Damn Right

[0psys]

Ha, that's fair enough. Over-zealous cynicism is my thing, albeit meant in jest. Mostly.
Honestly though, with that aside, landing a sprog would scare me shitless and I have no intention of ever having it happen. I'd be an awful dad because I know damn well what a massive mind-bending, back-breaking responsibility it is, emotionally, physically, financially and frankly, I can't be arsed. That and there's way too many people on this sodding planet as it is.

I hate to tell you, but that's probably what would make you a good dad.

[GONNAFISTYA]

lol semencan was right about you...and I remember now...you always hated my guts and I could always grate your nerves. I had to read the seething hatred in your post before I remembered your posts towards me in the past. I'm probably the only guy in the world who talks more or is more cocksure than you are, so you're pissed...or sumthin. You claim you'd buy me a beer but I don't believe you.

Anyways, didn't you originally claim that you beat the guy so bad that you knocked him into a bush? Oh yeah...didn't you also brag that you robbed him? And didn't you go to jail for that? Or so you claimed?

Yeah...I have real problems expressing myself socially. I'm such a dangerous cunt on the internet. A fucking computer game forum no less. Arguing in text about the moral implications of wonton acts of violence in a seemlingly crazy world. All while you actually assault people in real life who have only marginally slighted you while openly applauding acts of assault on people who've never slighted you with the minimalist amount of info of what actually happened.

And here you go again, modifying the scenario.

Seriously dude I don't give a fuck it's just fun watching you type until 4 am.

[0psys]

Dude.. DUDE. Read what you're writing. Just read it back once. You sound like you're fucking menstruating.

This is not a soap-opera. I do not hate you. I don't know you. I don't even remember you.

You could always grate my nerves? I totally believe it. You're doing it now.

And no, I probably wouldn't buy you a beer, you'd probably smash it over my head.

You're a bloody lunatic!

LORD

[0psys]

Aw yeaahhh, the fisting icon. How apt.

BAM! And to bed..

[U4EA]

Your description ..

That's not my description, that's the dictionary definition.

At this point, we don't have very many facts about this specific case, so much of what's in this thread seems to be knee jerk reactions and speculation.

I guess the main disagreement here seems to be about whether the degree of violence shown was justified or not. Without knowing the facts, this becomes impossible to determine. I think some of the backlash from the "pro-violence" [for lack of a better term] crowd stems from some of the comments saying or implying that it was wrong to have let it get to the point of murder regardless of what the alleged paedophile may or may not have done.

To dismiss the father as an overzealous vigilante murderer seeking to escape jailtime [without knowing the facts] is a bit heavy handed.

I don't think anyone here is condoning murder, just trying to understand or rationalize why the father did what he did and the state of mind he must have been in for it to get to that point.

[xer0s]

Why do you always pretend an opposing viewpoint is some crazy mish-mash that simply must be "dealt with"? It's just an alternate point of view. You should stop treating people like they're morons.

This.

[GONNAFISTYA]

lol of course you do

[TruthfulLiar]

lol this thread:

divergent as a motherfucker in here.

fistya's gettin trolled

no one knows what pacifism means

no one knows how to apply a definition in order to construct a reasonable argument that doesn't involve getting personal about it

logic took a shit here somewhere

and we're all mushrooms in the dark with limited information

ontological question: (scroll dhown) The Trolley Dilemma

http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~jgreene/

[Doombrain]

Yup, i'd have nothing to offer a woman who wants kids, 'cos I don't want 'em. What of it?
Figures you, like Dumbrain, would step-in with all the conversational clout of a damp fart, mincing words worse than you colour in Lara Croft's brassiere with your hairy-palmed wanking hand, when if there's any talentless, bitter mook that'll be satisfied with knocking up a desperate menopausal fatty, it's you

Nice try.

I commented because i'm bored of reading your mind blowing arrogant bullshit on topics that have no clue about.

Liked you better when you used to brag about the amount of drink you rammed down your neck. Now you're just another angry nerd snorting down your nose at people for having opinions on subjects they can personally draw an emotional link on.

[Don Carlos]

Well this is nice...

[Ryoki]

I think memph expressed himself clearly and with good arguments on the original subject - that he's now being attacked on unrelated things like not wanting to have kids is a good example of not being able to think of any arguments able to counter his. Goes for some of GKY's posts as well. There's a technical term or expression for that, but i forget.

In any case it's rather weak debating form, gents. For shame.

[Eraser]

Nightshade and sys0p are even slower than LawL. I'll say it plainly here: I do have a daughter, so in your views I should be fully qualitfied to talk.

However, I do take offense in the notion that simply because I wouldn't beat a man to death it would automatically mean I do not love my daughter.

I think I'm done discussing this subject with retards like Nightshade and sys0p. Lets just hope you never suspect anyone of harassing your kids, because the poor sod may just end up dead without having laid a finger on anyone.

[LawL]

I owned the fucking shit out of this thread.

[Eraser]

tipped your goat over.

that's a lovely expression

[Captain]

It sounds like you have nothing to offer a woman, so in addition to your lack of education, financial stability or emotional maturity, you're physically incapable of ever fathering a son. You're doing the world a favour though, so kudos to that.

Yup, i'd have nothing to offer a woman who wants kids, 'cos I don't want 'em. What of it?
Figures you, like Dumbrain, would step-in with all the conversational clout of a damp fart, mincing words worse than you colour in Lara Croft's brassiere with your hairy-palmed wanking hand, when if there's any talentless, bitter mook that'll be satisfied with knocking up a desperate menopausal fatty, it's you

lol you have no skills or talents and you fail the most basic tenets of humanity: creating life and sustaining it. Now go back to playing with your fantasy elves you ugly, worthless nerd

[0psys]

Nightshade and sys0p are even slower than LawL. I'll say it plainly here: I do have a daughter, so in your views I should be fully qualitfied to talk.

However, I do take offense in the notion that simply because I wouldn't beat a man to death it would automatically mean I do not love my daughter.

I think I'm done discussing this subject with retards like Nightshade and sys0p. Lets just hope you never suspect anyone of harassing your kids, because the poor sod may just end up dead without having laid a finger on anyone.

Extreme sanctimony is no substitute for balls, son. Unless you plan to bore a paederast to death with vague, rambling self-righteous monologues?

Cruel and unusual-I'd totally respect that.

[Ryoki]

Again with the evasion, well done.
You really have no arguments do you?

[0psys]

Again with the evasion, well done.
You really have no arguments do you?

Oh God, no! Say it isn't so? I haven't replied with a detailed itinerary of rebuttals to a post essentially calling me a retard! Please, Ryoki, as a serious internet computer game forum debate expert, what would you do in this situation? I'm thinking of not giving the slightest shit and just carrying on with my life, but I fear that might go against the q3w ethos of never giving an inch and grudgingly imposing your stupid view post after post, page after page, for eternity!

Karot!

[Eraser]

Extreme sanctimony is no substitute for balls, son.

And this, right here is the gist of it.
In your views, someone who isn't willing to beat a man to death is automatically a no-good pansy with no balls.

I'd say it takes ten times the man to hold back and do the right thing than to continue beating until someone is well beyond the point of death.

[0psys]

Extreme sanctimony is no substitute for balls, son.

And this, right here is the gist of it.
In your views, someone who isn't willing to beat a man to death is automatically a no-good pansy with no balls.

I'd say it takes ten times the man to hold back and do the right thing than to continue beating until someone is well beyond the point of death.

You raise an interesting point that I discussed with someone just recently. Namely the old argument about it taking a bigger man to walk away.

It takes a bigger man to walk away if that man is prone to reactionary violence, and it takes a bigger man to react violently if that man is prone to walking away.

Essentially, any other option is simply patting yourself on the back for doing what you find easiest.

Also, you can't really go beyond the point of death. Unless you're getting cruel and unusual again and following him into the afterlife to continue the beating? In which case, big respect. That shit takes dedication. I wouldn't fuck with you, Eraser, you play for keeps.

[Eraser]

You raise an interesting point that I discussed with someone just recently. Namely the old argument about it taking a bigger man to walk away.

It takes a bigger man to walk away if that man is prone to reactionary violence, and it takes a bigger man to react violently if that man is prone to walking away.

Essentially, any other option is simply patting yourself on the back for doing what you find easiest.

I'm not talking about walking away. You paint everything so black and white. For some reason, you make it look like the choice is between beating a man to death and doing nothing at all. That's just not how it is.

The real issue was about the dangers of someone taking matters into his own hands. I believe that someone who thinks he is right to act as judge, jury and executioner (especially while being red hot from anger) is a danger to our society. To me it seems you and Nightshade are arguing that anyone who wouldn't act that way is in fact a no-good, spineless eunuch. Especially due to the whole polarizing nature of this discussion, it feels like you and Nightshade are saying that anyone who would do anything less than beat him to death is a no-good spineless eunuch.

Now, to be clear: I'm not surprised or even condemning the fact that someone, in anger, initially reacts violently. I can even agree that the circumstances under which it happened softens his responsibility over the eventual death of the victim (assuming it wasn't intended). The next step you take, however, which is to say that the rapist got what he deserved and that the assailant did the right thing (implying that the intention was to kill the rapist) is a bridge too far for me.

In a perfect world the man would've gone as far as was necessary to ensure the safety of the child and then call the police. Maybe it's not a perfect world, but that doesn't mean the next step is beating the other person to death. There is so much gray area in between.

[0psys]

No, most definitely not, I'm not painting it black and white. My position from the beginning is that I can understand how a man could completely lose it and kill someone for messing with his kids.

I didn't say I'd do it (I probably would), I said I could understand the mindset of someone in that situation. I also said I support it (assuming the situation is how I'm choosing to read it), which I do.

It seems we agree on the core element here, which makes me wonder how I'm apparently a retard, and you're not.

It is my personal belief that if you commit the most unholy and unforgivable crime of all, that crime being the molestation of a child, then the value of your life on this planet drops to zero.

I don't, under those circumstance assign myself as judge, jury, or executioner, but I wouldn't shake my head at anyone who felt the need to take on any of those roles as a result of suffering that kind of torment.

In a perfect world, we'd be able to stop ourselves right at the point where we had incapacitated the man. My argument is that even you, Eraser, bastion of self-control, would probably lose your mind and rip the guy to absolute shreds.

It's always the ones with a no-violence policy that end up being the ones most prone to administering it once they feel justified.

[Eraser]

No, most definitely not, I'm not painting it black and white. My position from the beginning is that I can understand how a man could completely lose it and kill someone for messing with his kids.

I didn't say I'd do it (I probably would), I said I could understand the mindset of someone in that situation. I also said I support it (assuming the situation is how I'm choosing to read it), which I do.

It seems we agree on the core element here, which makes me wonder how I'm apparently a retard, and you're not.

Well, first of all, I don't support it and I think you support it for the wrong reasons. But we agree to disagree there and that's fine. What irks me is that while you show a lot of compassion for those that choose to use excessive violence, you show nothing of the sort for those who do not agree with such a course of action, going as far as calling them "weak", having no balls or, as Nightshade puts it: a "spineless pansy".

It is my personal belief that if you commit the most unholy and unforgivable crime of all, that crime being the molestation of a child, then the value of your life on this planet drops to zero.

We've all agreed that it is not up to individuals to decide such things or act upon them. Sure, you may be angry up to the point of using excessive violence, prohibiting any form or rationality at that moment, but it still doesn't make it right IMO.

I don't, under those circumstance assign myself as judge, jury, or executioner, but I wouldn't shake my head at anyone who felt the need to take on any of those roles as a result of suffering that kind of torment.

In a perfect world, we'd be able to stop ourselves right at the point where we had incapacitated the man. My argument is that even you, Eraser, bastion of self-control, would probably lose your mind and rip the guy to absolute shreds.

I can imagine someone (maybe even myself) going over the edge in such a situation, but again it's not OK by the moral standards the western civilized world holds dear. And to be honest, I'm not sure if I'd be capable of inflicting such harm to an individual. Maybe I could, maybe not. It seems your and my backgrounds are quite different, so I think it's impossible for you to judge if I'd be doing something like that or not. I even find it hard to try to determine that for myself. But from what I gather, it seems to me that real-life violence is something you have been exposed to far more than I am. That may make it easier for you to fall upon that behavior than me. But in the end, that's all just assumptions.

It's always the ones with a no-violence policy that end up being the ones most prone to administering it once they feel justified.

Sounds like a cliché. Got any figures to back it up?

[0psys]

This isn't a moral discussion. It's a discussion of who is capable of what. You have now admitted that you can imagine yourself going over the top in such a situation.

You are now one of us. Welcome to the real world, Eraser, it's a pleasure to have you.

In case you're worried, don't be. It's possible to be in our club and still maintain a rational moral outlook on life.

I don't have any figures to back it up, because it was, like you rightly point out, a cliché.

[Doombrain]

Nice try.
I commented because i'm bored of reading your mind blowing arrogant bullshit on topics that have no clue about.
Liked you better when you used to brag about the amount of drink you rammed down your neck. Now you're just another angry nerd snorting down your nose at people for having opinions on subjects they can personally draw an emotional link on.

I mention you in passing, whilst replying to spazda and your feeble mind angers enough to rewind and recap from ten years or so back? Fucking rofl Dumberina. If hate could be eaten, we could plant your cheese-filled crusty XL arse somewhere and feed a nation

For the record I don't agree with the killing however I can understand how it became the outcome, I know I'd have a good go at killing one if I was in the same situation. I do believe pedos should be chemically altered, I don't believe they can be re integrated.

That said there's not enough info on that link to get the full story. For all we know he could have died from ta knock when falling and we don't know that the girl wasn't removed before the beating. You assume too much.

Also, you ok mate. Need a hug?