Discussions

...intent is important.  
 
For example the difference between manslaughter, and first degree muder is one of intent. The result,causing the death of a human, is the same, but the intent is different.  
 
So if Joe Blow trully believes,for one reason or another,that Bob Blow is an evil agent for the forces of darkness bent on overthrowing all that is good in the world and God has chosen him to end the threat....... the intent is one of self defence of the planet and all its inhabitants rather than premeditated murder for the gain of personal "favor".  
 
In the example that is currently being tried in the media we have a victim,a perpetrator, and a society that has trouble with accepting that the perpetrator is not responsible. The "fairnees factor" does not compute. How can both the dead man and the perpetrator be victims???  
 
It is questions like these and the emotions they are bound to dredge up that is the very reason we have a system of justice. Sober women and men who are not directly connected to the individuals of the case, presumably able to look at the evidence at arms length, who will make the decision as to whether the perpetrator was "criminally" responsible for his actions. There is no doubt that he was physically responsible but "action" is not the sole yardstick by which we, as a society, measure culpability nor should it be.  
 
If we were to pass the so called "Tim"s" law. Then what would prevent the passing of a "Jack's" law, placing everyone who is responsible for vehicular manslaughter in prison for life, or "Bridgetts"s" law that does the same for mothers who inadvertently cause the accidental death of an infant.  
 
If we as a society are going to start having our law's legislated through the media by over emotional mothers and fathers with only the recent loss of a child on their mind in short order we will have chaos.  
 
 
 
 
Edited by Lenny, 2009-03-04 11:49:06