![](https://steemitimages.com/DQmXfPH9dGww8iR23wSxT4tuXC6Bx6KTzN8u9w7foxUpUsp/image.png)
**HHL** What’s the morality [or justice] of killing a killer? **JL** It's difficult for me to grant the power to kill in the name of justice when self-defense against imminent harm isn't employed. Where does mercy and forgiveness come in concerning justice? Who has the authority to exact justice in killing? Why isn't a scheduled execution premeditated, intentional, and with mens rae? It's what I struggle with concerning capital punishment. **DG** Those base morals like mercy or forgiveness do not save lives **JL** Is the killer not a life? **DG** Save a killer vs a bunch of victims. Next you'll tell me to save a serial child rapist vs his next trip to a park **JL** You assume every killer will always kill again? That's not realistic. **JL** You didn't answer my question. **JL** Every killer isn't the Joker. LMAO **DG** A: How much experience do you have with mass killers? I thought so. Your opinion on realistic is, well, invalid. B: How much experience do you have with rehabilitated killers? Why do most mass shooters kill themselves? A bit of psychology is involved there. C: I did answer your question. I acknowledged that a killer's life is a life, by stating "save a killer". You're also moving towards personal morals, at which point I stated that those morals do not prevent killings. **JL** Thanks for answering my question. I proved your assertion that "those morals" "do not save lives" wrong by proving the killer that is saved is a life. Now you change it to "prevent killings". I have very little experience with mass killers and rehabilitated killers. How much experience do you have with killing a killer?...with capital punishment? **HHL** (**DG**, to interject, I understood that most mass killers are suicidal by nature. That is, the killings are linked to the outward expression of psychic pain usually seen in males but not females.) **DG** Saving 1 life does not save multiple when that 1 life is ending multiple Telling a mass shooter to stop, it's immoral, and you're better than that, does not save victims. That was my point. A bullet to his head does. I didn't mention capital punishment. I have experience in killing killers though Your point is based on morality. Justice does not concern mercy or forgiveness, just crime and punishments, prevention, deterrents, and accountability. **HHL** **DG**, you seem to be saying that, if I have the ability to end that killer's life, then I am responsible for his future victims if I do not, yes? **DG** **HHL** false. Most mass shooters become suicidal when the consequence becomes apparent. If that is before or after, it does not make a difference. I'm not even going to take the female/male bait. And yes, your actions/lack of do merit responsibility in such a situation. Which is why you can be guilty of conspiring, guilty of obstructing, guilty of negligence, and guilty of association. This does not mean if you are a victim, that you'll get incriminated. Aside from legally, if you had the ability to stop a killer, say a gun, and he didn't notice you, or you had him at a disposition, why wouldn't stop him? I'm talking about immediate suppression. Not 20 years later decide to kill them because they killed. **HHL** I certainly didn't mean the gender thing as "bait". It's well-recorded that harm in depressive cases tends inward in females and outward in males. I was basing my statement re mass killers in general on what I've read - the case of Dylan Klebold (Columbine shooter) stands out. Dylan was suicidal going into the school shooting (his partner Eric was not). **HHL** So, while it may be immoral to take a life, it may be MORE immoral (?) to allow a future killer to go free. I think **JL** was just pointing out that there is immorality in the killing. **JL** Justice not including mercy is a matter of debate. It's definitely a contentious topic that's been debated for centuries. However, you don't get to dictate what justice means to others. Like morality or ethics, justice is a matter of opinion. **JL** I agree that killing in self-defense is justified and moral. After that I consider killing to be simply revenge. **DG** **JL** justice as in the legal system. Morality needs levels of logic to be of merit. When it came to 5 Taliban commanders under lock and key in G-bay, Intel was extracted, after that they sat there until used as a bargaining chip. Morally it sounds good. Ultimately those commanders were released and resumed operations, funding, training, and killing. It wouldn't be revenge to mitigate the damage those types do by killing them. Instead, they simply increased their body count. Same goes for serial killers. Society gains nothing from holding on to them. **HHL** are you talking about the guys they traded for Bergdahl? **DG** Yep **JL** **DG**, point well taken. Society gains keeping a killer off the streets by holding them in prison. Also, I'm of the opinion that civility gains when we don't kill in the name of revenge. Lastly, people are fallible, so revenge killing can be wrought on an innocent person. That's reason enough to not revenge kill, in my opinion. I tend to agree with William Blackstone: "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer." **JL** Concerning the release of known killers in Guantanamo, that was a political move by Obama. Had very little to do with justice or mercy, in my opinion. **HHL** IDK if I’d say “political” necessarily. **HHL** But I agree that justice and mercy were not relevant to their release. **DG** Killers kill in prison. A guy gets 25-life sentence for murder and is surrounded by people in for 10, 15, 20, etc. Guess stealing or selling 50lbs of marijuana constitutes sharing a yard with a murderer? Revenge is personal motive, the same logic you applied to perceived justice. If I kill a mass killer or a threat, my motive isn't "well you killed kids so you deserve death". It's "this guy gained enough experience to become proficient, and has no signs of slowing down. Killing him removes a body count". It's not personal revenge. If justice wasn't a part of their release, why where they still alive? William Blackstone fails on a spectrum. Those 10 guilty escaping create the suffering of innocents. Full circle to Batman Imma lock up a guy that escapes EVERY TIME and kills hundreds. Justice **HHL** I think the conversational waters are muddied by the failures of the US prison system. **DG** I pull my opinion from traveling abroad. There are worse systems than the US prison system, and there are better methods than our current application of law. **HHL** Oh for sure **JD** How is death a punishment? **JD** I would rather die the next day then spend my life in a box js **DG** **JD** I never implied punishment. I mentioned deterrent. Same case as serial rapists. I don't care to make them suffer. It's a waste of a lesson. I'd rather them be out of the picture and not possibly harm another woman. **JL** Death is pragmatic during the act of self-defense. Possibly harming another person doesn't seem to rise to the level of killing. That's more like in movies like Minority Report. **JD** Well serial rapists are not killers most of the time, I think that may be a different argument. **HHL** I agree that complicates the discussion (or is a separate, if related, discussion) **DG** **JD** serial rapists often escalate to killing. And though it's a different offense, it's the same logic. 1 person grievously harming many, and mitigation factors. **JD** I wouldn't say they often do that. Maybe a small percentage of the time. **JD** If a serial rapist kills I would think he would be upgraded to serial killer **DG** Based on what stats? Not trying to demean you in any way, but the majority do in countries that are well cracked down on rape/serial rape. It stems from compulsive disorders, the most extreme cases lead to murders. **DG** And even if we were talking about non homicidals, my original point is that it's the same concept. Preventing a larger body count is the idea. Not the punishment. **JD** I cant find any sources because once they kill they are not considered rapists anymore.... **JD** I found these descriptions of serial killer vs serial rapist... http://criminalminds.wikia.com/wiki/Serial_Rapist Serial Rapist CRIMINALMINDS.WIKIA.COM http://criminalminds.wikia.com/wiki/Serial_Killer Serial Killer CRIMINALMINDS.WIKIA.COM **DG** Can cut the fat by searching for all of the worst serial rapists. 79% of them began murdering victims. **DG** That's just in the 1st world. You can jump on Wikipedia and search "list of violence against women". It'll list other countries reports as well. **JD** ok **DG** Point is do you see sitting 20 years in prison as a deterrent vs killing a killer? Especially when said killer is prone to killing inmates? **JD** I don't see either one as a deterrent **JD** I see both as punishment **JD** I still didn't find a list that says most rapists eventually kill **DG** How could ending someone's habits not be a deterrent? Or are you saying morally you don't consider it an option? **JD** I'm saying its not going to stop others from doing it. **DG** Not all, but it will stop those that have the mindset of beating a lax legal system. There are countries that give minimal sentences for theft, and countries that cut your hands off for stealing. Who do you think has the lower theft rates? Just an example. (And no, I don't condone chopping people up for such petty offenses). **JD** I guess I'm using my background as an American for reference **JL** **DG**, have you considered the injustice of cutting an innocent person's hands off and the incentives it creates for the mindset of rebelling against a rigid and merciless legal system? Which countries do you think more accept violence as a means of resolving conflict? Performing mass social control many times doesn't go the way the enforcers planned. **DG** Same goes for taking an innocent person and throwing them in a compound for decades surrounded by racial division, murderers, and rapists. Doesn't change the fact that strict enforcement detours certain actions. 2 caveats: 1: I pointed out I don't condone such harsh methods for such petty offenses. 2: Lax punitive action creates more victims than the innocents convicted. We don't have a perfect system. Choosing the minimal course of victim production is one of our only go-to methods right now, if mitigation is even a factor. **JL** Agreed. What we are debating, though, is what method best minimizes victim and criminal production. I think we all agree that we should pick the one that minimizes the most. #
Click GIF pic below to follow me, @touchman. Thanks for this GIF, @son-of-satire and @shenanigator.