Go Back   the Magicball Network > Forums > MBN Main Forums > Off topic
Buy LBA1/Relentless from GOG.com Buy LBA1/Relentless from DotEmu Buy LBA2/Twinsen's Odyssey from DotEmu Buy LBA2/Twinsen's Odyssey from GOG.com Buy Little big Adventure from GOG.com or DotEmu Buy Little big Adventure 2 from DotEmu or GOG.com

Welcome to the Magicball Network.

You are currently viewing our site as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Off topic General off-topic chat goes in here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #151  
Old 2003-02-26, 14:45
Reek's Avatar
Reek Reek is offline
Party animal
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: israel
Posts: 9,491
Send a message via ICQ to Reek Send a message via MSN to Reek
I agree with firephoenix's last post...
It can be pretty frightening to discover the way your mind works,
it has many flaws.
People can fall victims to subliminal influence, which often satisfies our minds, and effects us permemantly, often for the worst.


All humans (or at least i believe so) can tell right from wrong,
at least at the earlier stage of their life, but if they are exposed to extreme conditions, they can be scarred for life.
People shouldn't be exposed to violence, especially if they are young.
They are vulnerable, whether they like to admit it or not.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpaceGuitarist
there's no room for subtleties, which are so important in personalities such as mine.
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 2003-02-26, 19:25
Darkflame's Avatar
Darkflame Darkflame is offline
Classic
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Sol, Earth, NL
Posts: 23,836
Send a message via ICQ to Darkflame Send a message via AIM to Darkflame Send a message via MSN to Darkflame
Even if you decided to slip into a less then fully conscious state that is still a dicision, a conscoius act, and you are repsonable for all that you do under it.
Ie. If you run someone over when drunk, that is fully your fault.
Its your fault you drunk and then went driving, its not the pubs fault, or the drink companys, its YOUR fault.
---
And you badly miss phraased me there, I never said we couldn't do anything to stop violence
I simple am saying that prevent people from seeing volience DOES NOTHING to prevent them from being violent.
Its just stupid to think that.
Look at all the religous wars, wars caused by gread or arogrance.
These are the things that cause evil acts, not something pathetic like a computer game.


And the reason we dont have guns ect is two fold:
1. They make killing extreamly easy.
2. Accidentle deaths skyrocket (look at the sick figues in the US)
__________________
http://fanficmaker.com <-- Tells some truly terrible tales.
-
Phones & Tricorders & Blobs & Bombs & 3D Printers & TVIntros also;stuff

Last edited by Darkflame; 2003-02-27 at 00:11.
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 2003-02-26, 22:56
Double-J's Avatar
Double-J Double-J is offline
Magic Ball Master
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 15,411
Quote:
Originally posted by Darkflame
Even if you decided to slip into a less then fully conscious state that is still a dicision, a conscoius act, and you are repsonable for all that you do under it.
Ie. If you run someone over when drunk, that is fully your fault.
Its your fault you drunk and then went driving, its not the pubs fault, or the drink companys, its YOUR fault.
---

Exactly.
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old 2003-02-26, 23:16
Firephoenix's Avatar
Firephoenix Firephoenix is offline
Wish of eternity...
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Lyon, France
Posts: 3,087
Send a message via ICQ to Firephoenix
Of course drinking a lot doesnt make you not responsible of your acts, but the guy is rarely aware of the state alcohol can put him in. Do you think all those people that take their car after two glasses of wine know precisely how dangerous it is for others ? No, they most of times dont even undrestand why it's foorbidden exactly. You're imo less responsible when your acts are a consequences of things made before, whereas you didnt think of consequences (taking drugs ect...) rather than when they're things decided in normal conditions, on the moment. Anyway there are many things people arent aware of, and forbidding the factor objects is the easiest way to prevent troubles. Look at all the prevention campaigns that are thrown in France, and however more and morre young people smoke. They are infoormed, but they dont manage to realize how dangerous cigarettes are. If they "understood" half of them would die because of the cigarette before they were 60, they'd surely be less numerous. It's pure dumbness to bet all on information and people's intelligence. Forbidding cigarettes is THE way to see the number of stupidly sacrificed people decrease quickly. Of course there'd be marchs and stuff from people willing to have the right to die from a cancer quickly, but there are moments I think where you gotta mmake the good of people despite of their will

You see, you can blame drunk people and stuff, but it will nevver change the fact people are huirted or dead. There is no point in thinking on how respoinsible they are, just make it impossoble foor them to act badly, and you'll have results.


Not watching violence doesnt PREVENT people from being violent, but watching it DOES PUSH them towards aggressivity and violence(statistics are proofs). So in some way avoiding "virtual" (and however so much real) violence is a way to decrease the society's aggressivity.
It doesnt mean violence wont be able to express on other plans, but deleting one factor makes it harder to exppress already. Ancestral hatred between nations wont disappear because of the TV violence deletion, but many social agressivity may decrease thanks to it. Fight against violence has to be lead on many many grounds.

TV and more again games have a SUPREME attraction on minds, dont underestimate them. Wheen you've felt the attraction power, the cahracter identification that cna happen in kewl games like FF7, you understand how big the impact of games like sanitarium, where you spend your life amound mads and criminals, can be, especially on weak minds. Some people even build religions around game universes, if that game universe claims the violence and the strongest's law you know what can happen.

I'd like to wonder, also, why people are sop easily ready to defend the violence in the medias. That's true, there are only 2 cases :
- hard violence is without importance in medias, it has no influence on people, in that case I dont see why it'd harm to remove iit....
- people like to see violence, deads, tortures and perversions on TV.....in that case, isnt there something wrong somewhere ? Why are games where you are a proxenet, a serial killer or an assassin so easily sold ? Why are there in more and more games missions where your goal is to kill all the civils of a village, to be sure to destroy the few real enemies ? All that violence is both a revelation of our societies state, and a mean to increase again that violence, cause when you're able to kill proudly thousands of civilians in a realist game, what could still prevent you from harming your fellow ? That's impossible to switch from demon to angel by switching from PC to real world, you only got 1 mind. The defenses that tv and pc violence finds everywhere is the revelation of its gravity imo.

My comments about free arms circulation concerned people that claim the right for everyone to own a weapon to defend themselves, a mind state that isnt far from "only humans kill" and "people are well aware of their acts". The same way giving weapons to people only increases the number of deads, showing people violence and imaginative tortures only inccreases the violence and aggressivity of watchers.

---------

DJ - the fact is that if that person hadnt been able to drink hard alcohols he wouldnt have killed/hurted. You cant excuse the people that make their money by causing indirectly other people. It's easier to drink too much alcohol than to drive over someone in max awarness. It's so easy to drink too much without being aware oof the consequences, I dunno about how "responsible" the guy is (only God knows), but alll what I know is that without those factors the troubles may have been avoided, so they ahve to disappear. What you seem to be against. You could spend your life blaming other for their so understandable stupidity, as long as you wont attack factors.....
__________________
Live your life as if you had to die tomorrow.

------------

Take a time to visit the Relentless Movie Project page.

Last edited by Firephoenix; 2003-02-26 at 23:27.
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 2003-02-27, 06:17
Double-J's Avatar
Double-J Double-J is offline
Magic Ball Master
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 15,411
So lemme get this straight...your saying that I can't blame a drunk driver for killing someone, potentially one of my friends or family because its the ALCOHOLS FAULT? That person excersiced their FREE WILL to consume the beverage, and therefore assumed ANY AND ALL responsibility for their actions...I don't understand how you can say that someone isn't responsible or is less responsible because of something they did that played a major factor in this.


So I guess I could go drink down a whole bottle of Bacardi Rum, get in my car, and run over someone on a bicycle...and be LESS GUILTY then someone who was sober??? Where do you get this logic???
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old 2003-02-27, 15:00
Firephoenix's Avatar
Firephoenix Firephoenix is offline
Wish of eternity...
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Lyon, France
Posts: 3,087
Send a message via ICQ to Firephoenix
Laws of relativity - someone that drove over your family is less responsible than someone who did drive over your family wheereas he WASNT drunk
Because it's far less shocking for the person's mind to drink too much than to consciously kill your felllows, even if the result is the SAME. But if YOU drink a lot in order to be able to kill others with extenuating circumstances, then YOU have the MAX responsabilkity cause you did it with premeditation, with a reasonned choice (there, with the oonly goal to destroy my theses ).

It doesnt make in any way the person innocent, he'll be sued anyway, but if he didnt do it with a thgough choice, if it was more iirrrespponsibilty and madness than real evilness, he wont be condamned as a real evil killer, and that's normal.

You know, YOU too could be lead to kill quite easily, as every human on the planet. Studies have been made on that : the majority of people are able to bbecome very quickly reall torturers, killers, with welll targetted psychological pressures or in lightly special situations. Yourself, if you found the guy that has just assassinated all your family, and if you had a weapon under the hand, you surely couldnt prevent yourself from shottting him. And however, personnal revenge is forbidden by the law. You'd be responsible, but you'd be happy to know that you have important extenuating circumsntances in your favour.

That way, all the things that can influe on minds, or makedestruction easier and less shocking, are extenuating circumstances for bad actions. A killer that has lived all his childhood in poverty and violence is less to blame than Bill Gates' son that goes out to shot people for fun imo (that's ann imagined example, sorry for him). But instead of blaming humans for their iresponsibility, their unawarness, their lack of reason, I take the side of removing all what can help them to act badly, even if they're not OK with that. Minds take too much time to change to bet on that improvement for soon enough.
__________________
Live your life as if you had to die tomorrow.

------------

Take a time to visit the Relentless Movie Project page.
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old 2003-02-27, 18:59
Darkflame's Avatar
Darkflame Darkflame is offline
Classic
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Sol, Earth, NL
Posts: 23,836
Send a message via ICQ to Darkflame Send a message via AIM to Darkflame Send a message via MSN to Darkflame
Quote:
Laws of relativity - someone that drove over your family is less responsible than someone who did drive over your family wheereas he WASNT drunk

Not at all, unless he was FORCED to get drunk, and then FORCED to drive...he sis still just as responable.

(and dont insult relativity)
__________________
http://fanficmaker.com <-- Tells some truly terrible tales.
-
Phones & Tricorders & Blobs & Bombs & 3D Printers & TVIntros also;stuff
Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old 2003-02-27, 22:27
Firephoenix's Avatar
Firephoenix Firephoenix is offline
Wish of eternity...
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Lyon, France
Posts: 3,087
Send a message via ICQ to Firephoenix
You can say that as a way to prevent people from drinking or taking drugs, but yuou cant say it in the absolute.

Responsibility depends of how aware the guy was on the moment - that's why mad men cant even be sued (what looks quite exagerated sometimes). It doesnt appear as dangerous or anormal to many people to drink too much, it's (unfortunately) often seen as a cool way of having fun, and after that, under the effects of such drugs, inhibition factors are unlocked and people are able to do bad actions very easily.

For the same result (someone driven over by example), you cant judge all the cases as equal. I *hope* you wouldnt be able to volountarily drive over someone in the street. But I know you have well existing chances to do it in your life. It could happen to you very quickly, to drink too much during a too happy MBN meeting, and then to take a car to go back home. And if you havent chance (chance is a very important factor for all the unvolountary crimes), you might be a killer some minutes later. And you wont understand what happened, and you'll know you did NOT want it to happen. That's like that we can have an idea on the responsibility : if the guy regrets it later, it means he didnt want it to happen, so he wasnt fully aware of the consequences of his acts, he has no reasons to be charged as someone that volountarily killed someone else by being maximally aware of what he did. There are lots of ways to kill soemone, and some can happen to anyone quite easily whereas others need a very evil heart.

Some people are in prison for a very short moment of irresponsibility (it's sooo quick to accept the lsd pill your *friends* advise you too take) whereas others are evil inside and however havent still killed anyone. You cant judge people on the rresult of their act, ther are too many factors around, you can only judge what they wanted to do, how aware of the consequences they were, and that, only God can know it. Humans courts are there to punish people for their guessed irresponsibility/evilness, and overall to prevent them from beginning again to act badlly too quickly. But how responsible the guy really is, no one can know it, and overall not with only the result.
__________________
Live your life as if you had to die tomorrow.

------------

Take a time to visit the Relentless Movie Project page.
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old 2003-02-27, 23:44
Darkflame's Avatar
Darkflame Darkflame is offline
Classic
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Sol, Earth, NL
Posts: 23,836
Send a message via ICQ to Darkflame Send a message via AIM to Darkflame Send a message via MSN to Darkflame
You got some temporaly blindness there.

Just because the decision you made to get drunk and drive was before the accident dosnt mean that the accident was not your fault.

If you choose in any way to become less then in full controll of your actions, then you are responsably for everything you do under that influence.
Just because you wernt in full controll at the moment, does not lessen your responsability in any way.
===

Mad men cant be sued because its not there fault there mad
If I got a machine gun, and ran into a crowed place and took some sort of hard mind-altering drugs, then Id be just as responsable for killing people as if I was fully conscious.

I couldn't pleed insanty, because it was fully my fault.

In short: Responabily is not an "at the moment" thing, its a continous thing.


"Thou shall not though action or inaction allow a human to come to harm"

You have heard me say it before, and its my guide though any morel question.
It is also shameless stolen from Issac Asimovs 3 laws of robotics.
Asimov wrote lots of interesting storys based on robots and these laws....really putting to shame hollywood's cliche robots.

There is an excelent short-story he wrote about some robots being used to help humans proform dangerous expirments on an astroid.
Now, the problem with using robots in this way, was the robots constantly prevented the humans from working.
They did this because they considered the work too dangerous...

"1. Thou shall not, though action or inaction allow a human to come to harm".

It was a rule programed into the very core of every robot.
So the robots blocked work on the asteroid.
The humans, in response altered there programing to this.

"1. Thou shall not, though action allow humans to come to harm"

Note the lack of "inaction".
IE. Robots could now let humans harm themselves.

However, the humans were rather foolish to do this, as action/inaction are really the same thing.

Ie. A robot could quite easily kill a human dispite his programing.
He could, for instance, just drop a brink on a human from a large hieght.
He could drop the brick, in full knowledge that he would latter swipe it out the air, saving the human.
But once the brick is in the air..he dosnt have to.
There is nothing in his programing that prevents him from letting gravity do her work.
"Though inaction" no longer is in his code.

Splat...one dead human.

Its just the same with drink driving.

By drinking driving, your are metaphoricaly "dropping the brick".
Once its falling, you are no longer in controll of your actions.

When you drink drive you are IN FULL knowledge that it is dangerous, and can kill people.
You are effectively killing someone...for what? lazyness? You cant be bothered to call a cab? cheapness?
Just because there are random factors involved does not mean you are somehow less responsable.
__________________
http://fanficmaker.com <-- Tells some truly terrible tales.
-
Phones & Tricorders & Blobs & Bombs & 3D Printers & TVIntros also;stuff
Reply With Quote
  #160  
Old 2003-02-28, 01:13
Firephoenix's Avatar
Firephoenix Firephoenix is offline
Wish of eternity...
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Lyon, France
Posts: 3,087
Send a message via ICQ to Firephoenix
The drunk guy is there as responsible as in other cases, because he volountarily drank by knowing it'd surely cause other people's death.
But I define responsibility on how the guy was conscious of the consequences its act may have. Someone that volountarily decides to drive over someone else is MAXIMALLY responsible, fully aware of what he does, although his conception of life, that comes from his environnment/education, may alter his reason on the gravity of his act. But someone that gets drunk doesnt necessarily know what the consequences can be, else believe me there would be fewer guys that stupidly die in a car crash after a too happy fest, cause imo not that many people have the will to die after a party.
People that kill by a consequence of ealier actions like drinking and stuff are 99.99% les responsible than others cause they have less again ways to realize what the consequences can be. Many people drive after having drunk too much, whereas in my knowledge not many would be able to volountarily drive over someone else.
The result is the same, but you cant judge drunk drivers as real murderers, they're precisely judged for their *IRresponsibility*, not their *responsability*.

You're responsible when you perfectly know how much harm your acts can do, and you anyway do them, but believe me about none of deaths tha happen everyday are wanted, see the number of people that regret what they did, it's the proof they're not fully responsible but rather irresponsible.

Actually NO human on earth is responsible for his crimes, if they knew the price of a human life, the future consequences and gravity of their acts, if they fellt how BAD they are in the absolute, no human would act badly in any way. Because no human is evil in his very core, just irresponsible, unconscious (we're actually ALL somehow "mad" you know).
Even Satan is imho irresponsible, cause if he realized what he lost by his arrogance, and if he had any kind of reason, he would change.
__________________
Live your life as if you had to die tomorrow.

------------

Take a time to visit the Relentless Movie Project page.
Reply With Quote
  #161  
Old 2003-03-01, 23:40
Double-J's Avatar
Double-J Double-J is offline
Magic Ball Master
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 15,411
Quote:
Originally posted by Firephoenix

People that kill by a consequence of ealier actions like drinking and stuff are 99.99% les responsible than others cause they have less again ways to realize what the consequences can be. Many people drive after having drunk too much, whereas in my knowledge not many would be able to volountarily drive over someone else.
The result is the same, but you cant judge drunk drivers as real murderers, they're precisely judged for their *IRresponsibility*, not their *responsability*.

By your reasoning, if I just stabbed 3 people with a knife, and "didn't know I could kill someone by doing that", I would be 99.99% less responsible than someone who stabbed them and "knew" it would kill them.
Reply With Quote
  #162  
Old 2003-03-02, 00:25
McKay's Avatar
McKay McKay is offline
On top of the Well
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: London, UK
Posts: 724
Guns may look cool, but dont do cool things, apart from fire paint balls. Now paintballing is like play war. Most people forget its not real, and stand there behind a barrel for half an hour. Now thats safe cool gun shit.
Reply With Quote
  #163  
Old 2003-03-02, 02:14
Panda's Avatar
Panda Panda is offline
Still in a dream...
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 7,047
What we do in Cadets is safe too. We fire blanks at eachother. Its good fun, cos noone gets hurt and, well its just fun
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #164  
Old 2003-03-03, 02:16
Double-J's Avatar
Double-J Double-J is offline
Magic Ball Master
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 15,411
Maybe we've already been too influenced...we better get rid of our guns...our knives have to go...brass knucks, yep...even the pocketblade? Aww, yep...

But then again, TV is the source of all evil, so we'd better throw that out too...and we know that TV comes from an outside source, so we'd better cut off communications with the outside world...and we know that people made those connections, so we'd better kill all of them...hey, maybe we'd better not step foot outside our houses, we might kill someone.
Reply With Quote
  #165  
Old 2003-03-06, 18:39
Darkflame's Avatar
Darkflame Darkflame is offline
Classic
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Sol, Earth, NL
Posts: 23,836
Send a message via ICQ to Darkflame Send a message via AIM to Darkflame Send a message via MSN to Darkflame
Quote:
People that kill by a consequence of ealier actions like drinking and stuff are 99.99% les responsible
Why?
If I time a bomb to go off in 5 hours time, im still as responble as if I set it off straight away no?
Why does time make such a difference?
By your logic a person that runs into a crowd with a machine gun, and then takes some hard drugs, is 99% less responsable then someone that just shots the gun anyway?

Thats just stupid, if you volentary lose controll of yourself, you are responable for all actions that happen under that lose!
==
Also, the fact that most crimals have huge regrets, dosnt mean that can pass the blame on someone else.
Yes they regret there actions, but that dosnt magicaly reduce how responsable they were.
__________________
http://fanficmaker.com <-- Tells some truly terrible tales.
-
Phones & Tricorders & Blobs & Bombs & 3D Printers & TVIntros also;stuff
Reply With Quote
  #166  
Old 2003-03-06, 19:34
Panda's Avatar
Panda Panda is offline
Still in a dream...
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 7,047
This is so offtopic......
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #167  
Old 2003-03-06, 20:32
StarmanDX's Avatar
StarmanDX StarmanDX is offline
Magic Ball Master
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gloucestershire, England
Posts: 3,155
Send a message via AIM to StarmanDX Send a message via MSN to StarmanDX
That's what conversation does. Deal with it
Reply With Quote
  #168  
Old 2003-03-08, 14:41
Firephoenix's Avatar
Firephoenix Firephoenix is offline
Wish of eternity...
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Lyon, France
Posts: 3,087
Send a message via ICQ to Firephoenix
Quote:
Originally posted by Double-J
By your reasoning, if I just stabbed 3 people with a knife, and "didn't know I could kill someone by doing that", I would be 99.99% less responsible than someone who stabbed them and "knew" it would kill them.
Exactly, because I speak of responsibility not as penal reesponsability, not as "being the one that made the troubles to happen", but as the opposite of "irresponsibility". To me here the most responsible one is the one that has to feel the most guilty because he was the most aware of the consequences of his acts.

If you really didnt know that stabbing someone would hurt or kill him, WHY should you be BLAMED ? People wouldnt havve the rigght to judge you for your evilness, to make you feel horribly guilty wereas you were simply unconscious, they'll just have the right to blame your for your IRRRESPONSIBILITY, your lack of thoughts and intelligence. In the end anyway you'll be condamned, but not for the same reason and the same gravity of act (if you were really fully unaware of what you diid you'll eveen not be condamned).
But I speak in the absolute, of what REALLY happpens in your mind while acting, not how you'd be tempted to lie later to excuse yourself.

Each human that is noot fully mad is responsible of his acts, in the way he has to respond of their consequences. But in each diffferent case of harm or death, they'll have a limited responsability, oin the way they were not fully handling their destiny and they werent fully aware of the consequences.

Look, each time you take your car, you goot a "chance" to kill someone. In most, you'd have had the possibility to avoid the victim, but a tiny inattention moment, a slightly too high speed and there are deads. But do you think the one that kills peeople by such ann accident has to feel as guilty, as responsible as the one that deliberatly drove over an enemy ? And however he has his responsabilities in that accident. But imo he cant be judged as responsible as the one that intentionnaly killed, because he wasnt as aware of the possible consequences and as controlling his destiny as that one.
__________________
Live your life as if you had to die tomorrow.

------------

Take a time to visit the Relentless Movie Project page.
Reply With Quote
  #169  
Old 2003-03-09, 06:52
Darkflame's Avatar
Darkflame Darkflame is offline
Classic
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Sol, Earth, NL
Posts: 23,836
Send a message via ICQ to Darkflame Send a message via AIM to Darkflame Send a message via MSN to Darkflame
That dosnt mean they are 99.99% less responsable, as you said earlier.
In fact, its probably like 1% less responsable.
--
Look, if you know that drinking lots increase the chance of an accident when driving AND you still do it, then you are showing you dont care about your future actions.
Therefor you are just as responsable, the only difference is there is an element of luck involved.

And I rather you to my prvious example of the bomb...
__________________
http://fanficmaker.com <-- Tells some truly terrible tales.
-
Phones & Tricorders & Blobs & Bombs & 3D Printers & TVIntros also;stuff
Reply With Quote
  #170  
Old 2003-03-09, 07:49
Reek's Avatar
Reek Reek is offline
Party animal
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: israel
Posts: 9,491
Send a message via ICQ to Reek Send a message via MSN to Reek
DarkFlame is right,
you're responsible for everything you do.
It is the criminal's choice to drink/smoke/dope, he can't put the blame on anyone else. Someone HAS to take the blame,
it should obviously be the criminal.

We're all responsible for our own lives, and actions.
You can't run away from that responsibilty.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpaceGuitarist
there's no room for subtleties, which are so important in personalities such as mine.
Reply With Quote
  #171  
Old 2003-03-09, 18:35
Firephoenix's Avatar
Firephoenix Firephoenix is offline
Wish of eternity...
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Lyon, France
Posts: 3,087
Send a message via ICQ to Firephoenix
You're right, but the thing is that most of times the drinking/smocking guy doesnt realize the grave consequences his acts can so easily have, it's sooo quick to try, "pushed" by your "friends", a new drug, or to drink slightly too much whereas your genes make you very sensitive to the alcohol's effects. For guys - like me - that drink more extremly rarely - let's say not at all - effects of a drunk moment arent well known. So big troubles can often happen suddely whereas NO one had bad wills.

Indeed someone has to take the blame, even when it's 99% the bad luck's fault, that's why there are some very dumb judgements all around the world, but in the reality responsabilities are often very shared and low. There are really a few people that like to kill, and however look at the number of various deaths all over the world, actually it's more the irrreponsibility than the responsability that is dangerous for societies.

99.99% was maybe slightly exagerated, but when you see how people can die whereas no one wanted those deaths, whereas no one felt the consequences quite common behaviours could have, you feel that it's not in so many cases that there is a heavy responsability of the guilties. And even in wanted murders, there is a part of irresponsability, cause if only criminals knew the price of a human life I doubt they'd act anyway.
Yep it's only if the criminal CHOOSES to drink in order to be more able to kill, that there is a max responsability (what's more than rarely the case). In that case only it's as planting a bomb, but it's a quite rare case amoung all the troubles our world is made of.

Becoming responsible, and so willing for all your actions and their consequences, is a quite tiring job, that take much time to be controlled. Prevention campaigns can have good eeffects, even if they're often quite limited.
__________________
Live your life as if you had to die tomorrow.

------------

Take a time to visit the Relentless Movie Project page.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Parcel Force the_angry_monkey Off topic 8 2004-06-06 01:38
LBA 3 not made?? Force them with jokes! Guitar General 9 2003-12-12 12:55
The force is not with me :( Xakep_INC LBA3D 22 2003-05-24 23:35


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 06:46.


News Feed
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, the Magicball Network