Attackers get what they deserve
- Thread starter OICW
- Start date
-
Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
What i don't understand here is why all the talk is about "deserving" death or not.
This wasn't a trial.
There was no time to think straight.
There was an immediate danger, in a situation of shock (who wouldn't be shocked if his quiet evening turned into a tie-and-rape party with armed attackers ?).
The man was surprised, then got a faint opportunty to fight back and seized it, pretty much as survival instinct.He fought the threat, and happened to kill two of his attackers while doing it. Think of the adrenaline of the situation, of the need to make quick decisions on the actions to do when you don't know for sure that you'll still live in the following seconds.
As i said again, it's sad that two men had to die, and a better outcome would have been better. But one can't blame the man who had to defend himself. As his reaction shows (the bit where he was just sitting while holding his head with his hands after the fight), himself probably didn't think that the attackers deserved to die and now feels bad about it, but that's how things happened. It may be a cliché, but life isn't about people getting what they deserve or don't.
I'm sad the attackers had to die, i'm sad that this man now has to live with blood on his hands, and i'm glad he and the two women can live another day. That's about it.
This wasn't a trial.
There was no time to think straight.
There was an immediate danger, in a situation of shock (who wouldn't be shocked if his quiet evening turned into a tie-and-rape party with armed attackers ?).
The man was surprised, then got a faint opportunty to fight back and seized it, pretty much as survival instinct.He fought the threat, and happened to kill two of his attackers while doing it. Think of the adrenaline of the situation, of the need to make quick decisions on the actions to do when you don't know for sure that you'll still live in the following seconds.
As i said again, it's sad that two men had to die, and a better outcome would have been better. But one can't blame the man who had to defend himself. As his reaction shows (the bit where he was just sitting while holding his head with his hands after the fight), himself probably didn't think that the attackers deserved to die and now feels bad about it, but that's how things happened. It may be a cliché, but life isn't about people getting what they deserve or don't.
I'm sad the attackers had to die, i'm sad that this man now has to live with blood on his hands, and i'm glad he and the two women can live another day. That's about it.
Last edited:
Comments like "Even more- he deserves death." have nothing to do with a trial, thinking straight or self defense but with the mindset that once you rape/try to rape you loose all rights as human beeing and deserve to be tortured/killed/whatever. It's something different if you have to kill somone to defend yourself or others and there's no problem with that but the 'deserve death' stuff annoys me.
:tup:Max Sterling said:
Last edited:
Sure ... that may work in practice or during demonstrations, but what about those times it *really* counts ?ravens_hawk said:
ie : when it's not a matter of getting a nice ribbon or a piece of paper, but when it's you or them ? live or death ?
These things don't exist because they 'work'. They exist because it makes for easy practice of certain techniques/moves. Like the 'kata' (sp?) which demonstrates a persons' understanding of the moves for his 'level'.
IMHO trying to do stuff like you're suggesting IRL will get you killed.
Never mind that you forget that those 'attackers' during such demos have no emotion / no desire to win either.
Look, anyone remember the case where the farmer shot the burglars??
There was controversy over that, and if that could have gone either way, then this is definately in favour of the Doctor dude.
1. He was acting in self defence
2. He was outnumbered.
3. He used their weapons.
4. They had intent to harm him.
5. They were armed.
There was controversy over that, and if that could have gone either way, then this is definately in favour of the Doctor dude.
1. He was acting in self defence
2. He was outnumbered.
3. He used their weapons.
4. They had intent to harm him.
5. They were armed.
If you have a knife and someone tries to attack you, you have to put them down. You can't let them get too close to you, otherwise you loose the advantage and face having the knife turned on you.
If someone is comiting a crime agaist you, I think you should have the right to attack them with 'resonable' force for the circumstance, in the case of numbers like this, resonable force means hitting each one of them so they can't get up and come back at you.
If someone is comiting a crime agaist you, I think you should have the right to attack them with 'resonable' force for the circumstance, in the case of numbers like this, resonable force means hitting each one of them so they can't get up and come back at you.
What about slashing him, like across the face or summing?
If he was "hunting them down" he would have finished off the guy in the street, not be sitting down shaking on the steps outside.
Poor guy.
P.S. Why are there no pictures
If he was "hunting them down" he would have finished off the guy in the street, not be sitting down shaking on the steps outside.
Poor guy.
P.S. Why are there no pictures
Last edited:
It says in the article that only 2 out of the 3 rapists were armed. And he seized one of the knifes. Which means that two of them were defenceless. Now that he was armed he could have make them leave. I really doubt the guys tried to stop him (although the one with the knife probably did). Did he have to stab them all? killing 2 of them? That was a simple revenge. Which shows you that the victime can be the murderer just as well.
Taking a life is bad, and it can't be justified. There are no good or bad killers.
Things get really nasty when you start puting a "price tag" on human lifes. You can't justify a murder by saying that the victim's life is more worthy that the criminals' lifes. It only leads to fascism or even eugenism.
edit: jasdave, wtf are you talking about? I've always been nice (well, not too mean at least) with newcomers. I've even defended you and Cold Killer a few times.
Taking a life is bad, and it can't be justified. There are no good or bad killers.
Things get really nasty when you start puting a "price tag" on human lifes. You can't justify a murder by saying that the victim's life is more worthy that the criminals' lifes. It only leads to fascism or even eugenism.
edit: jasdave, wtf are you talking about? I've always been nice (well, not too mean at least) with newcomers. I've even defended you and Cold Killer a few times.
Last edited:
How do we know we didn't? Please bare in mind he had what, half a second to decide what to whilst facing multiple attackers? He didn't have the advantage of hindsight like we did.
stabbing guys take time
while stabbing them, he probably had all the time to think about what to do next.
maybe I also point out that he stabbed 2 of them in the chest (heart and lungs). Being a doctor he probably knew where to hit them without killing them.
while stabbing them, he probably had all the time to think about what to do next.
maybe I also point out that he stabbed 2 of them in the chest (heart and lungs). Being a doctor he probably knew where to hit them without killing them.
Slashing someone across the face does not incapacitate them. Even if you manage to take out their eyes, that won't necessarily stop them from going into, literally, a blind rage. Having to deal with a blind person randomly swinging a knife and charging in your general direction = bad.
That is the most naive thing I've ever heard/seen you say.Freon said:stabbing guys take time
while stabbing them, he probably had all the time to think about what to do next.
maybe I also point out that he stabbed 2 of them in the chest (heart and lungs). Being a doctor he probably knew where to hit them without killing them.
Last edited:
Well, maybe they had 2 knives.
Even if they didn't the doctor couldn't be sure.
What he could have done is Stabbed the f0rker with the knife, then slashed the others, dropped the knife, and kicked the crap out of them with fung fu or whatever.
I expect he saw red. I know the feeling. I have hit someone and kept going even tho they were on the floor. Its not "controllable" its the one time you need to think and you don't.
K?
P.S. Damn this is a good discussion!
Even if they didn't the doctor couldn't be sure.
What he could have done is Stabbed the f0rker with the knife, then slashed the others, dropped the knife, and kicked the crap out of them with fung fu or whatever.
I expect he saw red. I know the feeling. I have hit someone and kept going even tho they were on the floor. Its not "controllable" its the one time you need to think and you don't.
K?
P.S. Damn this is a good discussion!
My reading of the article was that it did NOT specify how many attackers there were, merely that there were two knives.
I also didn't think it neccesarily said that he took all of them down.
He isn't a "real" doctor, just a practicioner of acupuncture and the like.
I will carefully re-read the article to make sure I am not talking crap, but that was how I understood it.
I also didn't think it neccesarily said that he took all of them down.
He isn't a "real" doctor, just a practicioner of acupuncture and the like.
I will carefully re-read the article to make sure I am not talking crap, but that was how I understood it.
Or rather : he was not a real doctor as defined by *western* standards.
As for stabbing vs slashing ... I thought I once read that slashing was more difficult to use effectively unless you knew how to handle the knife in combat ?
Besides : just because the article doesn't describe the exact blow by blow account of the fight we can't be perfectly sure he didn't try to slash at all.
As for stabbing vs slashing ... I thought I once read that slashing was more difficult to use effectively unless you knew how to handle the knife in combat ?
Besides : just because the article doesn't describe the exact blow by blow account of the fight we can't be perfectly sure he didn't try to slash at all.
In the time it takes to stab a person and then stab the next you do NOT have time to think about anything.
In the time it takes to stab a person to not kill him or her you have time to think about so much that you'll be dead when finding the exact spot. Besides, his training was in herbs and pressure points. The knowledge he has could only be used to inflict massive harm at once.
Slashing isn't considered a viable combat options by any of my masters. I remember reading somewhere that slashing is only "a mere touching of the opponent with your blade." You can only really think about things when fighting one person. There were four here all capable of harming this doctor with or without kinves. The doctor managed to disarm one of the attackers, before he was unarmed. Any of the attackers could've known how to disarm a knife wielding person easily making them just as dangerous as this doctor. Like OICW said, the doctor doesn't have time to think about what was possible and what wasn't, he had to assume that he was facing opponents of equal or greater skill.
He obviously isn't a killer since there's one or two that left unharmed. If he had been a killer they'd all have been injured on some level.
Taking a life IS bad. But what if someone is in a posistion to take yours? Is it then justified for him to die as opposed to his killing two others? We don't know wether or not the attackers really wanted to kill the doctor but they certainly could have. Once the doctor escaped they probably would have too. At the time I think the doctor thought only to protect his coworkers and he did so. This is a question of morals but I highly doubt that it should be considered more morally correct for two innocent women to be raped opposing two men with a viscious and criminal intent on their minds to die. It's a sad thing but if we're still talking about value of life then it's probably for the general good that these men died. If they did not than many more rapes and burglaries and possible murders probably would've occured.
In the time it takes to stab a person to not kill him or her you have time to think about so much that you'll be dead when finding the exact spot. Besides, his training was in herbs and pressure points. The knowledge he has could only be used to inflict massive harm at once.
Slashing isn't considered a viable combat options by any of my masters. I remember reading somewhere that slashing is only "a mere touching of the opponent with your blade." You can only really think about things when fighting one person. There were four here all capable of harming this doctor with or without kinves. The doctor managed to disarm one of the attackers, before he was unarmed. Any of the attackers could've known how to disarm a knife wielding person easily making them just as dangerous as this doctor. Like OICW said, the doctor doesn't have time to think about what was possible and what wasn't, he had to assume that he was facing opponents of equal or greater skill.
He obviously isn't a killer since there's one or two that left unharmed. If he had been a killer they'd all have been injured on some level.
Taking a life IS bad. But what if someone is in a posistion to take yours? Is it then justified for him to die as opposed to his killing two others? We don't know wether or not the attackers really wanted to kill the doctor but they certainly could have. Once the doctor escaped they probably would have too. At the time I think the doctor thought only to protect his coworkers and he did so. This is a question of morals but I highly doubt that it should be considered more morally correct for two innocent women to be raped opposing two men with a viscious and criminal intent on their minds to die. It's a sad thing but if we're still talking about value of life then it's probably for the general good that these men died. If they did not than many more rapes and burglaries and possible murders probably would've occured.
Freon I just lost any and all respect I ever had for you, you have absolutely no idea what being in a fight is like, never mind being in a fight which might be life or death. Things happen fast, and its scary as hell, you don't have any time to sit down and think "gee how can a save myself without hurting this piece of **** who is trying to rape two women and probably kill me". Seriously grow up and join the real world
Everyone who has suggested any variation of ' he should have incapacitated them / thought about it / not used the knife ' is living in a dream world. This guy was ****ting himself with fear and anger. Guaranteed. Once he chose to fight back its all or nothing.
The law in Venezuala states that you may kill someone you find on in your house without your permission. Full stop. I see nothing wrong with that.
When you choose to break the law (particularly in a violent manner) then you really should not expect protection by that same law.
Bottom line is if you dont want to get stabbed and die then dont threaten people with ****ing knives.
The law in Venezuala states that you may kill someone you find on in your house without your permission. Full stop. I see nothing wrong with that.
When you choose to break the law (particularly in a violent manner) then you really should not expect protection by that same law.
Bottom line is if you dont want to get stabbed and die then dont threaten people with ****ing knives.
Ok, not deserving of death. Its clear it wasn't a trial, it was split second thinking.
But he still "got what he deserved".
But he still "got what he deserved".
Seriously, who the hell feels sympathetic towards the attackers? Surely not I if I was the one being attacked.