleep to mitigate that risk? There is a risk that i could be shot the next time i leave my house, yet i indeed leave my house. If i take that risk does that mean i am responsible for my own death should i end up murdered after leaving? Your logic seems in-line with the Saudi court system when it sentenced the victim of a gang **** because she was in the company of a male non relative when the **** occurred and thereby is responsible for her own ****.
There is inherent risk in everything we do, but a REASONABLE person isn't controlled by such minuscule risks and takes such risks with the understanding that they are a part of life and unavoidable.

It works both ways. If these two are responsible for their own deaths, then ultimately every victim of a crime is responsible for becoming a victim and the only way to escape responsibility for ones victim status is to kill yourself before you become a victim.

There is a difference between following ones line of reasoning to its conclusion and hyperbole.

You cannot make claims regarding policy, morality, justice ,and law, without expecting them to be generalized from. To claim that applying ones reasoning to the broader context is evident of a poor debate is extreme naivety.

You haven't even listened to the tape but are making claims to the intent and disposition of the shooter? Maybe you should try listening to it before you make judgments about the intent and credibility of the shooter. Aside from what is said on the tape but not included in the transcripts you might be able to examine the tone of voice and credibility of the shooter. To make claims while refusing to listen to it is asinine.

I won't address your comments about the shooter, since I'm not defending the fact that he killed anyone, so that point's moot. Moving right along...

As for your assinine statements about us all assuming risk, the difference is, when I get in my car to go to McDonald's, I'm not breaking the law and stealing other people's possessions in order to do so.

And you're not following my reasoning, you're using exaggeration and hyperbole, it's a different concept than following a line of reasoning. You're silly, boy.

You just can't admit you're wrong, can you? lol

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

I won't address your comments about the shooter, since I'm not defending the fact that he killed anyone, so that point's moot. Moving right along...

Great, you concede and i win.

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

I'm glad i was able to assist you in seeing the error in your ways and that now you realize i was correct the entire time.

 

[tRidiot 10+ year member]

hy·per·bo·le

/haɪˈpɜr

bə

li/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[hahy-pur-buh-lee] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun Rhetoric. 1.obvious and intentional exaggeration. 2.an extravagant statement or figure of speech not intended to be taken literally, as “to wait an eternity.”

Pretty much sounds to me like all the shit you've been posting about "logical deductions"

lol

 

[tRidiot 10+ year member]

I'm glad i was able to assist you in seeing the error in your ways and that now you realize i was correct the entire time.

You wish, dude... where did you prove me wrong in any way? You can keep repeating yourself over and over but it doesn't change the fact that you're wrong.