from julian buhrings' blog, she's a ledgend
http://julianabuhring.blogspot.com/2008/03/time-to-live-and-time-to-die.html
Thursday, 27 March 2008
A Time to Live and a Time to Die?
Justice has protected the guilty and failed the innocent. The guilty are now protected under the politically correct banner of ‘Human Rights’. They have the right to roam this planet without serious consequence, as long as they have the money and the power to pay off enough people. They have the right to spend a few perfunctory years in a cell while they “contemplate” their crime, or rather, plan how to get away with the next one once they are released. Meanwhile, they have irredeemably damaged lives, and the consequences of their actions has indefinite ripple effects on generations to come. A paedophile who molests a small child and spends 10 years in prison, will be released without actually being cured of their sickness, but much wiser about how to prevent being caught the next time around. Meanwhile, the child they have abused grows up to inflict harm on themselves and those around them, continuing the cycle on their child and their child’s child and on it goes.
Is there a solution, or is society, for lack of a better word, fucked? We are quick to rail on the death penalty and it could be argued that because the justice system is imperfect, there will always be innocents who will be wrongly implicated. This may be true, but which is worse? To allow those who cannot be reformed, who given the chance will continue to harm and destroy human lives, to continue on this planet and in society, or to exterminate them and potentially a small number of innocents with them? Is one innocent life worth 100 guilty? This question is not popular discussion. It is too uncomfortable to question our humanity, our morality, our mortality.
Let’s take the discussion to the root of the problem, the chicken with the egg, so to speak. The parents. Life begins because of two people, whose lives began with two people and so on and so forth. If the child was neglected and failed to form human connection or attachment, they can grow to be a psychopath lacking emotion or connection to human society. A child is abused by a parent, they can inflict similar abuse upon their child, continuing the cycle. But where does it start and where does it end? It could be argued that those parents who damage their children were themselves damaged. Are they then to blame? When is a person old enough to account for their actions, or can we now write everything off to “childhood trauma”, and thus excuse all actions and consequences?
Here’s another question, is there a time when it is right to kill? If a person is irrevocably damaged that they can only inflict harm on themselves and those around them, when they have reached the point that they can no longer be helped, when there is no longer a side of them that can be reasoned with, appealed to, when their existence on this planet becomes entirely destructive in purpose, is there a reason that they should continue to exist? Should we continue to feel any kind of moral compunction to keep them alive, when our own survival instincts should demand that we end their life before they end ours? What if they were harmed and abused as children? Should their actions be justified, and excused because of a “rough childhood”? Should their parents, or whoever was responsible for damaging them be given the same sentence, and what if the parents of their parents abused them? How far can we take it, how far does it go and when does it stop, or does it ever?
So back to the question, is there a time to kill? What if some kind of daredevil assassin existed who killed solely those people who harm innocent and defenceless children? If this assassin killed in order to ensure the next generation of children grew up safe from the predators; would they be justified in killing? If so, can society then justify killing these same people who cannot be rehabilitated? Continuing the line of thought, how can we determine who can and cannot be reformed? Should we consider age, background, IQ? Frankly, it is nearly impossible to set any kind of clear standard, because the diversity of human kind means that the notion of a ‘final solution’ is in itself a formal contradiction.
It seems there is no simple answer, only more questions. The more I think about it, the more my head goes round and round and the more pissed off I become. Society, as I see it, has failed in more respects than it has found solutions, and no institution has demonstrated this more clearly than the justice system. However, the justice system is run by humans, and therein lies the problem, the root of all evil and also the source of redemption—ourselves. The greatest achievement of evolution and the most despicable. There are times when I want to shout at the triumphs of mankind and other times when I want to wash humanity off me like a bad smell. The power of life and death rests with us. Who determines who lives and who dies? We do. There are laws to prevent random murder, but then, random murder happens anyway, and it seems to me that it is the wrong people being killed and the wrong people who are allowed to live.
This is not a call to vigilantism, it is simply a subject that I'm sure many of us have thought of, but people are too afraid to address. Though I don't condone murder and I don't condone the death penalty, I know every time I hear of some pervert who has sexually molested babies, I think, 'why is this man allowed to live? Clearly anyone who preys on an innocent and defenseless baby is a monster and has crossed the boundary of what makes us human!' But then again, what does make us human? What is it to be 'human'?
(Admin note: Please be cautioned. Not for young/sensitive readers.)
Well what about cutting their b******* off.
I couldn't agree more. Chemical castration makes sense for the worst offenders.
the big questions in life fascinates me .it is important to make a decision on which lines we stand etc
i guess i was reading and i know its a question i've asked myself.i watched a movie (alien vs predator) where aliens were attacking a city to kill humans.there was a group of survivors that contacted the military, who then told them to go back into the centre of the city as there would be a helicopter or some sort of rescue. oh,the aliens could turn humans into aliens by having sex or something.it turns out that the decision was made to drop like a mad-ass-killer bomb that destroys any form of life in like a 1000mile radius.
ultimately, they decided to kill the innocent for the sake of the country.
know,if i was one of the innocent i would be pissed off!i'd like to think that everyONE matters.it takes one to cause a ripple effect.
again,the question of human value comes up.depends on how you see humans.if I, and everyONE in the world, thought and knew and acted like everyONE is valuable as valuable as...diamonds (the worlds general view of it).i was going to say,as people we are selfish and when it comes down to it we probably will always save ourselves, aka the most valuable thing a person has is concerning themselves.so i was going to say that,if we treated people like ourselves = a better world.but the state of the world,some dont even feel any worth.probably see sand as more worthy then people, as, are constantly digging for sand to maintain roads,buildings etc.
anyway,if society/people/the world treated eachother like diamonds and felt that they were diamonds then i dont think this problem would exist.
in a way,i ask myself...because of the world we are in,even like you proposed,killing off evil,there would still be this problem of evil.you kill all the bad guys,then your still left with media and influences.even if you killed that off,your left with human nature...selfishness.(as a race, we are alive aka survive because of the selfish instinct) we dont really think first of how our actions affect those around us.
kill the innocent to save the many?i feel that i cannot agree.to be honest i could be some hitler person,i could be that evil "bastard" that just doesnt care. i ask myself,am i the lucky one?i could be a totally different person right now and justifiably so.but something came and changed that,hope happened.i could be in a hole and not know the meaning of beauty,life,hope,friends etc etc. would i rather die than to cause others to, in their own way die because of me?would i rather die and save "the world"?when it comes down to it,the honest answer,when no one is around and i'm by myself,when i ask myself the question,truth is that i want to feel.i want to be helped.i want to love or be loved.to be "free".i want to be human.in essence,i want a second chance.and i think its murder the way the justice system works.yes your locked up to plan the next xyz but thats cause there's probably nothing "better".no real support.no one cares.your just a statistic.thats the reality of the "world" we live in.
is it worth killing the one to save the million,in truth, i dont know.but who,which person dares to condemn me to death.death emotionally,sexualy,spiritually etc etc.even the one who condems me is in a way a killer or "guilty". But I do think that we need rules aka law.
it is the ONE that matters.he is a pervert and we society have created that appetite for him.
is there a time to kill?i cant respond and say everything has its own time because i cant then say that, there is a time to be taken advantage of,violated,silenced and not even seen.but i feel i cannot say this.if i say there is a time to kill,then there is a time for everything else.which sounds like i'm championing "perverts" and the like.
our world is like an environment.and an environment has the power to determine things. Eg laws of gravity,law of time. if i plant sunflowers in good soil,they will grow.if i plant them in water...maybe there's a fish that eats sunflower seeds.
my conclusion,its an imperfect world that we live in.love the ONE your with.do the "little" you can do.start a ripple.
at the minute i dont think i can quite tick those boxes but i intend to.
ps sorry for the LONG reply.what are your thoughts?thanks for the question