Poll: If you could go back in time and kill one person who would it be?

[Gerazzi]

This is a huge hypothetical situation and I doubt many people think about it.
If you could go back in time and kill someone, whoever you want, with no consequences.

So what'll it be?

If you would kill someone:

1. Who would you kill?

2. Why would you kill them?

3. Which way would you like them to die?

If you decided you don't want to kill them:

What is your reason for not killing anyone?

Also, you cannot be killed while you are back in time and you basically have the powers of a god.

What would you do, Escapist?

 

[El Poncho]

I wouldn't kil anyone because it might change the future:|

 

[New Troll]

Remember the original ending to Butterfly Effect?

 

[Neonbob]

1. The first man ever.
2. Because it would be funny to me. And I'd want to at least try, even if the resulting paradox would cancel out my actions.
3. Cave his skull in with a rock while he sleeps.

 

[Trivun]

Too much history would be changed. So I go back and kill Hitler. Fine. Then Russia suddenly becomes really powerful in the absence of Germany attempting to oppress them. Hence Russia is more powerful in the Cold War than they were in history and end up beating the USA. That causes a major turning point which leads to communism spread all over the world. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. If you change the past there will always be unforseen consequences. History is too volatile, it's as simple as that.

 

[Zenode]

Well preferably

Hitler

/thread

 

[ghalkhsdkssakgh]

No. I think we have to take the bad with the good. Screwing with the past would be to likely to mess up the present. I like my existance, thank you.

 

[Monshroud]

While this always seems like an interesting idea, I would be afraid of the so-called Butterfly Effect. What would happen to the world if Hitler or Stalin never existed, or even Osama Bin Laden. Even the best intentions can have terrible consequences. I know there is the argument that millions of people would be alive today, but what if a billion more died because Korea bombed the hell out of China because they invented the Atomic Bomb first...

 

[Canadamus Prime]

I wouldn't do it. Two words: Butterfly effect.

 

[Souplex]

I would destroy the primordial soup.
Why? Cause paradoxes are funny.
How? Nuke it so there is no possibility of survival.

Also for everyone who considers killing Hitler there will be paradoxes galore. We are all baby boomers/children of baby boomers/ Grandchildren of baby boomers. The baby boomer generation is a result of WWII.

 

[walls of cetepedes]

Too much history would be changed. So I go back and kill Hitler. Fine. Then Russia suddenly becomes really powerful in the absence of Germany attempting to oppress them. Hence Russia is more powerful in the Cold War than they were in history and end up beating the USA. That causes a major turning point which leads to communism spread all over the world. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. If you change the past there will always be unforseen consequences. History is too volatile, it's as simple as that.

That is the plot of 'Command and Conquer: Red Alert'.

OT: I wouldn't kill anyone. Because of TIME PARADOXes.

 

[Eatbrainz]

Id go back to the garden of eden and kill the serpent because he probably shouldnt have been there in the first place.

 

[Jedoro]

I would only go back and kill someone if it was guaranteed to make the world a better place.

If I knew that, I'd kill the person whose lack of existence made the best difference.

 

[Strategia]

1.) Jesus.
2.) Christianity killed Greek philosophy, Greek scientific theory, Greco-Roman culture, and IMO aided the downfall of the Roman Empire. Enter about 900 years of superstitious faith-mongering and living in squalid conditions, with the occasional troupe of people heading east to commit some mass murder. Then, after all that ended, the persecution and religious wars began. Only since the nineteenth century has Christianity receded into the background as an instigator of violence and misery, and then only because it was replaced with ideals like nationalism, socialism and, later, national socialism. No Christianity = much, much less religious violence. (Please direct any discussion on this topic to PMs, let's not clutter up this thread, ok?)
3.) Quickly and without any witnesses, preferably before he got a messiah complex. Maybe drop a rock on his head or something.

 

[AMCization]

If I was doing it just because, with no danger of messing up my existence. I would probably take down someone who did something really good, just to see what would have happened without him. Like, Abraham Lincoln, or Ghandi. For research purposes of course.

But if we were being serious, it would probably be like, Robert Mugabe in his youth...I dislike that guy lots >_<

 

[SpikeyGirl]

I have no idea.
If I had to pick someone, I'd just go and kill someone just before the would normally die. Therefore with any luck, no paradox.

 

[FallenRainbows]

Your great grandfather

Directed at who ever is reading.

 

[walls of cetepedes]

I have no idea.
If I had to pick someone, I'd just go and kill someone just before the would normally die. Therefore with any luck, no paradox.

Yes, but instead of it being passed off as an accident or natural cause, there would be an investigation into his death, which diverts police resources, which means other things may not be discovered... etc etc. It's horribly complicated.

 

[RebelRising]

1.) Jesus.
2.) Christianity killed Greek philosophy, Greek scientific theory, Greco-Roman culture, and IMO aided the downfall of the Roman Empire. Enter about 900 years of superstitious faith-mongering and living in squalid conditions, with the occasional troupe of people heading east to commit some mass murder. Then, after all that ended, the persecution and religious wars began. Only since the nineteenth century has Christianity receded into the background as an instigator of violence and misery, and then only because it was replaced with ideals like nationalism, socialism and, later, national socialism. No Christianity = much, much less religious violence. (Please direct any discussion on this topic to PMs, let's not clutter up this thread, ok?)
3.) Quickly and without any witnesses, preferably before he got a messiah complex. Maybe drop a rock on his head or something.

While this is going to get you flamed very quickly, I definitely agree with all of your #2 points. To be honest, Christianity was a bad influence on Russia as well, though the Orthodox tradition is nowhere near as bad as what went on in the West. The Classical civilizations were abruptly cut off by the alien influences of the Abrahamic ideals. In essence, this.