One Punch, One Kill

Off Topic
121

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

I’m not involved in MMA, I’m involved in boxing, and boxing, as you know, attracts a much different crowd than MMA.

And believe me when I tell you I’m no fan of MMA fans in general… or many of the practitioners- exactly for the reason you state.

But just like I said- you often make statements that generalize massively about fighters, and it’s still no different from the presuppositions that are made about bodybuilders. And there’s certainly bodybuilders that fit the mold that society has created for them- but it ain’t all of them, and you’d take offense too if someone assumed it.

In all honesty it attracts the same assholes that are attraced to weightlifting and bodybuilding and any other physical pursuit that they feel could make them “superior” to their fellow man. There’s less differences than you think.

Did you say “Everyone?” No. But you allude to it, and have done so consistently.[/quote]

Dude, if you knew my family, making it seem as if I don’t like “fighters” would sound fucking ridiculous. No, I do not in any way see the same types of bullshit associated with bodybuilding. I don’t see “bodybuilding related t-shirts” in the club. Even in this thread, the assumption was that I was “insecure” about MMA fighters…as if there was no chance in hell I had any background in self defense. I see that mentality often…the apparent assumption that guys who outweigh them by 50lbs are all weak as hell and will fall quickly should an altercation break out.

122

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Dude, if you knew my family, making it seem as if I don’t like “fighters” would sound fucking ridiculous.
[/quote]

You’re right, I don’t know your family. All I can go by is what’s posted on here.

No, but there are guys out there clearly lying about how much they lift, there’s guys who act like they’re huge when they’re not, there’s guys offering advice on all kinds of lifts and diet info that they don’t understand… there is a lot of the same type of attitude amongst the stupid people who have not accomplished anything.

I don’t disagree. But it’s the same as the assumption that a bigger guy is going to beat your ass simply because he’s bigger, regardless of your own background. That mentality works both ways.

I never thought you were insecure about them, just that you take jabs and sly shots that are unnecessary and, once again, are generalizing and stereotyping in way that offends many of us who aren’t like that.

123

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

I don’t disagree. But it’s the same as the assumption that a bigger guy is going to beat your ass simply because he’s bigger, regardless of your own background. That mentality works both ways.

I never thought you were insecure about them, just that you take jabs and sly shots that are unnecessary and, once again, are generalizing and stereotyping in way that offends many of us who aren’t like that.[/quote]

You just said you aren’t into MMA…so how does this concern you?

If you aren’t running around assuming guys way bigger and stronger than you are easily taken down (because you assume ALL are untrained), then this doesn’t concern you. If you aren’t wearing your Ultimate Fighting shirts just so EVERYONE knows you are into it, then it does not concern you. If you aren’t bragging about your “skillz” loudly so everyone knows you should go to jail if anyone gets hurt, then it doesn’t concern you.

Why is it we even know who is training MMA and who isn’t?

Yes, that is a stereotype…one that actually exists.

124

I may not always be right, but I am never wrong.

125

[quote]Professor X wrote:
The guy didn’t die as a direct result of the punch. He died of the secondary act of hitting his head after the punch. If the punch itself had been what killed him, then by all means, use his words against him.

[/quote]

Legally you are absolutely incorrect. The death resulted from an uninterrupted chain of events starting with the punch. It was not an accident. It was an intentional assault and serious injury is a foreseeable risk of such an assault.

126

[quote]HeavyTriple wrote:
I’m going to agree with Nards. This Ryuu kid is parrotting the kind of silly attitude that is easily refuted in practice. He/she probably thinks communism is a great form of government too.[/quote]

How this is an intelligent rebuff to an unintelligent argument is beyond me.

127

It’s intelligent because he agreed with me.

Jeez, some people.

128

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]rehanb_bl wrote:

the punch didn’t kill him the fall did?
[/quote]

Uh, yeah, that is what happened. I do believe that is the difference in this country between involuntary and voluntary man-slaughter. If your lawyer can get a jury to believe that you did not intend on killing him and that he died not because of the direct hit but what happened afterwards, then you get involuntary.

I know we have some lawyers here who can clarify that.[/quote]

the intent might have an effect on the sentence but he still killed a man. Technically it would make a difference but in practice it should be minimal

129

[quote]Rational Gaze wrote:

[quote]rugggby wrote:

[quote]Hyena wrote:
but he doesn’t deserve 6 years of hard time for it.[/quote]

Don’t worry, its England… there’s no such thing as hard time.[/quote]

People who say this usually have no idea what it’s like being in prison.[/quote]

I dont, youre right. But I’ve worked with 2 people who’ve been inside and my uncle has as well.
One of which was a cat a prisoner.

130

Hey Guys,

My first post so be gentle. This is a subject of interest to me so here are a few thoughts. That wasn’t a fight. Mr. Molloy never raised his hands, bladed his body or showed any other signs that he knew he was in a fight. The other guy (Viecht?) kept a neutral stance until the instant before he threw, effectively masking his intent. Classic sucker punch. Whatever shit Molloy was talking we cannot answer words with fists. I also don’t believe that Viecht “snapped”. It looked to me like he intended to hit Molloy along and was looking for an excuse which he either found or got tired of waiting for. When he threw it was a deliberate, tight, calculated shot. That looks like malice rather than uncontrolled rage. Not implying that he intended Malloy’s death but typically bad things happen to people when we hit them. His earlier remarks are relevant because they discount the “didn’t know his own strength” argument.

When we do stupid shit and other people die it’s our fault. Yes the same thing probably happened at dozens of other U.K. bars that night without any real consequences, but that’s the way it goes. In my opinion, guy totally needs to go to jail and if 6 years really equals 3 then he got off lightly. All the same it’s a stupid fucking waste of 2 lives however you look at it. It ended one life and will likely ruin another plus both families. Something to remember next time your ego starts run away with you.

131

[quote]Nards wrote:
You’re using the word ‘revenge’ here because of its negative connotations and trying to lay a debating trap for those that argue against you.
[/quote]

I use the word “revenge” because by definition, this is revenge. Do you know a better word?

132

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:
Alright, you all pretty much said the same thing… but decided to each say it anyway, so here we go.

None of you are interested in “justice”. You all want revenge. There are more (violent) criminals and returning (violent) criminals in prison now than ever (controlled for population growth). If prison was really the best means to solve crime, just the opposite would be true. The thing is, making something “illegal” doesn’t mean much when you’re stupid-drunk and can’t think past anything that isn’t in your immediate line of sight. So don’t act like prison fixes persons. Perhaps some persons come out better for it, but they are the exception, NOT the rule. Most persons come out more violent and with more pent-up anger than they had before.

Just because you’re ignorant of how to deal with issues like this doesn’t mean it can’t be done and certainly DOESN’T justify using revenge as the next-best tactic. Taking six years from this man’s life does nothing to insure he wont come out REALLY screwed up. You’d be naive to assume otherwise. So, if your main concern really is with keeping these persons away from yourself/family/“civilized” persons rather than punishment, then one would expect you to be in favour of a life sentence for all violent crime, especially considering how “easy” it is to bullshit your way out on good behaviour.

Since that’s not the case, revenge is the only motive left. [/quote]

This is pretty stupid. Really.

So you’re saying crime does not deserve to be punished. That our laws and prison terms associated therewith are not deterrents? There is no doubt people come out fucked up more than when they went in. But that’s an issue of how prisons are managed - not an argument against punishment and a period of confinement. He took a man’s life.

Plenty of people get drunk every weekend. And they don’t go around cold cocking unsuspecting innocent people. When you engage in that kind of conduct, you need to be removed from society for as long as it takes. If you want to come out and do it again, back you go.

I wonder how you’d feel is someone “drunk and stupid” took the life of one of your loved ones. I wonder how you’d stand before the judge and plea that prison is not the answer, but please get the man some therapy. And I wonder how those around us with the proclivity for violence against innocent people would feel if they knew that their actions had no greater consequence than some therapy.

You think you’re smart. Apparently, this is a national illusion in Canada for many. But trust me, and I’m being kind when I say you’re not nearly as clever as you fancy yourself. [/quote]

It’s specifically BECAUSE plenty of persons get drunk every weekend without cold-cocking someone that this man is peculiar. There’s something wrong with him. Trying to solve the problem rather than just locking him up for a while seems to be the clearly superior method to me, but I guess none of you see that.

Treating him keeps him away from society all the same, so your argument is moot in this respect. As for deterrents, law clearly is not. Violent crime is higher, not lower. Besides, even if it worked as a deterrent, you wouldn’t be solving their psychological and/or chemical problems, you would merely be suppressing it.

Also, you don’t know me or my past so your theory is unfalsifiable and unverifiable, making it pointless.

You think yourself some hardcore realist. Apparently, this is an illusion shared by many on this site. But trust me and I’m being kind when I say, you’re merely deriving an ought from an is.

133

[quote]HeavyTriple wrote:
I’m going to agree with Nards. This Ryuu kid is parrotting the kind of silly attitude that is easily refuted in practice. He/she probably thinks communism is a great form of government too.[/quote]

So easy that you made no attempt to do so… yeah.

Also, no, I’m no communist. Strange that you would make such an assertion… =/

134

[quote]batman730 wrote:
All the same it’s a stupid fucking waste of 2 lives however you look at it. It ended one life and will likely ruin another plus both families. Something to remember next time your ego starts run away with you.

[/quote]

This.

135

[quote]batman730 wrote:
Hey Guys,

My first post so be gentle. This is a subject of interest to me so here are a few thoughts. That wasn’t a fight. Mr. Molloy never raised his hands, bladed his body or showed any other signs that he knew he was in a fight. The other guy (Viecht?) kept a neutral stance until the instant before he threw, effectively masking his intent. Classic sucker punch. Whatever shit Molloy was talking we cannot answer words with fists. I also don’t believe that Viecht “snapped”. It looked to me like he intended to hit Molloy along and was looking for an excuse which he either found or got tired of waiting for. When he threw it was a deliberate, tight, calculated shot. That looks like malice rather than uncontrolled rage. Not implying that he intended Malloy’s death but typically bad things happen to people when we hit them. His earlier remarks are relevant because they discount the “didn’t know his own strength” argument.

When we do stupid shit and other people die it’s our fault. Yes the same thing probably happened at dozens of other U.K. bars that night without any real consequences, but that’s the way it goes. In my opinion, guy totally needs to go to jail and if 6 years really equals 3 then he got off lightly. All the same it’s a stupid fucking waste of 2 lives however you look at it. It ended one life and will likely ruin another plus both families. Something to remember next time your ego starts run away with you.

[/quote]

Solid first post.

136

[quote]duffyj2 wrote:

[quote]HeavyTriple wrote:
I’m going to agree with Nards. This Ryuu kid is parrotting the kind of silly attitude that is easily refuted in practice. He/she probably thinks communism is a great form of government too.[/quote]

How this is an intelligent rebuff to an unintelligent argument is beyond me. [/quote]

It wasn’t an attempt at intelligent debate. From the views expressed in this thread, he fits a very specific type of person I’ve observed in my time.

137

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]HeavyTriple wrote:
I’m going to agree with Nards. This Ryuu kid is parrotting the kind of silly attitude that is easily refuted in practice. He/she probably thinks communism is a great form of government too.[/quote]

So easy that you made no attempt to do so… yeah.

Also, no, I’m no communist. Strange that you would make such an assertion… =/[/quote]

Why don’t you explain how you drew the conclusion that the law is not an effective deterrant to crime based on nothing other than the increased per-capita rate of crime? If you honestly think that’s the only variable at play in an overwhelmingly complex issue, then I have nothing to say to you. Or hell, maybe you can tell me how you expertly determined that this man has a chemical imbalance based on a 15-second video clip, while of course knowing nothing about him personally.

138

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

It’s specifically BECAUSE plenty of persons get drunk every weekend without cold-cocking someone that this man is peculiar. There’s something wrong with him. Trying to solve the problem rather than just locking him up for a while seems to be the clearly superior method to me, but I guess none of you see that.

Treating him keeps him away from society all the same, so your argument is moot in this respect. As for deterrents, law clearly is not. Violent crime is higher, not lower. Besides, even if it worked as a deterrent, you wouldn’t be solving their psychological and/or chemical problems, you would merely be suppressing it.

Also, you don’t know me or my past so your theory is unfalsifiable and unverifiable, making it pointless.

You think yourself some hardcore realist. Apparently, this is an illusion shared by many on this site. But trust me and I’m being kind when I say, you’re merely deriving an ought from an is. [/quote]

Do you masturbate to ejaculate these pseudo-intellectual cum stains. Are do they merely eject from your mouth like a wet fart, leaving yet another stain in rear?

He’s not peculiar in any sense. There are plenty of idiots in every bar, every night, that haul off and crack someone. I know. Because I had the pleasure of grabbing those anti-social motherfuckers by their neck and showing them the door 100s of times. And although I am no bully, I would be praying those silly motherfuckers would make me the target of their anti-social bullying behavior so that I could unleash my own justice upon these animals. I never got my satisfaction. None of these cowards was stupid enough to direct their aggression in my direction. Well, there were two. I forgot. It didn’t go well for them. And sometimes someone is seriously injured (aggravated assault) or dies (murder, or variations thereof) as a result of those assaults. And when that recklessness results in such an outcome, you have to pay the price - however inconvenient or fucked up prisons are, it’s what we have at the moment. There are those among us that are comfortable with violence, particularly against the weak or weaker among us, and this case is no different, not “peculiar”. It was anything but “peculiar”, it was “typical” and the assault was committed by a cowardly bully.

This is not a debate about our prison systems and failures at rehabilitation. This is about removing a dangerous (yes, dangerous because he plies his trade against those that are weaker than he) criminal from society, to separate him for his rights, as punishment for his crime. If during those 6 years you want be volunteer as a counselor where he is incarcerated and listen to his story and perhaps masturbate him under the visiting room tables and touch him like his uncle did when he was 5, then have at it. I’d at least respect that commitment, however misguided, as opposed to your liberal musings delivered from your bedroom in Canada.

Hardcore realist? Did you invent that label? If you’re going to invent labels, at least define them for us so that we can follow along with your thoughtstains.

And although violent crime is higher and we live in a violent world, those of us with the higher reasoning skills and moral compass to fit into civilized society, are deterred by the prospect of punishment. I can honestly say I do not give the beatings I would love to deliver and that are richly deserved, because I do not want to be taken from my loved ones and children. I do not want to forfeit my freedoms. Those animals among us with lower reasoning skills, still understand punishment. Remove punishment and crime would rise even higher. Counseling is not punishment. At least the monkeys among us TRY TO GO UNDETECTED FOR THEIR CRIMES. I’m sure they would be much more brazen the minute we get all Canandian-touchy-feely on them and lend an ear to the “my uncle touched my pee pee when I was 4” excuses for their anti-social and violent behavior.

Nice try. Stick to hockey.

139

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]batman730 wrote:
Hey Guys,

My first post so be gentle. This is a subject of interest to me so here are a few thoughts. That wasn’t a fight. Mr. Molloy never raised his hands, bladed his body or showed any other signs that he knew he was in a fight. The other guy (Viecht?) kept a neutral stance until the instant before he threw, effectively masking his intent. Classic sucker punch. Whatever shit Molloy was talking we cannot answer words with fists. I also don’t believe that Viecht “snapped”. It looked to me like he intended to hit Molloy along and was looking for an excuse which he either found or got tired of waiting for. When he threw it was a deliberate, tight, calculated shot. That looks like malice rather than uncontrolled rage. Not implying that he intended Malloy’s death but typically bad things happen to people when we hit them. His earlier remarks are relevant because they discount the “didn’t know his own strength” argument.

When we do stupid shit and other people die it’s our fault. Yes the same thing probably happened at dozens of other U.K. bars that night without any real consequences, but that’s the way it goes. In my opinion, guy totally needs to go to jail and if 6 years really equals 3 then he got off lightly. All the same it’s a stupid fucking waste of 2 lives however you look at it. It ended one life and will likely ruin another plus both families. Something to remember next time your ego starts run away with you.

[/quote]

Solid first post.[/quote]

x2. That posts sums up how I feel about the incident. Except I think it’s only a waste of one life. Fuck the guy that threw the punch.

140

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]Nards wrote:
You’re using the word ‘revenge’ here because of its negative connotations and trying to lay a debating trap for those that argue against you.
[/quote]

I use the word “revenge” because by definition, this is revenge. Do you know a better word?[/quote]

We call it justice.

I think the reason humans developed laws and punishments for breaking them was an attempt by our ancestors to duplicate nature.
If Og, the stupid caveman decides to climb up a tall tree and jump off…he will likely be badly hurt. If that doesn’t happen, others will be very surprised that Og somehow ‘got away’ with it.
If Og then kicks a sleeping bear and the bear doesn’t chase him and instead gives him a pat on the head, others will balk at this incredibly lucky (for Og) turn of events.
If Og decides to sleep all day and not contribute to the tribe but hit the females that are gathering berries over the head…the others now see something they can actually effect.
They may hit Og over the head repeatedly. They are attempting to create the natural effect that was missing when this fool Og went against the natural law and nothing happened.

Also, we all know revenge is an emotional and what we call philosophically a ‘loaded’ word. If you want to go against all history before you may decide to change “justice system” to “revenge system,” but that would be dishonest
Even though I may want revenge on someone who’s wronged me, the idea that all the police, lawyers, judges and jury members between me and the suspect going to jail are all motivated by revenge is not possible.