Penalty for cannibalism

I think it should be death hands down
you?

BolshevikClock wrote:

I think it should be death hands down
you?

everything should be equeal.but being eaten alive is worse than just death, but noone should endure cannabilism.

BolshevikClock wrote:

I think it should be death hands down
you?

Cannibalists should be eaten alive as a punishment

Patetine wrote:

BolshevikClock wrote:

I think it should be death hands down
you?

Cannibalists should be eaten alive as a punishment

thats an great idea, how come i never thought of that?
i always thought that being shot by firing squad well being humiliated by a crowd was always appropriate

Here we come to the grounds of personal freedoms.

Anyone remembers the case of the two German Cannibals that even recorded a video? There was no coercion there, no compulsion.

One was searching for someone to eat in internet and the other one was searching for someone to eat him. They contacted, they met and they arranged the dinner and for no one to suspect murder they recorded the whole thing.

So this is a possibly fair stance:

As long as cannibalism is practiced consious and voluntarily by all the parties implied it shouldn't be punished.

I'm against the capital punishment in all cases, even for cannibalism; and if you eat someone alive for cannibalism won't have to also eat the people who ate the cannibal alive and so forth?
I think there should be punishment even if the person you ate consented but not too severe of one.

oligarch wrote:

I'm against the capital punishment in all cases, even for cannibalism; and if you eat someone alive for cannibalism won't have to also eat the people who ate the cannibal alive and so forth?
I think there should be punishment even if the person you ate consented but not too severe of one.

agreed.

oligarch wrote:

I'm against the capital punishment in all cases, even for cannibalism; and if you eat someone alive for cannibalism won't have to also eat the people who ate the cannibal alive and so forth?

I guess he was joking... or I hope so....

oligarch wrote:

I think there should be punishment even if the person you ate consented but not too severe of one.

Comrade, the other person is consenting it.... where's the crime? That's personal freedom.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

oligarch wrote:

I think there should be punishment even if the person you ate consented but not too severe of one.

Comrade, the other person is consenting it.... where's the crime? That's personal freedom.

Yes, but theres still the matter the person dieing for the express purpose of being eaten and also the emotional effect it will have on the loved ones of the person being eaten.

oligarch wrote:

Yes, but theres still the matter the person dieing for the express purpose of being eaten and also the emotional effect it will have on the loved ones of the person being eaten.

While we can argue it's a wasted life and that it will indeed have a negative impact in the feelings of the eaten's beloved ones, isn't that a personal issue of all the parties implied? Isn't it the eaten's right to die eaten? If a person wishes to die eaten and doesn't desire to live anymore, isn't the capability to choose that his right? We could argue mental problems, but, it couldn't be a rule and would be hard to study (if not impossible) after the eaten's death.


It would be matter of studying the case, however if a person consiously consented someone to eat him, the cannibal can't be punished for that.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

oligarch wrote:

Yes, but theres still the matter the person dieing for the express purpose of being eaten and also the emotional effect it will have on the loved ones of the person being eaten.

While we can argue it's a wasted life and that it will indeed have a negative impact in the feelings of the eaten's beloved ones, isn't that a personal issue of all the parties implied? Isn't it the eaten's right to die eaten? If a person wishes to die eaten and doesn't desire to live anymore, isn't the capability to choose that his right? We could argue mental problems, but, it couldn't be a rule and would be hard to study (if not impossible) after the eaten's death.


It would be matter of studying the case, however if a person consiously consented someone to eat him, the cannibal can't be punished for that.

But the cannibal plays a role in the death of the eaten but I suppose each case would be very different and there a blanket rule about cannibalism couldn't be very effective.

oligarch wrote:

But the cannibal plays a role in the death of the eaten but I suppose each case would be very different and there a blanket rule about cannibalism couldn't be very effective.

Yes, the cannibal plays a role indeed, probably even being the executioner. However, it is a death consented by the one who dies. A person is making a personal decision about his life and someone is assisting him. It's like saying the eaten has right to be eaten by the cannibal and the cannibal to eat him as long as there's no coercion implied and all the parties involved agree.

Penalizing a canibal who has eaten a consenting eaten is in my view like penalizing a 20 year old that had sex with a 17 year old for felony when both are consenting in that act.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

oligarch wrote:

But the cannibal plays a role in the death of the eaten but I suppose each case would be very different and there a blanket rule about cannibalism couldn't be very effective.

Yes, the cannibal plays a role indeed, probably even being the executioner. However, it is a death consented by the one who dies. A person is making a personal decision about his life and someone is assisting him. It's like saying the eaten has right to be eaten by the cannibal and the cannibal to eat him as long as there's no coercion implied and all the parties involved agree.

Penalizing a canibal who has eaten a consenting eaten is in my view like penalizing a 20 year old that had sex with a 17 year old for felony when both are consenting in that act.

Though there may or may not be any actual crime, the fact remains that a cannibal is probably mentally unstable and should be placed in some sort of mental institution.

oligarch wrote:

Though there may or may not be any actual crime, the fact remains that a cannibal is probably mentally unstable and should be placed in some sort of mental institution.

You said it "probably", but it could be just even a sexual fetish, once again, part of the personal freedoms.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

oligarch wrote:

Though there may or may not be any actual crime, the fact remains that a cannibal is probably mentally unstable and should be placed in some sort of mental institution.

You said it "probably", but it could be just even a sexual fetish, once again, part of the personal freedoms.

In most cases, I think a the kind of person who likes to eat other people is mentally unstable and this also raises the question of whether or not people should be protected from committing suicide; I think they should.

oligarch wrote:

In most cases, I think a the kind of person who likes to eat other people is mentally unstable and this also raises the question of whether or not people should be protected from committing suicide; I think they should.

Maybe not all are mentally unstable. I think that as long as they don't eat anyone who doesn't consent everything's fine.

As for the suicide issue. I think we should try to persuade a person who searches to suicide not to do it. However, imagine the next scenary:

A person is completely convinced that he's nothing more than a cumulous of chemicals and thus his life is senseless so he decided to suicide... why should we stop a person who is convinced that he or she should die?

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

oligarch wrote:

In most cases, I think a the kind of person who likes to eat other people is mentally unstable and this also raises the question of whether or not people should be protected from committing suicide; I think they should.

Maybe not all are mentally unstable. I think that as long as they don't eat anyone who doesn't consent everything's fine.

As for the suicide issue. I think we should try to persuade a person who searches to suicide not to do it. However, imagine the next scenary:

A person is completely convinced that he's nothing more than a cumulous of chemicals and thus his life is senseless so he decided to suicide... why should we stop a person who is convinced that he or she should die?

They still should receive mandatory counseling and other assistance and as for suicide, does allowing a person to kill themselves when you know you can stop them equate to killing them?

oligarch wrote:

They still should receive mandatory counseling and other assistance and as for suicide, does allowing a person to kill themselves when you know you can stop them equate to killing them?

No, allowing a person to kill him/herself doesn't equate to killing him/her.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

oligarch wrote:

They still should receive mandatory counseling and other assistance and as for suicide, does allowing a person to kill themselves when you know you can stop them equate to killing them?

No, allowing a person to kill him/herself doesn't equate to killing him/her.

Maybe, but cannibals still need psychiatric help.

oligarch wrote:

Maybe, but cannibals still need psychiatric help.

Not every cannibal may need it. Probably if you want a 90%, but not every.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

oligarch wrote:

Maybe, but cannibals still need psychiatric help.

Not every cannibal may need it. Probably if you want a 90%, but not every.

What kind of recreational cannibal is sane?

Wait..how did cannibalism ever come come in the first place.. am I missing some crazy stuff in russia?

Diogritor wrote:

Wait..how did cannibalism ever come come in the first place.. am I missing some crazy stuff in russia?

Im so confused at what you are trying to say...

Im just asking why Cannibalism came up and is this common where you come from?

cary jebus wrote:

oligarch wrote:

I'm against the capital punishment in all cases, even for cannibalism; and if you eat someone alive for cannibalism won't have to also eat the people who ate the cannibal alive and so forth?
I think there should be punishment even if the person you ate consented but not too severe of one.

agreed.

I didnt meant eaten by human, i meant eaten by an animal