Murderers

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

I'm sorry to hear about your friend.

But that doesn't give you universal insight into the mind of every person who ever robbed a convenience store.

Nor can you say with any authority that every crime of passion is carried out with the same intent or forethought.

I realize you have a penchant for absolutes, but sorry, I see too much complexity in the world for that.

Yeah it does. I don't even need that experience - I was just next door and heard the shot - to know that a person wielding a firearm when he's committing a robbery has had to have thought about shooting the thing.

I wasn't talking about every crime of passion, I was talking about armed robbery, which is a premeditated act and NOT a crime of passion.

And no, I deal only in absolutes when absolutes are the appropriate currency. Needless to say, my posts on THIS topic are about gradations of gravity.

 

[doughgirl]

"Hmmmmm....a husband gets sick at work and goes home early, to find the cable-guy riding his wife for all she's worth. He freaks out, grabs the cuckold's head, and breaks his neck.

A husband finds a new chickie, but the old hen is in the way. He spends three months engineering the means to kill the old lady and dispose of the body effectively."




Boy do you watch the LIFETIME for woman channel. :lol:

 

[mixedmedia]

Yeah it does. I don't even need that experience - I was just next door and heard the shot - to know that a person wielding a firearm when he's committing a robbery has had to have thought about shooting the thing.

No it doesn't. There is no way your exposure to one tragic crime can sum up every other crime in that same broad category.

I wasn't talking about every crime of passion, I was talking about armed robbery, which is a premeditated act and NOT a crime of passion.

I was referring to the husband shooting his wife's lover. You cannot sum that scenario with one set of factors. Wouldn't you view a husband who has had a history of violence differently than one who hasn't?

And no, I deal only in absolutes when absolutes are the appropriate currency. Needless to say, my posts on THIS topic are about gradations of gravity.

Well, your gradations stop suddenly at the threshold of your absolutes.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

No it doesn't. There is no way your exposure to one tragic crime can sum up every other crime in that same broad category.

Let's get the facts straight.

Are you, or are you not, arguing that a man with a gun intent on robbery didn't have to think about using the weapon before he entered the store?

I was referring to the husband shooting his wife's lover. You cannot sum that scenario with one set of factors. Wouldn't you view a husband who has had a history of violence differently than one who hasn't?

Certainly. But I'd still consider that crime to be less heinous than the premeditated murder of a store clerk.

 

[vergiss]

That's something that anger management therapy could solve. After he's served his term, he is unlikely to be a threat to society anymore.

Bull. Same could be said about the convenience store guy - most people who hold up stores, banks etc are just desperate junkies who don't know what they're doing, anyway. When murders or injuries happen, it's because of panic. They don't saunter into a shop thinking "I'm going to shoot some random guy!"

What's more, Scarecrow Akbar, the convenience store murder itself was NOT pre-meditated. In fact, it was probably less so than the cuckolded husband - how soon after walking in on them does he kill them?

 

[Jerry]

I had a brief discussion about this type of thing with a gentlemen in another thread.

Is there a difference in your eyes between a man who holds up a convenience store and murders the clerk and a man who murders his wife's suitor after he walks in on them?

We had a similiar dialogue about the difference between killing a child and killing an adult.

Is murder murder and always a single degree of such a thing? Does the man who witnesses his wife's adultery get any sympathy/mercy/understanding at all from you or is he the same as the asshole that held up the convenience store and put a bullet in the clerk after he handed over the money?

We report, you decide.

A man who murders his wife when he walks in on the act could plea Temporary Insanity, ie: "not guilty by reason of [temporary] mental defect" from "severe mental anguish or psychological trauma" and declare that the murder was a Crime of Passion (not to be confused with a "hate crime").

Armed robberies are drastically more difficult to prove as Crimes of Passion in court. The law sees a difference between the 2. So yes, there are levels of murder. Basically, 1st. degree murder is premeditated and in "cold blood"; 2nd degree murder is spontaneous and may or may not be in "cold blood"; 3rd. degree murder is a generic term for all of the various forms and degrees of Homicide.

In my mind, I would need to observe someone's life in immediate danger in order to draw my weapon. Now, if I were to "assume" that my wife were being raped, well, then murder becomes Justifiable Homicide, as "immediate forcable sexual penetration" can be met with lethal force.

Though, knowing myself, I would probably go get the camera and collect evidence for the court proceedings and for my children's future questions regarding why their parents got divorced.

 

[vergiss]

Me?

"Oh, crap, I guess now's not a good time to tell you I have HIV."

 

[Jerry]

Let's broaden this out a bit to see if people still fail to employ moral reasoning in other situations:

I love hypotheticals.....lets see how I do....

Person A causes the death of person B in each case:

Situation A -- person A is driving a car and the brakes fail, the car running into person B.
That would fall on who's fault the brake failure was. Was it the car's owner who didn't upkeep the car, was it the mechanic who did a crappy job, was it an unforeseeable part failure.....?

Situation B -- person A is driving a car, and their foot slips off the brake
Driver error. Involuntary manslaughter.

Situation C -- person A is talking on the cell phone and doesn't notice person B
Driver negligence. Manslaughter.

Situation D -- person A is drunk and runs a stop light
DWI, Reckless driving. Manslaughter.

Situation E -- person A intentionally runs the stop light.
Recless Endangerment, Recless Driving. Manslaughter-Murder 2, depending.

Situation F -- person A and person B just had a big fight and person A speeds up when approaching person B
Murder 2

Situation G -- Person A runs over person b and person b is only injured, so person A runs over them again.
Murder 2-Murder 1 + Depraved Indifference.

Situation H -- person A runs over person B until legs are pinned, then proceeds to torture person B to death.
Murder 1 + Depraved Indifference + applicable Domestic Terrorism charges; depending.

Situation I -- well, I could get carried away, but won't.
Violations of FAA regulations for failure too register your flying disk, file a flight plan and violating restricted military/civilian airspace; kidnapping, unlawful possesion of a human, unlawful use of an anal-probe :shock: ..........

 

[mixedmedia]

Let's get the facts straight.

Are you, or are you not, arguing that a man with a gun intent on robbery didn't have to think about using the weapon before he entered the store?

I am arguing that people who rob convenience stores can have a multitude of stories leading them there and that it is highly possible that they didn't intend to use the gun for any purpose other than getting the money.

Certainly. But I'd still consider that crime to be less heinous than the premeditated murder of a store clerk.

And that is your consideration. I see many contributing factors that could influence my own.

 

[Blue Collar Joe]

I am arguing that people who rob convenience stores can have a multitude of stories leading them there and that it is highly possible that they didn't intend to use the gun for any purpose other than getting the money.


And that is your consideration. I see many contributing factors that could influence my own.

I see a big difference. The husband/wife is returning to their home, which they both work to maintain and keep. It is their property (until someone wants a mall built there, anyway.:doh ).
Safe to assume they are tax payers, and the firearm is there for home protection. Thus, going on the premise of the normal situation, no planning in advance. (Lets break it down to the lowest common denominator rather than the ever popular hypothesis used to try and ruin a good debate. You can almost always come up with a scenario that doesn't normally fit.)
Is it premeditated? No. It is a crime of passion. Pappa Bear kills the bear playing hide the salami with Mamma Bear. He didn't have any intention of doing so.

The guy that holds up the store would probably get second degree, but only if the clerk tried to shoot him. He still went into someone elses property with the intention of committing a crime. It would be murder one if he decided to kill a clerk that didn't fight, but simply opened the cash register and gave the guy the money. Entirely different. He carried a weapon INTO someone elses property, and planned a criminal activity.
Now, if he walked into the store and caught the clerk buffing his wifes privates, then I'd have to reconsider...

 

[aquapub]

Is there a difference in your eyes between a man who holds up a convenience store and murders the clerk and a man who murders his wife's suitor after he walks in on them?

We had a similiar dialogue about the difference between killing a child and killing an adult.

Is murder murder and always a single degree of such a thing? Does the man who witnesses his wife's adultery get any sympathy/mercy/understanding at all from you or is he the same as the asshole that held up the convenience store and put a bullet in the clerk after he handed over the money?

Our entire legal system is based (rightly) on the intent of the assailant. This is why the coldest, most calculated killers (murder for hire, cop killers, killing to get away with/get rid of evidence of another crime, murder for insurance money, etc.) get charged with Murder 1-the death penalty while crimes of rage (like the adultery scenario you provided) get Murder 2-25 to life. And if you killed someone without any intent, out of recklessness, like drunk driving, then it drops down to Manslaughter 1, 2, or 3.

I think it makes more sense to do it the way we do than to base punishments on how much damage the person did or who he killed, etc. Criminal justice systems are always going to be flawed because they are run by humans, but the closest we can come to true justice is by basing everything on the intent of the assailant.

 

[Blue Collar Joe]

And if you killed someone without any intent, out of recklessness, like drunk driving, then it drops down to Manslaughter 1, 2, or 3.

I think it makes more sense to do it the way we do than to base punishments on how much damage the person did or who he killed, etc. Criminal justice systems are always going to be flawed because they are run by humans, but the closest we can come to true justice is by basing everything on the intent of the assailant.

I do not agree with Drunk Driving being involuntary. Only an utter moron doesn't realize the risk of driving while intoxicated.