if someone offered you 1m to kill someone

[Brad]

Surely the level of 'bad' gets to a stage where you could justify it, though? Like mass-murdering scum?

I guess you're right but yeah.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Joshirin]

When you say animal, does that mean you wouldn't go hunting but you'd shoot somebody? Also, this may be a stupid question as I think you're american but have you used a firearm before? As I'm guessing we are talking shooting not death by spoon.

Yes I wouldn't shoot an animal, especially hunting, it's just traumatising and basically making th animal look like utter crap having all their dogs and whatever else chasing the poor thing, before being tortured and killed. Also humans are greedy and the worst kind of specie on this earth, despite this I still love living and family and friends.
No I'm british and have used various guns before

- - - Updated - - -

Nope, couldn't ever live with myself with the guilt and knowing I took someone's brother/sister/dad/mum/friend away. No no. Wouldn't ever kill anyone unless they straight were about to kill someone infront of me and the only way to prevent it would be by killing them

- - - Updated - - -


I think you need help

why? who else is going to kill the terrorists abroad with a good heart?

I said I'd do it without consequences, sadly their are consequences so I wouldn't, unless ordered too which relates back to the army, police or whatever else

[jake87385]

Yes I wouldn't shoot an animal, especially hunting, it's just traumatising and basically making th animal look like utter crap having all their dogs and whatever else chasing the poor thing, before being tortured and killed. Also humans are greedy and the worst kind of specie on this earth, despite this I still love living and family and friends.
No I'm british and have used various guns before

I've been hunting before, nothing big, rabbits and other pests and they've always been clean kills and as much as I value all life, I can't help but think taking a rabbits life is nothing in comparison to a humans. 'Traditional' fox hunting or anything with dogs attacking the animal I am against though.

[AgnesIO]

I've been hunting before, nothing big, rabbits and other pests and they've always been clean kills and as much as I value all life, I can't help but think taking a rabbits life is nothing in comparison to a humans. 'Traditional' fox hunting or anything with dogs attacking the animal I am against though.

So it is fine for you to shoot an animal (unnatural in nature), but not for a dog to hunt an animal (natural in nature)?

[jake87385]

So it is fine for you to shoot an animal (unnatural in nature), but not for a dog to hunt an animal (natural in nature)?

A bunch of men on horses chasing foxes with a pack of dogs is not natural. They rip the fox to bits while its still alive for 'fun'. Hence why fox hunting with dogs is illegal.

Hunting an animal and then eating it is what humans have been doing for years, it's just the method of doing so that's changed.

[AgnesIO]

A bunch of men on horses chasing foxes with a pack of dogs is not natural. They rip the fox to bits while its still alive for 'fun'. Hence why fox hunting with dogs is illegal.

Hunting an animal and then eating it is what humans have been doing for years, it's just the method of doing so that's changed.

Will you eat the humans, too?

Take out humans, and the dogs will shred the fox to death anyway. Place humans into the mix and we 'tame' dogs to be pets.

[jake87385]

Will you eat the humans, too?

Take out humans, and the dogs will shred the fox to death anyway. Place humans into the mix and we 'tame' dogs to be pets.

(most) Humans and animals only kill for survival. Fox hunting is killing for entertainment and is as sickening as a public execution.

And no personally I wouldn't eat a human, unless that is like a twisted invitation for dinner?

[Empired]

Surely the level of 'bad' gets to a stage where you could justify it, though? Like mass-murdering scum?

Who gets to decide when the level of 'bad' gets to the stage where you can justify it? Also just because they've done terrible things, does that give you the right to commit similar crimes back? Killing a murderer is still murder.

Will you eat the humans, too?

Take out humans, and the dogs will shred the fox to death anyway. Place humans into the mix and we 'tame' dogs to be pets.

All dogs are bred for different things. You have hunting dogs (typically terriers) who will rip apart rats, rabbits, etc. but you also have sheepdogs, guard dogs, lapdogs.. We didn't train dogs to be pets, selective breeding meant we kept choosing the ones with the nicest nature to breed and so on until the family tree went from vicious wolves to tamed house pets. Not all dogs will rip apart a fox if they're given the chance, guard dogs like shih-tzus would probably only be interested in the chase.

[AgnesIO]

(most) Humans and animals only kill for survival. Fox hunting is killing for entertainment and is as sickening as a public execution.

And no personally I wouldn't eat a human, unless that is like a twisted invitation for dinner?

What, an people going on pheasant shoots isn't for entertainment?

Who gets to decide when the level of 'bad' gets to the stage where you can justify it? Also just because they've done terrible things, does that give you the right to commit similar crimes back? Killing a murderer is still murder.


All dogs are bred for different things. You have hunting dogs (typically terriers) who will rip apart rats, rabbits, etc. but you also have sheepdogs, guard dogs, lapdogs.. We didn't train dogs to be pets, selective breeding meant we kept choosing the ones with the nicest nature to breed and so on until the family tree went from vicious wolves to tamed house pets. Not all dogs will rip apart a fox if they're given the chance, guard dogs like shih-tzus would probably only be interested in the chase.

You have the chance to eliminate someone responsible for the deaths of 500,000 people. Or someone for the deaths of 6,000,000 people. Or 1,500,000 people. Do you think it would be wrong of me to take that chance to stop that happening?

Your thing about dogs is nullified immediately by "all dogs are bred for different things". What do dogs do where there are no humans interfering? No rubbish to go through for food? Whether they are shih-tzus or something else, they still have to eat.. and sorry to announce, but that revolves around killing something. Primarily speaking, dogs are carnivores (although can act in an omnivorous way).

I am not saying I agree with fox hunting; just to claim that a dog wouldn't kill without humans around is somewhat naive.

[Empired]

You have the chance to eliminate someone responsible for the deaths of 500,000 people. Or someone for the deaths of 6,000,000 people. Or 1,500,000 people. Do you think it would be wrong of me to take that chance to stop that happening?

You should really show some self restraint. If you kill and think later we may end up in a situation like with Lee Harvey Oswald. We never found out anything about how John F. Kennedy was really killed because some idiot decided to take the law (so-called "justice") into his own hands which just caused more problems than it started.

Your thing about dogs is nullified immediately by "all dogs are bred for different things". What do dogs do where there are no humans interfering? No rubbish to go through for food? Whether they are shih-tzus or something else, they still have to eat.. and sorry to announce, but that revolves around killing something. Primarily speaking, dogs are carnivores (although can act in an omnivorous way).

I am not saying I agree with fox hunting; just to claim that a dog wouldn't kill without humans around is somewhat naive.

Actually most house dogs starve or dehydrate so badly they die when left to fend for themselves in the solved.