Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - Britain says "Burglars Need Protection" <or> The lunatics Have taken Over the Asylum

4thTimeLucky · 05-11-2003, 06:01 AM

Mad-Gecko
So do you think it was right that Mr.Martin went to jail?

My argument is:
i) Every person has a right to defend themselves using only reasonable force.
ii) A person who uses unreasonable force to defend themselves should be punished.
iii) Mr. Martin used unreasonable force to defend himself.
iv) A prisoner who threatens to act in the same way again and show no repentance or remorse, you should not get parole.
v) Mr.Martin has said he would do the same again (despite the air raid siren stuff) and shows no repentence or remorse.
ii + iii) Mr.Martin should be punished/ in prison.
iv + v) Mr.Martin should not be released early.

Tried to make that a nice bit of predicate logic for you. So the floor is open to say which of my premises (i to v) you disagree with, or you can challenge whether the conclusions follow from the premises.

If logic isn't your cup of tea, then consider your argument that burglars give up their rights when they commit the offence. I have some questions for you:

1) Which crimes mean you lose your rights? Murder, theft, fraud, speeding, jay walking....
2) Do you always lose all of your rights when you commit these crimes?
3) If you do lose your right to life, then can anyone kill you (presumably yes as you're are an 'outlaw') or do you only lose your right to life in regard to your victim?
4) Is this lose of rights time limited? Can Mr.Martin trap the burglar and then torture them for the rest of their life? If not, then how many hours/days/weeks do you lose your rights for?
5) What if two people both commit crimes in regard to each other, do you both lose all rights or does the right-losing cancel itself out?
6) Assuming you are not killed, when do you regain your rights? When you leave the house? When you leave the property? When you return everything you've stolen?

I have a few more questions on your theory, but I think six is enough for now.

I look forward to hearing your answers.

PLEASE NOTE: This is not just intended for Mad_Gecko. Every one of you who believe that Mr.Martin and anyone else has the right to kill intruders should be able to say what is wrong with my argument at the top of this page and then answer the questions at the bottom. If you find the argument solid, or some of the questions silly, then maybe it is because your position is silly and that something as fundemantal as the right to life is not something you lose when you try to steal something as trivial as a piece of furniture.

05-11-2003, 06:01 AM	#33 (permalink)
4thTimeLucky Psycho Location: 4th has left the building - goodbye folks	Mad-Gecko So do you think it was right that Mr.Martin went to jail? My argument is: i) Every person has a right to defend themselves using only reasonable force. ii) A person who uses unreasonable force to defend themselves should be punished. iii) Mr. Martin used unreasonable force to defend himself. iv) A prisoner who threatens to act in the same way again and show no repentance or remorse, you should not get parole. v) Mr.Martin has said he would do the same again (despite the air raid siren stuff) and shows no repentence or remorse. ii + iii) Mr.Martin should be punished/ in prison. iv + v) Mr.Martin should not be released early. Tried to make that a nice bit of predicate logic for you. So the floor is open to say which of my premises (i to v) you disagree with, or you can challenge whether the conclusions follow from the premises. If logic isn't your cup of tea, then consider your argument that burglars give up their rights when they commit the offence. I have some questions for you: 1) Which crimes mean you lose your rights? Murder, theft, fraud, speeding, jay walking.... 2) Do you always lose all of your rights when you commit these crimes? 3) If you do lose your right to life, then can anyone kill you (presumably yes as you're are an 'outlaw') or do you only lose your right to life in regard to your victim? 4) Is this lose of rights time limited? Can Mr.Martin trap the burglar and then torture them for the rest of their life? If not, then how many hours/days/weeks do you lose your rights for? 5) What if two people both commit crimes in regard to each other, do you both lose all rights or does the right-losing cancel itself out? 6) Assuming you are not killed, when do you regain your rights? When you leave the house? When you leave the property? When you return everything you've stolen? I have a few more questions on your theory, but I think six is enough for now. I look forward to hearing your answers. PLEASE NOTE: This is not just intended for Mad_Gecko. Every one of you who believe that Mr.Martin and anyone else has the right to kill intruders should be able to say what is wrong with my argument at the top of this page and then answer the questions at the bottom. If you find the argument solid, or some of the questions silly, then maybe it is because your position is silly and that something as fundemantal as the right to life is not something you lose when you try to steal something as trivial as a piece of furniture. __________________ I've been 4thTimeLucky, you've been great. Goodnight and God bless! Last edited by 4thTimeLucky; 05-11-2003 at 06:07 AM..