Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Man raises demon in church. Is this a crime?

11011131516

Posts

  • IncenjucarIncenjucar QA Tester -> Game Producer Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Man there's hella people who are begging some deity to kill Obama and/or all of the West right now.

    We better bomb their asses.

    freefallagentad_zps635a83ed.png
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Couscous wrote: »
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    Couscous wrote: »
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    Robman wrote: »
    My argument includes the perspective of someone suffering mental illness as a factor in the legal system. You're introducing the supernatural as a "real" factor. There's a critical difference there.

    If we're going to lock people up for summoning forth the supernatural, why can't we free them for the same reason?

    The use of the supernatural/impossible does not negate the fact that they attempted the crime, but it doesn't mean the jury needs to believe what they say is correct. If the person could prove he was possessed by a fox spirit, I'm sure the jury would be willing to allow it.

    So every time a preacher asks God to strike me down with lightning, I have a right to shoot them in self-defense?

    Rules for self defense are different from rules for murder so no. The threat needs to be immediate. God is obviously a lazy son of a bitch who takes his time so you obviously have time to call the police in order to protect yourself against God.
    Alright, you're definitely trolling.

    Please stop.

    HOW DO YOU FUCK UP BAGELS. YOU BOIL THE WATER. PUT IN THE NOODLES
  • FiarynFiaryn Omnicidal Madman Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Couscous wrote: »
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    Couscous wrote: »
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    Robman wrote: »
    My argument includes the perspective of someone suffering mental illness as a factor in the legal system. You're introducing the supernatural as a "real" factor. There's a critical difference there.

    If we're going to lock people up for summoning forth the supernatural, why can't we free them for the same reason?

    The use of the supernatural/impossible does not negate the fact that they attempted the crime, but it doesn't mean the jury needs to believe what they say is correct. If the person could prove he was possessed by a fox spirit, I'm sure the jury would be willing to allow it.

    So every time a preacher asks God to strike me down with lightning, I have a right to shoot them in self-defense?

    Rules for self defense are different from rules for murder so no. The threat needs to be immediate. God is obviously a lazy son of a bitch who takes his time so you obviously have time to call the police in order to protect yourself against God.

    And obviously demons have all been smoking a wicked bong since like, the 1600s and so can't be expected to desecrate a damn thing these days. So, this guys claim of summoning is about as valid as me claiming Brittney Spears is going to put out a good album.

    Soul Silver FC: 1935 3141 6240
    White FC: 0819 3350 1787
  • IncenjucarIncenjucar QA Tester -> Game Producer Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Couscous wrote: »
    Rules for self defense are different from rules for murder so no. The threat needs to be immediate. God is obviously a lazy son of a bitch who takes his time so you obviously have time to call the police in order to protect yourself against God.

    If I don't shoot them now they'll try again and again until I die from magic.

    And man every time some girl who hates some other girl from stealing her boyfriend says "I hope you die!" or "Drop dead!" we'll have to get the police.

    freefallagentad_zps635a83ed.png
  • durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Couscous wrote: »
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    Couscous wrote: »
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    Robman wrote: »
    My argument includes the perspective of someone suffering mental illness as a factor in the legal system. You're introducing the supernatural as a "real" factor. There's a critical difference there.

    If we're going to lock people up for summoning forth the supernatural, why can't we free them for the same reason?

    The use of the supernatural/impossible does not negate the fact that they attempted the crime, but it doesn't mean the jury needs to believe what they say is correct. If the person could prove he was possessed by a fox spirit, I'm sure the jury would be willing to allow it.

    So every time a preacher asks God to strike me down with lightning, I have a right to shoot them in self-defense?

    Rules for self defense are different from rules for murder so no. The threat needs to be immediate. God is obviously a lazy son of a bitch who takes his time so you obviously have time to call the police in order to protect yourself against God.

    No you don't. Earthly authority cannot protect one from the Almighty. If you are, say, a heretic or blasphemer to the church, your only recourse is to strike back against those who are immediately and constantly imperiling your existence both in the here and now and in the hereafter via a power that you can't hope to match.

    You make an excellent argument for my serial self-defense against local priests.

  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Couscous wrote: »
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    Robman wrote: »
    My argument includes the perspective of someone suffering mental illness as a factor in the legal system. You're introducing the supernatural as a "real" factor. There's a critical difference there.

    If we're going to lock people up for summoning forth the supernatural, why can't we free them for the same reason?

    The use of the supernatural/impossible does not negate the fact that they attempted the crime, but it doesn't mean the jury needs to believe what they say is correct. If the person could prove he was possessed by a fox spirit, I'm sure the jury would be willing to allow it.
    What crime?

    "Causing an evil spirit to end the life of a human being" is not a crime
    , last time I checked. It can't even be called murder because murder is causing the death of a human being intentionally. Who even gets the credit for the kill on the leaderboards in the case of a demon summoning? The guy? Or the demon? Presumably demons are entities capable of choosing their victims. Or is the demon bound to the guy's will? Is that why it's murder?

    The whole thing is so fucking idiotic I'm having a hard time believing you're not trolling me right now.
    Intentionally causing the death of a person except in certain situations is a crime and attempts to do so are a crime. How is this not attempted "causing the death of a human being intentionally"? I'm assuming the demon would be considered the same as a hitman if it did exist.

  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    No you don't. Earthly authority cannot protect one from the Almighty. If you are, say, a heretic or blasphemer to the church, your only recourse is to strike back against those who are immediately and constantly imperiling your existence both in the here and now and in the hereafter via a power that you can't hope to match.

    You make an excellent argument for my serial self-defense against local priests.
    Wait, how would killing a priest prevent God from striking you down? According to all available evidence, that usually just makes God angrier.

  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Couscous wrote: »
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Couscous wrote: »
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    Robman wrote: »
    My argument includes the perspective of someone suffering mental illness as a factor in the legal system. You're introducing the supernatural as a "real" factor. There's a critical difference there.

    If we're going to lock people up for summoning forth the supernatural, why can't we free them for the same reason?

    The use of the supernatural/impossible does not negate the fact that they attempted the crime, but it doesn't mean the jury needs to believe what they say is correct. If the person could prove he was possessed by a fox spirit, I'm sure the jury would be willing to allow it.
    What crime?

    "Causing an evil spirit to end the life of a human being" is not a crime
    , last time I checked. It can't even be called murder because murder is causing the death of a human being intentionally. Who even gets the credit for the kill on the leaderboards in the case of a demon summoning? The guy? Or the demon? Presumably demons are entities capable of choosing their victims. Or is the demon bound to the guy's will? Is that why it's murder?

    The whole thing is so fucking idiotic I'm having a hard time believing you're not trolling me right now.
    Intentionally causing the death of a person except in certain situations is a crime and attempts to do so are a crime. How is this not attempted "causing the death of a human being intentionally"? I'm assuming the demon would be considered the same as a hitman if it did exist.

    But they don't. Saying a thing is attempted murder doesn't make it attempted murder.

    gkcmatch_zps97480250.jpg
    'we got hella people, they got helicopters'
  • reVersereVerse Never odd or even Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Couscous wrote: »
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Couscous wrote: »
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    Robman wrote: »
    My argument includes the perspective of someone suffering mental illness as a factor in the legal system. You're introducing the supernatural as a "real" factor. There's a critical difference there.

    If we're going to lock people up for summoning forth the supernatural, why can't we free them for the same reason?

    The use of the supernatural/impossible does not negate the fact that they attempted the crime, but it doesn't mean the jury needs to believe what they say is correct. If the person could prove he was possessed by a fox spirit, I'm sure the jury would be willing to allow it.
    What crime?

    "Causing an evil spirit to end the life of a human being" is not a crime
    , last time I checked. It can't even be called murder because murder is causing the death of a human being intentionally. Who even gets the credit for the kill on the leaderboards in the case of a demon summoning? The guy? Or the demon? Presumably demons are entities capable of choosing their victims. Or is the demon bound to the guy's will? Is that why it's murder?

    The whole thing is so fucking idiotic I'm having a hard time believing you're not trolling me right now.
    Intentionally causing the death of a person except in certain situations is a crime and attempts to do so are a crime. How is this not attempted "causing the death of a human being intentionally"? I'm assuming the demon would be considered the same as a hitman if it did exist.

    Well, it doesn't exist. So this isn't so much hiring a hitman as it is hiring a unicorn. A mean, armed-to-the-teeth unicorn, but a unicorn nonetheless.

  • IncenjucarIncenjucar QA Tester -> Game Producer Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Couscous wrote: »
    How is this not attempted "causing the death of a human being intentionally"? I'm assuming the demon would be considered the same as a hitman if it did exist.

    I once dreamed that a dozen clones of my dad invaded the house and I had to kill them with a sword.

    Clearly I'm guilty of mass attempted murder of a single person. It being my fevered and absurd imagination changes nothing.

    freefallagentad_zps635a83ed.png
  • QinguQingu Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Couscous wrote: »
    Wait, how would killing a priest prevent God from striking you down? According to all available evidence, that usually just makes God angrier.
    But you said that such priests should be locked up right with demon-summoner-man.

    Presumably killing the demon-summoner would make his chaotic overlord madder as well, if he existed, which he doesn't. But if you're invoking the law to punish these people there is presumably some social harm that you are preventing or punishing, right?

  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    from stealing her boyfriend says "I hope you die!" or "Drop dead!" we'll have to get the police.

    A hope is different from an actual attempt. Saying that you are going to kill a person isn't enough to count as an actual attempt. Most of this witchcraft bullshit involves a pointless amount of effort. Preachers also put in a lot of effort in wishing a person to deaf.

  • QuidQuid The Fifth Horseman Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Qingu wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    Qingu wrote: »
    So Rob, do you think any Christian who prays to God to kill or torture people (including gays, pro-choice people, atheists, etc) should be guilty of a crime of attempt?

    If someone expressed an open and honest desire to kill people I would be all for them being forced to go through mental evaluation.
    Great. What order of magnitude of people do you think were praying for God to strike town "Tiller the baby killer" and then cheered his death? I would guess from 10 to 100 thousand. Should they all be locked up?

    If someone expressed an open and honest desire to kill people I would be all for them being forced to go through a mental evaluation.

  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Couscous wrote: »
    MikeMan wrote: »
    What crime?

    "Causing an evil spirit to end the life of a human being" is not a crime
    , last time I checked. It can't even be called murder because murder is causing the death of a human being intentionally. Who even gets the credit for the kill on the leaderboards in the case of a demon summoning? The guy? Or the demon? Presumably demons are entities capable of choosing their victims. Or is the demon bound to the guy's will? Is that why it's murder?

    The whole thing is so fucking idiotic I'm having a hard time believing you're not trolling me right now.
    Intentionally causing the death of a person except in certain situations is a crime and attempts to do so are a crime. How is this not attempted "causing the death of a human being intentionally"? I'm assuming the demon would be considered the same as a hitman if it did exist.
    That's a pretty fucking big assumption. You're asking the law to engage in theology. We must analyze the properties of demons. We must analyze the properties of demons by asking this guy what demons do, because it is his intent alone which causes the crime apparently. So we need to ask the insane man what his made up fucking entities would do if they were real, which they are not, and then what if he says the demon doesn't have to listen to him? What if you poll 100 priests and 50 say demons have to listen to someone and 50 say they're evil products of satan and are just as likely to kill the guy? Your argument is beyond infantile. I am shocked that you keep defending it.

    HOW DO YOU FUCK UP BAGELS. YOU BOIL THE WATER. PUT IN THE NOODLES
  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Couscous wrote: »
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    from stealing her boyfriend says "I hope you die!" or "Drop dead!" we'll have to get the police.

    A hope is different from an actual attempt. Saying that you are going to kill a person isn't enough to count as an actual attempt. Most of this witchcraft bullshit involves a pointless amount of effort. Preachers also put in a lot of effort in wishing a person to deaf.

    But if you say it, and do something totally random, that act becomes attempted murder?

    That is what you're arguing for, here.

    gkcmatch_zps97480250.jpg
    'we got hella people, they got helicopters'
  • AtomikaAtomika (citation needed)Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Couscous wrote: »
    Intentionally causing the death of a person except in certain situations is a crime and attempts to do so are a crime. How is this not attempted "causing the death of a human being intentionally"? I'm assuming the demon would be considered the same as a hitman if it did exist.

    But this just goes back to what I was saying earlier about intent vs. method. There's very little legal precedent for attempted murder by thought-conjuring, much in the same way there's very little precedent for attempted murder by marshmallows. The law doesn't waste too much time legislating contingencies for impossibilities.

  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Couscous wrote: »
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    from stealing her boyfriend says "I hope you die!" or "Drop dead!" we'll have to get the police.

    A hope is different from an actual attempt. Saying that you are going to kill a person isn't enough to count as an actual attempt. Most of this witchcraft bullshit involves a pointless amount of effort. Preachers also put in a lot of effort in wishing a person to deaf.
    So what's an attempt as opposed to a hope?

    HOW DO YOU FUCK UP BAGELS. YOU BOIL THE WATER. PUT IN THE NOODLES
  • QinguQingu Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Quid wrote: »
    If someone expressed an open and honest desire to kill people I would be all for them being forced to go through a mental evaluation.
    Here is my point in this thread: that's not feasible. We are talking about tens, hundreds of thousands of people, probably millions of people. Praying to a god or enacting a summoning ritual cannot be your threshold here, let alone a legal threshold.

    Someone should be committed if they pose an immediate threat to themselves or others. Since God and the demon do not exist, such people do not satisfy this criteria. They're scary, but living with scary people is better than living in a society that punishes thoughtcrime and incarcerates a large percentage of its population (America already does this bad enough).

  • IncenjucarIncenjucar QA Tester -> Game Producer Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Would stabbing at a voodoo doll be attempted assault?

    What about love charms? Do we have laws against mind control?

    freefallagentad_zps635a83ed.png
  • durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Couscous wrote: »
    No you don't. Earthly authority cannot protect one from the Almighty. If you are, say, a heretic or blasphemer to the church, your only recourse is to strike back against those who are immediately and constantly imperiling your existence both in the here and now and in the hereafter via a power that you can't hope to match.

    You make an excellent argument for my serial self-defense against local priests.
    Wait, how would killing a priest prevent God from striking you down? According to all available evidence, that usually just makes God angrier.

    What recourse do I have but to eliminate the people holding the weapons? If not to protect me, then certainly to protect all the other friends of mine whom priests may one day target. My only hope to protect myself is to eliminate all Christians with access to high enough levels of influence with God that they can call for my death.

  • QuidQuid The Fifth Horseman Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Qingu wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    If someone expressed an open and honest desire to kill people I would be all for them being forced to go through a mental evaluation.
    Here is my point in this thread: that's not feasible. We are talking about tens, hundreds of thousands of people, probably millions of people. Praying to a god or enacting a summoning ritual cannot be your threshold here, let alone a legal threshold.

    Someone should be committed if they pose an immediate threat to themselves or others. Since God and the demon do not exist, such people do not satisfy this criteria. They're scary, but living with scary people is better than living in a society that punishes thoughtcrime and incarcerates a large percentage of its population (America already does this bad enough).

    I'm sorry, you seem to have confused mental evaluation with incarceration.

  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Qingu wrote: »
    Couscous wrote: »
    Wait, how would killing a priest prevent God from striking you down? According to all available evidence, that usually just makes God angrier.
    But you said that such priests should be locked up right with demon-summoner-man.

    Presumably killing the demon-summoner would make his chaotic overlord madder as well, if he existed, which he doesn't. But if you're invoking the law to punish these people there is presumably some social harm that you are preventing or punishing, right?

    The social harm doesn't necessarily need to be actual deaths. There removal of people willing to attempt murder from society which suggests they may easily go on to use more useful methods and that they have a willingness to commit serious crimes, and various other social harms.

    I don't think you could prove most preachers' actions are anything more than the usual idle threats unless there is good evidence that they took it seriously and considered it an act that would likely cause deaths instead of simply suggestions to God.

  • QinguQingu Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Quid wrote: »
    Qingu wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    If someone expressed an open and honest desire to kill people I would be all for them being forced to go through a mental evaluation.
    Here is my point in this thread: that's not feasible. We are talking about tens, hundreds of thousands of people, probably millions of people. Praying to a god or enacting a summoning ritual cannot be your threshold here, let alone a legal threshold.

    Someone should be committed if they pose an immediate threat to themselves or others. Since God and the demon do not exist, such people do not satisfy this criteria. They're scary, but living with scary people is better than living in a society that punishes thoughtcrime and incarcerates a large percentage of its population (America already does this bad enough).

    I'm sorry, you seem to have confused mental evaluation with incarceration.
    Touche. But you seemed to suggest forced mental evaluation.

    Obviously, me being Qingu, I would agree that every religious person ought to get themselves mentally evaluated, but I am extremely uncomfortable with the opinion that we ought to force people to get mentally evaluated based on nothing but their beliefs and ritual actions.

  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    What recourse do I have but to eliminate the people holding the weapons? If not to protect me, then certainly to protect all the other friends of mine whom priests may one day target. My only hope to protect myself is to eliminate all Christians with access to high enough levels of influence with God that they can call for my death.
    Just because the person believes he has the ability to do so doesn't mean he does or that you think he does. If you could prove you actually believed that, feel free to try it. I don't know how you could prove it.

  • Modern ManModern Man Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    This discussion about attempted murder charges is pointless. The authorities in this case never contemplated charging this guy with anything more than some low-level harassment crime, and they didn't give that much serious consideration, either.

    Outside of some crazy third-world hellhole, no one is in any danger of being charged with a crime for attempted summoning of a demon or any other such horseshit.

    The free speech discussion was cooler, IMO.

    Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
    Rigorous Scholarship

  • QinguQingu Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Couscous wrote: »
    The social harm doesn't necessarily need to be actual deaths. There removal of people willing to attempt murder
    Nobody in any of the scenarios, including the demon summoner, is "willing to attempt murder."
    I don't think you could prove most preachers' actions are anything more than the usual idle threats unless there is good evidence that they took it seriously and considered it an act that would likely cause deaths instead of simply suggestions to God.
    Show me what criteria you would use to distinguish between idle threats and serious business.

  • GungHoGungHo Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Qingu wrote: »
    Obviously, me being Qingu, I would agree that every religious person ought to get themselves mentally evaluated, but I am extremely uncomfortable with the opinion that we ought to force people to get mentally evaluated based on nothing but their beliefs and ritual actions.
    There's a difference between telling yourself that grandma, grandpa, and your puppy are waiting for you in heaven and telling yourself that you are the 13th Acolyte of Killfuck Soulshitter (His Darkness Be Praised) and that you are going to unleash the Vile Wrath of Killfuck Soulshitter (His Darkness Be Praised) via Chanting the Name of Killfuck Soulshitter (His Darkness Be Praised) and wishing that Killfuck Soulshitter (His Darkness Be Praised) gaze the Weirding Gaze of Killfuck Soulshitter (His Darkness Be Praised) on the cast of House if they don't bring back Kal Penn.

    "Adios, mofo" -- TX Gov Rick Perry (R)
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Modern Man wrote: »
    This discussion about attempted murder charges is pointless. The authorities in this case never contemplated charging this guy with anything more than some low-level harassment crime, and they didn't give that much serious consideration, either.

    Outside of some crazy third-world hellhole, no one is in any danger of being charged with a crime for attempted summoning of a demon or any other such horseshit.

    The free speech discussion was cooler, IMO.
    Yeah, that's what I thought, until people started coming in here and talking about how he should be charged with attempted murder. Fucking ridiculous.

    HOW DO YOU FUCK UP BAGELS. YOU BOIL THE WATER. PUT IN THE NOODLES
  • psychotixpsychotix __BANNED USERS
    edited October 2009
    Obviously, me being Qingu, I would agree that every religious person ought to get themselves mentally evaluated, but I am extremely uncomfortable with the opinion that we ought to force people to get mentally evaluated based on nothing but their beliefs and ritual actions.

    If you think you can summon a demon you should get your head checked. If you think that somebody else can hurt you by sicking a demon/god/the tooth fairy on you, then you should get your head checked.

  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Show me what criteria you would use to distinguish between idle threats and serious business.
    Whether or not there was serious planning beforehand, whether the person actually believed he was capable of doing so, etc. The same way courts already determine whether threats and actions are idle or enough to be considered a substantial attempt.

  • QinguQingu Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    GungHo wrote: »
    Qingu wrote: »
    Obviously, me being Qingu, I would agree that every religious person ought to get themselves mentally evaluated, but I am extremely uncomfortable with the opinion that we ought to force people to get mentally evaluated based on nothing but their beliefs and ritual actions.
    There's a difference between telling yourself that grandma, grandpa, and your puppy are waiting for you in heaven and telling yourself that you are the 13th Acolyte of Killfuck Soulshitter (His Darkness Be Praised) and that you are going to unleash the Vile Wrath of Killfuck Soulshitter (His Darkness Be Praised) on the cast of House if they don't bring back Kal Penn.
    Okay. Not a legal difference, though.

    More relevantly, there is no legal difference between your character trying to summon a demon to kill people and an evangelical Christian trying to pray to God to hasten the end times, which will kill people. You cannot have the first person forcibly taken and mentally examined while leaving the second person alone. That would be a double standard. And it would also be a pretty creepy extension of government authority into the realm of private belief.

  • TL DRTL DR Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Man will somebody kill Couscous so this debate can end?

    Ohshit I just attempted murdered somebody

    eokNV.jpg
  • GungHoGungHo Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Couscous wrote: »
    Show me what criteria you would use to distinguish between idle threats and serious business.
    Whether or not there was serious planning beforehand, whether the person actually believed he was capable of doing so, etc. The same way courts already determine whether threats and actions are idle or enough to be considered a substantial attempt.
    So, a few candles from Ye Olde Magick Shoppe don't count, but if he was playing Slip 'n' Slide in a few gallons of pigs' blood, it might be over the top?

    "Adios, mofo" -- TX Gov Rick Perry (R)
  • Richard_DastardlyRichard_Dastardly Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    psychotix wrote: »
    Obviously, me being Qingu, I would agree that every religious person ought to get themselves mentally evaluated, but I am extremely uncomfortable with the opinion that we ought to force people to get mentally evaluated based on nothing but their beliefs and ritual actions.

    If you think you can summon a demon you should get your head checked. If you think that somebody else can hurt you by sicking a demon/god/the tooth fairy on you, then you should get your head checked.
    And yet billions of perfectly sane people right now believe that supernatural forces can affect the physical world. Do you suggest they have their heads checked as well?

    ಠ_ರೃ wrote: »
    cats are douches
  • Modern ManModern Man Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    MikeMan wrote: »
    Modern Man wrote: »
    This discussion about attempted murder charges is pointless. The authorities in this case never contemplated charging this guy with anything more than some low-level harassment crime, and they didn't give that much serious consideration, either.

    Outside of some crazy third-world hellhole, no one is in any danger of being charged with a crime for attempted summoning of a demon or any other such horseshit.

    The free speech discussion was cooler, IMO.
    Yeah, that's what I thought, until people started coming in here and talking about how he should be charged with attempted murder. Fucking ridiculous.
    Even if his actions somehow met the technical legal definition of attempted murder (ignoring things like legal impossibility, insanity and the like), no prosecutor is going to go in front of a judge with charges based on this situation.

    Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
    Rigorous Scholarship

  • ÆthelredÆthelred Registered User
    edited October 2009
    Couscous is pretty game for keeping going during this massive pile-on. I agree with him. Attempting to murder someone is "attempted murder." I didn't think that was such a wild assertion.

    pokes: 1505 8032 8399
  • AtomikaAtomika (citation needed)Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    psychotix wrote: »
    Obviously, me being Qingu, I would agree that every religious person ought to get themselves mentally evaluated, but I am extremely uncomfortable with the opinion that we ought to force people to get mentally evaluated based on nothing but their beliefs and ritual actions.

    If you think you can summon a demon you should get your head checked. If you think that somebody else can hurt you by sicking a demon/god/the tooth fairy on you, then you should get your head checked.

    And that's the crux of the argument right there. Why are we giving the parishioners a pass on their stupidity if we aren't doing the same for demon-boy?

  • IncenjucarIncenjucar QA Tester -> Game Producer Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Æthelred wrote: »
    Couscous is pretty game for keeping going during this massive pile-on. I agree with him. Attempting to murder someone is "attempted murder." I didn't think that was such a wild assertion.

    Ultimately, it's a logistics thing.

    Huge portions of the religious community are guilty of this same thing.

    Even if we released all current inmates, we would not have enough jails to house them all.

    freefallagentad_zps635a83ed.png
  • IncenjucarIncenjucar QA Tester -> Game Producer Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    And that's the crux of the argument right there. Why are we giving the parishioners a pass on their stupidity if we aren't doing the same for demon-boy?

    Democracy.

    freefallagentad_zps635a83ed.png
  • QinguQingu Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Couscous wrote: »
    Show me what criteria you would use to distinguish between idle threats and serious business.
    Whether or not there was serious planning beforehand, whether the person actually believed he was capable of doing so, etc.
    What on earth constitutes serious planning in the case of summoning or invoking supernatural involvement?

    And why would that matter to begin with? What if I believed I was capable of summoning a demonic killer by instant nonverbal incantation?

    What you are doing is suggesting guidelines that are just completely untenable from a legal standpoint. There would be absolutely no way to enforce these guidelines in any consistent way.
    The same way courts already determine whether threats and actions are idle or enough to be considered a substantial attempt.
    That's not an answer.

    Don't courts do this based on probability of actually succeeding?

Sign In or Register to comment.