natedog
Member
My forensics teacher today was talking about self defense and philosophy. He said that if you have a gun for self defense, and plan ahead for defending yourself, he proclaimed that that is pre-meditated murder. Your thoughts?
A teacher raised an interesting statement today...
- Thread starter natedog
- Start date
- Status
Mark Tyson
Member
No, because it lacks malice.
duckfoot
member
SDC
Member
That's ludicrous; it's pre-meditated SELF-DEFENCE, and if the other party didn't wish to be defended from, all he'd have to do is not do anything worth being defended against (if you see my meaning).
natedog
Member
My thoughts exactly. My, my, that was fast.
critter
Member
Ignorence is NOT confined to the student body in many if not most schools nowadays!
He is absolutely right ...
Of course, this line of reasoning would also apply to all police and military personnel who have been hired and trained by the state to carry out government sanctioned 'pre-meditated murder'. Interesting point of view isn't it ???
Of course, this line of reasoning would also apply to all police and military personnel who have been hired and trained by the state to carry out government sanctioned 'pre-meditated murder'. Interesting point of view isn't it ???
tiberius
Member
He's an idiot. Its still early in the semester....change classes.
Silver Bullet
Member
I can remember when teachers were role models. Guess that gives away my age.
PlayTheAces
Member
So just what exactly is this guy advocating? Is he putting forward a premise that people have no right to self defense? Is he suggesting shooting for the kneecaps? What, precisely, is his major maladjustment?
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2002
- Messages
- 22,516
Well if that isn't a harsh and strict interpretation of the Code of Hammurabi. Even the English Common Law allows for self defense (and I'm sure Hammurabi would agree).
General murder is the slaying of another human with malice aforethought. Gee, unless I'm mistaken, self defense isn't malice aforethought.
General murder is the slaying of another human with malice aforethought. Gee, unless I'm mistaken, self defense isn't malice aforethought.
Baba Louie
Member
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2002
- Messages
- 3,831
Pre-meditated "justfiable homicide" is more like it and a "more" correct answer.
A flippant answer might be, "some people just need killin".
Murder is a considered to be an offense against the peace and tranquility of the community. Defending your life could be so construed, but if your P's & Q's are aligned, most DA/Grand Juries will give you a clean bill.
That's a good thing.
Adios
A flippant answer might be, "some people just need killin".
Murder is a considered to be an offense against the peace and tranquility of the community. Defending your life could be so construed, but if your P's & Q's are aligned, most DA/Grand Juries will give you a clean bill.
That's a good thing.
Adios
Don Gwinn
Moderator Emeritus
My thoughts, in no particular order:
1. If I'd been there, I'd have felt compelled to raise my hand and ask exactly how he figures such a thing. This has gotten me in trouble before, but I can't seem to help it.
2. If this guy is teaching criminal forensics (studying physical evidence, etc.) watch him carefully. He may know what he's talking about, but he's not off to a good start.
3. If this guy is teaching forensics as in debate and logic, either get out of that class or resign yourself to a long semester. This man will do damage to his students.
1. If I'd been there, I'd have felt compelled to raise my hand and ask exactly how he figures such a thing. This has gotten me in trouble before, but I can't seem to help it.
2. If this guy is teaching criminal forensics (studying physical evidence, etc.) watch him carefully. He may know what he's talking about, but he's not off to a good start.
3. If this guy is teaching forensics as in debate and logic, either get out of that class or resign yourself to a long semester. This man will do damage to his students.
He has a basic misunderstanding between 'killing' and 'murder'. Unfortunately this is common since most translations of the ten commandments are wrong. The original is 'thou shalt not murder". Killing is acceptable in the bible and in the courts. Our supreme court has stated that you have a right to use lethal force to prevent death or serious injury. It's sad when people permit themselves to be murdered without any attempt to prevent that murder.
BerettaNut92
Member
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2002
- Messages
- 9,723
Great, so now we have this guy AND that CSI show making experts out of everybody.
Can I ask where you're going to school?
Can I ask where you're going to school?
Henry Bowman
Senior Member
Maybe he's just yanking you chain to see who will bite.
(Sorry about the mixed metaphor.)
(Sorry about the mixed metaphor.)
Andrew Wyatt
Member
Sounds like Bakersfield College, which is populated by the largest supply of leftists i've ever seen in one place.
cool45auto
Member
Never before did a "smiley" say so much: 
Waitone
Member
I've been frustrated lately because I see so many idiots who are able to get their pontifications published and make money at the same time. In frustration I demanded to know how I can be an idiot and get paid for it.
Weeeellll, seems to me I don't have to limit myself to journalism. Seems I can become a forensics instructor, be an idiot, and get paid for it.
OK! I'm off to implement Plan B.
Weeeellll, seems to me I don't have to limit myself to journalism. Seems I can become a forensics instructor, be an idiot, and get paid for it.
OK! I'm off to implement Plan B.
Standing Wolf
Member in memoriam
I think you need a forensics teacher with more than half a brain.
I shoot to live, not kill.
I shoot to live, not kill.
Zundfolge
Member
Killing is not always murder.
Self defense is one of those cases where killing is not murder.
Therefore your teacher is wrong.
Duncan Idaho
member
Your teacher's village called...they want their idiot back. 
The fundamental principle of forensics is discernment. If one cannot discern between moral (right action) killing i.e. defensive killing, and immoral (wrong action) killing i.e. pre-meditated, unprovoked murder, then one has no business teaching.
Call him on it. If he did it to test the class, fine. If he believes it, then he is a certifiable moron. You should then take immediate action to leave him and his BS behind.
The fundamental principle of forensics is discernment. If one cannot discern between moral (right action) killing i.e. defensive killing, and immoral (wrong action) killing i.e. pre-meditated, unprovoked murder, then one has no business teaching.
Call him on it. If he did it to test the class, fine. If he believes it, then he is a certifiable moron. You should then take immediate action to leave him and his BS behind.
In that case, every officer involved shooting amounts to murder/attempted murder.
Don't the police carry loaded weapons and practice using them regularly?
Why doesn't it bother him that the government is training law enforcement officers to murder citizens without even allowing them to have their say in a court of law?
Ask him about that one.
Check and mate.
Also, what about the criminal?
By attacking you, isn't the criminal acutally trying to commit suicide?
Don't the police carry loaded weapons and practice using them regularly?
Why doesn't it bother him that the government is training law enforcement officers to murder citizens without even allowing them to have their say in a court of law?
Ask him about that one.
Check and mate.
Also, what about the criminal?
By attacking you, isn't the criminal acutally trying to commit suicide?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked