Poll: Are murderers forgivable?

[Jedoro]

I got no problem with murdering bad people, like those sons of fucks who get off on technicalities in trials or members of organized crime. It's illegal to kill 'em, but damn do they probably deserve it.

 

[Robert632]

It all depends on the context. If it's someone who truly makes the world worse by being alive, then I think that a murderer could be forgiven. If it's them acting out when they aren't in full control of their body, then I can see it being forgiven as well. Otherwise, no.

 

[Get Off My Lawn]

Depends on the circumstances. Kills for revenge/to end a dictatorship/etcetc are justice at work. Kills just because you like looking at dead bodies or something? No. Kills blindly out of rage? No.
You get the idea.

 

[Bobzer77]

If someone is truly sorry for something they did.

And I mean actually truly, absolutely sorry, I could probably forgive them.

 

[Timberwolf0924]

everyone deserves forgiveness, no matter the crime, no matter the person race creed religion or gender. They all deserve forgiveness

 

[ShikyoTenshi]

Just give me any thoughts you have. Personally, I hold to the idea that any act is forgivable, with the exception of first degree murder. To me, once you kill someone else, planned it out and executed them, you have crossed the line between human and monster.

EDIT: since people seem to not understand, I'm talking about first degree murder. Planned, thought about, and finally, done.

The real question here I think would be who is the victim? Is the victim Sam the annoying guy from work that just wont shut up? Is the victim Vicky a drug dealer that ruins the lives of people? Is the victim Robert a man who raped your sister, daughter, brother ect.? Is the victim Sue a sweet old lady slowly dying of a terminal illness that causes her excruciating pain every day that just wishes for the end but doesn't have the strength to do it herself?

If its a murder just to murder. No
If it is a murder to save the lives of others. Quite possibly.
If it is a murder for vengeance. That really seems to go both ways.
If it is proven a murder to assist a person in pain that will never get better and it was consensual. Probably yes.

 

[RubyT]

it depends if the person has changed since they murdered.

Very good point. Someone could have been a cold-blooded a**hole and murdered a whole family. After 40 years of prison, they can turn into a totally different person, one that seeks forgiveness and could be given such.

 

[Kamehapa]

Since being forgiven is on a person to person basis, I'm sure that there's someone out there who could forgive anyone for anything.

 

[Yopaz]

Depends on the murder. For starters, killing in self-defence or by accident isn't murder so they are often forgivable depending on the exact circumstances.

I'd say the following could be possibly be forgivable, depending on circumstance:

-Murder under influence of drugs or drink
-Murder under a false belief which has later been recanted
-Murder in a moment of anger
-Murder of someone who had grievous hurt yourself or someone close to you
-Murder if the murderer was a young child or severely mentally disabled at the time

However I'd say the following could never be forgiven unless the murderer was so young or disabled they were literally unaware of the conseqences:

-Murder of a child
-Murder accompanied by torture, sadism or rape of the victim

So a person willingly putting poison making him unable to make considerations will be forgiven murder? The law states (and I agree with it) that if you put yourself in a situation where you are unable to be responsible for your actions then you are still guilty of the actions you commit. This sent a schizophrenic who had killed someone behind bars. The reason he killed someone was that he had stopped taking medications because they made him gain weight.

OT: some cases should be forgiven, but most should not be left without punishment. However I will say that sending a kid to jail is a bad idea. Jail is more likely to make them messed up and likely to repeat their actions, maybe not murder, but it's hard to get out of a life of crime.

 

[Powlee]

(deleted)

 

[The Shade]

What if it was 1940 1938, and we spent a lot of time and money organizing and carrying out an assassination of Hitler? Are we still monsters?

Murder is the unlawful killing of another human.

Killing an enemy during war is not unlawful, and therefore that is not an example of murder.

Okay, how 'bout now?

 

[Brandon237]

Things that are OK in my book:
1. Self-defense
2. Revenge acts that are somewhat justifiable but still should be punished ... hey ... that's what law & order is for ... screw vigilantes (Killing a rapist ... but NOT a cop/soldier for doing his/her/its (robots are people too!) job in the line of duty ... or killing a man who only killed another in self-defense)
3. Freak accidents where you might be directly or indirectly irresponsible for the death of someone.

I really don't believe in second chance and reformation for murderers. Sure, reformation might actually work. They might actually fit in their community thanks to the money and professionals who will help a few, but the idea of working with a known murderer whose life somewhat 'improved' at the cost of an innocent man/woman is disgusting.

This + killing of serial killers / genocidal people.

Self-defence is something no law or body should ever have the right to take away, without the right to defend ones self to the full extent of their ability so long as the force is not brutally excessive (I say brutally because the current margin of error is too biased for the attacker, if they have a weapon and attack you, you should have every right to end the fight in whatever way keeps you intact).

Revenge I would consider to be almost a Latent crime of passion, so forgiveable, but not justifiable like the other two could be.

 

[JoJo]

Depends on the murder. For starters, killing in self-defence or by accident isn't murder so they are often forgivable depending on the exact circumstances.

I'd say the following could be possibly be forgivable, depending on circumstance:

-Murder under influence of drugs or drink
-Murder under a false belief which has later been recanted
-Murder in a moment of anger
-Murder of someone who had grievous hurt yourself or someone close to you
-Murder if the murderer was a young child or severely mentally disabled at the time

However I'd say the following could never be forgiven unless the murderer was so young or disabled they were literally unaware of the conseqences:

-Murder of a child
-Murder accompanied by torture, sadism or rape of the victim

So a person willingly putting poison making him unable to make considerations will be forgiven murder? The law states (and I agree with it) that if you put yourself in a situation where you are unable to be responsible for your actions then you are still guilty of the actions you commit. This sent a schizophrenic who had killed someone behind bars. The reason he killed someone was that he had stopped taking medications because they made him gain weight.

Note the words "could be possibly be forgivable". The only situation where murder would be automatically forgivable would be where the murderer was (by age or disability) entirely unable to understand what they were doing. If someone killed someone-else in a fit of drunken rage, did their time in prison and regretted what they did, came out and made a new life for themselves, I might see fit to forgive them personally. Remember being forgiven doesn't mean avoiding punishment.

 

[retyopy]

What's with all your psychologically investigative threads? This is the third one I've seen.

Seriously with parade of "Zombie apocalypses with a twist", "Am I the only one?" "Why all the hate" "Loosing faith in humanity" and any of the rest of the redundant threads we see on a daily basis, I love it when someone presents a topic that actually has some actual discussion value and does not basically exist as a "this is my answer" list. Kudos OP!

I wasn't giving him shit... it's just that the OP obviously has something on his mind.

No. This is just stuff I think about. What can I say? I'm an odd person. Then again, I don't know what goes on in peoples heads, everyone might think abouth this sort of stuff and they just don't mention it... TIME TO POST A THREAD!

 

[retyopy]

Just give me any thoughts you have. Personally, I hold to the idea that any act is forgivable, with the exception of first degree murder. To me, once you kill someone else, planned it out and executed them, you have crossed the line between human and monster.

EDIT: since people seem to not understand, I'm talking about first degree murder. Planned, thought about, and finally, done.

I went to high school with 5 guys. November after graduation there was a party. The 5 happened to be there partying. The police came and shut down the party due to noise complaints. The 5 left and went home. After that a 17 year old who was a designated driver started shuttling people home. After a few rides he answered the door to someone knocking. It happened to be the 5 who for reasons beyond logic decided that they would go back to the party and raise hell. They beat the 17 year old to death and bear maced while beating everyone at the party. They didn't plan it. They just did it. Are they forgivable? Murder can be forgivable. But sometimes it shouldn't be.

What? WHY? Why would they... God, the world is a fucked up place, isn't it?

And now, I really, really don't want to point this out, because this sort of thing should be met with nothing but utter shock, but... The amount of time spent planning is immaterial. The very thought, "hey guys, lets go kill that dude" is a plan.

And now I feel like a douche.

 

[jyork89]

The questions whether first degree murder is forgivable morally and whether it should be forgiven legally are two different things I think. On the moral standard, a person who murders a criminal is forgivable. For example, a father who murders his daughters rapist would be forgivable in my mind. I would not hold resentment towards such a person.

However, the law should still punish such people. It does not matter what the victim did to deserve it, first degree murder is still murder. Note first degree doesn't apply to self defense or spur of the moment murder. My reasons for this is simple. Vigilante justice is entirely subjective. What one person considers to be extremely wrong could be completely different to what another person considers to be extremely wrong. The reason we have courts is to create a relatively consistent and objective system of judgement.

Say for example I murder a murderer. Most people would view this as a good thing probably. However, lets say that murderer had children. Those children would not only see me as the murderer of a murderer, but as the murderer of their father. So when they murder me what have they done? They have murdered another murderer.

Since Norman England we have been developing a system where people should be relying on the court. You don't just stab someone who wrongs you. You take them to court. Vigilante justice undermines this system. For that reason motive, is irrelevant in conviction and can only help color the defendants guilty mind. By allowing a single case of vigilante justice to go unpunished we are opening the door to repeats and everyone who has been wronged will personally seek to correct the wrong.