Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Janx" data-source="post: 6215333" data-attributes="member: 8835">That's because the conversation looped. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> And we all recognized she had other choices.  Some of us just don't mind the choice she made, even though it wasn't the best.It would be disturbing if I believed or acted on that to the extreme letter of the statement.  We already have bad guys killing good people (though the crime rate has gone down thanks to Freakonomics).  Can't raise them either.  Justice system isn't perfect, and never will be.  But somebody with direct contact with the bad guy is in a good position to cut out the weeds.  I prefer such situations to be cut and dried obvious who the bad guy was, so I am not approving rampant vigilantism either.Assuming she was ever beaten by him, that warrants lethal self defense in JanxLand.  I reserve a special level in hell for wife beaters and I like to receive them direct from their spouses or new boyfriends if possible.They call it Jury Nullification, but the law specifically covers that a jury member may vote his conscience.  If I do not believe that a woman who was abused by her husband warrants going to jail, I do NOT have to side with the letter of the law.  That's what happens when Chaotic Good people get involved with writing the Constitution.I did use a qualifying term "apparently" as I cannot actually know your intent.  If you want to punish the woman who was in unusual circumstance (it's not like my wife deciding to off me for no reason), then you are also in effect choosing that she not raise her daughter.  She might actually suck at raising her daughter (she did have poor taste in men apparently), but those are variables outside the information I have.No, because they are bad.  I do not believe the woman is bad (lacking any info that she has done any other bad things).  Therefore, putting a presumably good woman who did bad but justifiable thing is not a useful punishment for her act.  As sociologists have apparently proven that stiff punishments don't disuade others from doing a crime, it seems there is little value and more harm in punishing THIS woman stiffly.I would prefer to put actual bad people in prison.  People who will be repeat offenders or whose crime was very damaging to society.  I don't see how this woman damaged society.  She probably reduced calls to police for this bad guy and she just happened to prevent terrorism (which if she didn't know he was building a bomb, she also didn't know if he was feeling her kid up and that is VERY common).  If she's not likely to kill again or otherwise disrupt society, let's put some stuff on her record and give her time served (including time with mr. wife beater).All good things.  The trap is if we get stuck in trying to be a "right fighter" as Dr. Phil would call it, or if we're just blasting the same point that nobody else cares about.  Like the jury, I think a majority here doesn't care that what she did was legally wrong.  It's an impasse.I try to to include qualifying words like "apparently" or "appears" or some such to indicate that I think a person's position is XYZ, but to leave room for being wrong and to show I am not stating it as an absolute fact.  Deducing intent is always tricky and EN advises not assigning somebody's intent.  However, some things are logically deducible.  If you say the woman should to go to jail, then I am inclined to believe your intent is that the woman should go to jail and that you are arguing with that goal.I do find, that if you are attempting to argue as a devil's advocate (choosing a specific side as its own exercise in debate), it helps to declare that upfront.  Otherwise, it can make discussion maddening as "we don't care that what she did was illegal, so why do you keep bringing that point up" happens.Also remember, I suck at debate.  I might have a few points, but I am not going to successfully sway anybody.</blockquote>

Verification