jackbrock
Sophomore
@jackbrock
Posts: 119
Likes: 20
|
Post by jackbrock on Jul 21, 2023 0:47:11 GMT
I think you are confusing autonomy with being subject to the local laws. Interesting. Where do we get autonomy from if not the law? The law is part of it, the other human customs and beliefs.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 21, 2023 0:54:49 GMT
He also had a double homicide charge for killing a pregnant woman. OJ killed two people, one a white woman. He got off. If I stabbed a pregnant woman and she lived but the baby didn't, do you think I should only be charged with assault? Or maybe attempted murder at best?
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 21, 2023 0:55:58 GMT
Interesting. Where do we get autonomy from if not the law? The law is part of it, the other human customs and beliefs. Is the law not based on human customs and beliefs?
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jul 21, 2023 1:08:24 GMT
The law is part of it, the other human customs and beliefs. Is the law not based on human customs and beliefs?
According to captainbryce,
So, seems so.
|
|
jackbrock
Sophomore
@jackbrock
Posts: 119
Likes: 20
|
Post by jackbrock on Jul 21, 2023 1:14:41 GMT
The law is part of it, the other human customs and beliefs. Is the law not based on human customs and beliefs? Sometimes. Mostly special interest groups from both political parties.
|
|
jackbrock
Sophomore
@jackbrock
Posts: 119
Likes: 20
|
Post by jackbrock on Jul 21, 2023 1:15:28 GMT
Is the law not based on human customs and beliefs?
According to captainbryce,
So, seems so.
I am not captain bryce.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 21, 2023 1:25:30 GMT
Is the law not based on human customs and beliefs? Sometimes. Mostly special interest groups from both political parties. Name one law that isn't based on human customs and/or beliefs.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 21, 2023 1:26:21 GMT
According to captainbryce, So, seems so.
I am not captain bryce. Thank God for small favors.
|
|
jackbrock
Sophomore
@jackbrock
Posts: 119
Likes: 20
|
Post by jackbrock on Jul 21, 2023 22:33:49 GMT
Sometimes. Mostly special interest groups from both political parties. Name one law that isn't based on human customs and/or beliefs. The laws that allowed banking regulations to become more relaxed, resulting in 2008 crisis. Those were meant for a certain few to profit.
|
|
jackbrock
Sophomore
@jackbrock
Posts: 119
Likes: 20
|
Post by jackbrock on Jul 21, 2023 22:38:02 GMT
OJ killed two people, one a white woman. He got off. If I stabbed a pregnant woman and she lived but the baby didn't, do you think I should only be charged with assault? Or maybe attempted murder at best? Depends. How much money do you have? If you go for a public defender, you're looking at the book getting thrown at you. A good lawyer - assault. A great lawyer - It was self defense.
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jul 21, 2023 23:14:49 GMT
Name one law that isn't based on human customs and/or beliefs. The laws that allowed banking regulations to become more relaxed, resulting in 2008 crisis. Those were meant for a certain few to profit.
In other words, people BELIEVED a certain few should profit.
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jul 21, 2023 23:15:33 GMT
If I stabbed a pregnant woman and she lived but the baby didn't, do you think I should only be charged with assault? Or maybe attempted murder at best? Depends. How much money do you have? If you go for a public defender, you're looking at the book getting thrown at you. A good lawyer - assault. A great lawyer - It was self defense.
The question was what are the police going to charge him with? The police are going to charge him with self defense because he's got a great lawyer?
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Jul 22, 2023 0:13:42 GMT
Because laws are a reflection of the BELIEFS of lawmakers, not objective facts. You might as well be asking me why “spanking” your neighbors kid results in an ASSAULT charge when spanking your own does not. Sometimes laws are stupid, just like the people. So murder, rape and robbery being wrong, are not objective facts and just beliefs some stupid people have. Thanks for clarifying.
If non sequiturs and straw man arguments are the only ones you have left, then I can basically rest my case on that alone (as you no longer have one).
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jul 22, 2023 1:12:00 GMT
So murder, rape and robbery being wrong, are not objective facts and just beliefs some stupid people have. Thanks for clarifying.
If non sequiturs and straw man arguments are the only ones you have left, then I can basically rest my case on that alone (as you no longer have one).
Your own words.
So you're saying murder, rape and robbery are not factually wrong.
|
|
jackbrock
Sophomore
@jackbrock
Posts: 119
Likes: 20
|
Post by jackbrock on Jul 22, 2023 1:15:27 GMT
Depends. How much money do you have? If you go for a public defender, you're looking at the book getting thrown at you. A good lawyer - assault. A great lawyer - It was self defense.
The question was what are the police going to charge him with? The police are going to charge him with self defense because he's got a great lawyer?
You can't read.
|
|
jackbrock
Sophomore
@jackbrock
Posts: 119
Likes: 20
|
Post by jackbrock on Jul 22, 2023 1:16:10 GMT
Thank God for small favors. I take it you're not a fan of his.
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jul 22, 2023 1:22:18 GMT
The question was what are the police going to charge him with? The police are going to charge him with self defense because he's got a great lawyer?
You can't read.
He's not asking what's the jury going to find him. He's asking what you think he should be CHARGED with.
|
|
djorno
Sophomore
@djorno
Posts: 322
Likes: 81
|
Post by djorno on Jul 27, 2023 15:53:33 GMT
Then explain why killing a pregnant woman results in a DOUBLE homicide charge. You don't get that for killing a person carrying a potted plant.
Because as explained to you before, illegal killing is always murder or manslaughter, legal killing (where abortion is allowed for instance, state executions etc) is not. Please try and remember the distinction. It will save you embarrassing yourself all over.. It was legal for the nazis to kill Jews during world war 2. It was legal to own slaves in America during the 16th century…
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 27, 2023 19:40:34 GMT
It was legal for the nazis to kill Jews during world war It is still the case that legal killing is not murder. In the UK for instance homicides may be justifiable, excusable or criminal, depending upon the circumstances of the killing and the state of mind of the killer. As a matter of fact all legal systems make important distinctions between different types of homicide. In Nazi Germany the Holocaust in the sense of the Final Solution at least (as I understand it) was the result of Nazi policy, largely internally unopposed, agreed on at such events as the infamous Wannsee Conference rather than through the passing of a final, fatal 'Holocaust law'. (Other laws depriving Jews of civil rights were certainly passed though). It is also notable that when it came to the very worst the Nazis were often wary of spelling things out. But at appears you are attempting a Reductio ad Hitlerum also known as playing the Nazi card, usually an attempt to invalidate someone else's argument on the basis that the same idea was promoted or practised by Adolf Hitler or the Nazi Party. And as I do not use the Holocaust to score points or otherwise in discussions out of respect unfortunately I will not reply to this example again. It must be obvious that anything at a time and in a place which is legal is not illegal until the law changes - even if today we find it reprehensible. Such as burning witches or torturing heretics for instance.
|
|
djorno
Sophomore
@djorno
Posts: 322
Likes: 81
|
Post by djorno on Jul 27, 2023 20:33:12 GMT
It was legal for the nazis to kill Jews during world war It is still the case that legal killing is not murder. In the UK for instance homicides may be justifiable, excusable or criminal, depending upon the circumstances of the killing and the state of mind of the killer. As a matter of fact all legal systems make important distinctions between different types of homicide. In Nazi Germany the Holocaust in the sense of the Final Solution at least (as I understand it) was the result of Nazi policy, largely internally unopposed, agreed on at such events as the infamous Wannsee Conference rather than through the passing of a final, fatal 'Holocaust law'. (Other laws depriving Jews of civil rights were certainly passed though). But at appears you are attempting a Reductio ad Hitlerum also known as playing the Nazi card, usually an attempt to invalidate someone else's argument on the basis that the same idea was promoted or practised by Adolf Hitler or the Nazi Party. And as I do not use the Holocaust to score points or otherwise in discussions out of respect unfortunately I will not reply to this example again. I can't see how this is relevant. It must be obvious that anything at a time and in a place which is legal is not illegal until the law changes - even if today we find it reprehensible. Such as burning witches or torturing heretics for instance. The point is just because something is legal doesn’t mean it’s not immoral or should be acceptable.
|
|