Consented Canabalism - be warned because its far worse than it sounds - seriously its really creepy

[jessegeek]

It doesn't matter that someone tells you commit a crime, it's still a crime.

EDIT: Even Kevorkian got 10-25 year sentence from second degree murder.

Agree, to a certain extent. Some things, like actual, non-perverse euthanasia for the teminally ill, are still illegal but shouldn't be, so being told to do it by the patient can act as a safety net for the loved one(s) who carried out their last wishes. But yes, definitely agree within the context of this case.

EDIT2: After seeing the sentencing, I don't want to ever live in Germany.

That seems a bit extreme, because one lone lunatic lived there but is now in prison you never want to live in Germany? It's actually a really safe country- even in the big cities- and Berlin is one of the cleanest capitals in all of Europe (no, I don't work for the German tourist board, but I am from the UK and now just how crappy a country- and a genuine endemic crime problem- can be).

 

[Cheery Lunatic]

"Perfectly sane" but "deeply disturbed". I'm sorry, what? Aren't those at opposite ends of the spectrum...? Is it even possible to be both...

 

[Normandyfoxtrot]

At least in most of the world it's simply impossible to consent to the ending of one's life.

 

[BlindedHunter]

As always the strange debate over the "right to death".
How can it not be a little strange, after all, where simply considering something qualifies you as unable to legally consider it?
He ought not have gotten a life sentence for what he did. If I were to make the call, I'd put his troubles at a psych evaluation and maybe a short while of counseling to be sure it wouldn't become more of a Hannibal Lecter issue.
To be sure it dissolves down to a very moral-driven, and emotion-guided, debate, but there has to be a point, I think, where a person retains as complete a control over their own lives as they can. Really, I'm not so sure that we can so firmly state depression is the wrong state of mind sometimes. Maybe there are reasons so many people are diagnosed each year?

 

[Dr. Pepper Unlimited]

How old is this article, because to me, it shows it being published back in 2006...?

 

[Swny Nerdgasm]

The man committed a crime and therefore he should be put in jail, no second guessing, you do something illegal, you go down

 

[ultrachicken]

Just because someone agrees to let you commit a crime doesn't mean it isn't a crime.

 

[renegade7]

snip

Personally, I'm not as interested in the argument about assisted suicide as I am in the argument about the inherent morality of cannibalism itself, but who am I to dictate what this thread is interested in?

The assumption throughout your argument seems to be that it's wrong for people to kill themselves. This is different from saying that you don't like it when people kill themselves. If I had it my way, no one would ever be so eager for death that they would opt to bring themselves to it. But things are not wrong simply because they upset us. Homosexuality is very upsetting for a lot of people, but that doesn't make it wrong for someone to have gay sex. What I think is the crucial point here is whether the consequences of suicide outweigh the right of the individual to make his own decisions about his fate. It seems to me that, regardless of the fact that people will mourn the loss of that life, the right to choose one's destiny, even if that destiny is premature death, supersedes other considerations.

At the same time, I can see the argument about incapacity. If someone is suffering from a mental illness that prevents them from seeing better alternatives to suicide, it would seem criminal to not stop them and treat them. I would just be careful about assuming that all instances of suicidal thoughts are results of mental illness, and not rational decision.

Well people do have the right to choose their own destiny...I just think that is one that ought to be highly discouraged, and hopefully prevented. Same with drug abuse, you might say it's your own choice but
by no means is it a good one.

 

[Unesh52]

Well people do have the right to choose their own destiny...I just think that is one that ought to be highly discouraged, and hopefully prevented. Same with drug abuse, you might say it's your own choice but
by no means is it a good one.

Well I also think that most kinds of drugs should be legalized too. You can make a pretty good case for, say, meth, since that shit tends to make people go ape and murder folks for pocket change, but if the drug only causes harm to the individual and doesn't cause drug induced crime, then it should be legal. It should still be discouraged -- drugs, suicide, and that sort of thing need to be part of an active dialog in schools and in the media -- but making them illegal is just infringing on the freedom of people to decide things for themselves.

 

[Unesh52]

Just because someone agrees to let you commit a crime doesn't mean it isn't a crime.

Taking money from someone can be a crime in some cases, and not a crime in others. Whether it is a crime or not is generally dependent on whether the person consented to having his money taken. You are assuming that consent is irrelevant to deciding whether someone being killed is criminal, but you need to support that a little more. It's relevant in deciding the criminality of other types of actions, why isn't it relevant here?

 

[Veldt Falsetto]

The only thing I can think of is the IT crowd episode with the german.

He was a fine young cannibal!

 

[Normandyfoxtrot]

Just because someone agrees to let you commit a crime doesn't mean it isn't a crime.

Taking money from someone can be a crime in some cases, and not a crime in others. Whether it is a crime or not is generally dependent on whether the person consented to having his money taken. You are assuming that consent is irrelevant to deciding whether someone being killed is criminal, but you need to support that a little more. It's relevant in deciding the criminality of other types of actions, why isn't it relevant here?

In most if not all countries its simply impossible to give consent to end ones life, it's illegal, period.

 

[Sonicron]

Seriously, internet? This happened back in 2001. How does this mess cause an outcry now...? I actually had to think hard to remember I'd seen this nonsense before, even though it was big news here when it happened a decade ago.
Come on, folks, there's got to be other outrageous things to discuss. This is not news, it's olds.

 

[Sonicron]

-video snip-

It's funny you posted that clip from 'Werner: Beinhart'. You see, that public square (called the 'Blücherplatz') is located less than 500 metres from my apartment, and I go there to shop for fresh food twice a week. There's a lot of fun to be had on market day, especially if you bring along a soccer ball and a few friends... even got a few terrified looks from the fish vendors.

-EDIT- Errr... sorry for the double post. :\

 

[renegade7]

Well people do have the right to choose their own destiny...I just think that is one that ought to be highly discouraged, and hopefully prevented. Same with drug abuse, you might say it's your own choice but
by no means is it a good one.

Well I also think that most kinds of drugs should be legalized too. You can make a pretty good case for, say, meth, since that shit tends to make people go ape and murder folks for pocket change, but if the drug only causes harm to the individual and doesn't cause drug induced crime, then it should be legal. It should still be discouraged -- drugs, suicide, and that sort of thing need to be part of an active dialog in schools and in the media -- but making them illegal is just infringing on the freedom of people to decide things for themselves.

I agree that some drugs should be legalized, but I'm talking about abuse, not just use, ie deciding to take it to excess and regularly get high out of your mind to the point at which you're a danger to yourself or others...if that's the case then even if it is legal it's not a good idea...same with eating too much junk food, it may be legal and it may be relatively fine if not consumed regularly, but eating too much (food abuse?) is definitely not a good choice.

 

[NotSoLoneWanderer]

At some point a lawyer has gotta say, I don't think I can defend you.

 

[Unesh52]

In most if not all countries its simply impossible to give consent to end ones life, it's illegal, period.

Consent laws are based on capacity and ownership. The ownership part is pretty straightforward -- you can't declare consent for things that aren't yours. I can't consent to you taking my brother's money because it's not mine. I can't consent to you having sex with someone because I am not that person. But clearly you own your own life, so that part is settled. So when we say that no one can ever properly consent to terminating their own life, we assume that anyone who would give such a consent lacks capacity (is too young or is mentally unstable or whatever). It's a catch 22 sort of thing. You can only consent if you have capacity, but you would only want to consent if you lack capacity. If that's not true, and sometimes people who are rational (as far as the law is concerned) decide to end their own life, then the law that makes all intentional, non-defensive killings illegal is an unjust law.

So the question here is whether it's possible to want to kill yourself if you are a rational individual. I think it's possible, even if it's unlikely. (That doesn't seem to be the case here, as the guy who died was reportedly disturbed in a way that precluded consent, so it's morally wrong, besides being against the law.) Consider a man with a mystic sort of new age religion. He whole heartedly believes that there is life after death that's actually quite similar to our own. When his lover dies, he decides that his life in that world (with her) would be better than his life in this one, and he decides to kill himself. The decision was made not out of a passionate depression brought on by the passing of his loved one, but by a simple mode of reasoning based on some basic assumptions which in general would not classify him as mentally unstable. He has the ownership and the capacity; he has all the usual requirements for consent. Does this person lack the capacity to consent to his own death? Is there some other consideration which invalidates his consent?

 

[ShadowsofHope]

..How is this even news worth talking about when it happened more than a decade ago, and has little to no bearing on society in the current day save for one mentally ill individual already in prison?

Seriously, people..

 

[Tharwen]

That's... unusual. Hasn't this happened in Germany before? I think I've heard about it somewhere.

And who the hell are the fuckin lawyers on this case? You have to really be a top of the line crap eater if you try to let this guy go free.

Everyone has the right to a fair trial. Even if the fair outcome is a life sentence, both sides should be presented as well as possible.