Login    Register
User Information
Username:
Password:
We are a free and open
community, all are welcome.
Click here to Register
Sponsored
Who is online

In total there are 44 users online :: 4 registered, 0 hidden and 40 guests


Most users ever online was 155 on Mon Aug 15, 2016 1:40 am

Registered users: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], jimmy101, Yahoo [Bot] based on users active over the past 5 minutes

The Team
Administrators
Global Moderators
global_moderators.png CS

"Offtopic-posts-topic" NSFW

All non-spudgun related discussion goes here such as projects, theories, serious questions, etc. All "off-topic" posts (aka useless posting, determined by moderators) will be removed.
Sponsored 
  • Author
    Message

Unread postAuthor: jackssmirkingrevenge » Mon Jan 14, 2013 5:47 am

Interestingly from the wiki article:

Daniel Bartels of Columbia University found that individual reactions to trolley problems is context sensitive and that around 90% would refuse the act of deliberately killing one individual to save five lives. Further study by Daniel Bartels and David Pizarro focused on those 10% who made utilitarian choice. The study asked participants to series of value statement. The experiment found that those who had stronger utilitarian leaning had stronger tendency to psychopathy, Machiavellianism or tended to view life as meaningless.


Image

While I agree with most of what you said about the dangers of attempting to assign a value to life, have a read:

http://advocatusatheist.blogspot.com/20 ... ought.html

Interesting conclusion:

It seems to me that the implication here is the statistical data of which dictates the proper action seemingly outweighs the moral intuition. Whether this is good or bad, I cannot pretend to know the answer to. Perhaps, we should use statistical computations to help model morality with prospective logic to aid us in moral decision making. I don't know. I just thought by positing a logical sociopath, instead of a morally righteous bystander, the test shows that righteous morality may in fact pose a greater threat to society than sociopathy. A strange moral realization if there ever was one.


MrC wrote:I would probably divert the trolley to hit the fat man instead of the 5 people.


Ah, but what if the fat man was your father and the other five were strangers of a different ethnic and social group? I wouldn't be able to kill my dad, but I think I would be morally justified in not taking action. I would also think that given the conclusion above, someone else who didn't know my father would be justified in pushing me out of the way and diverting the trolley.

MrC wrote:I couldn't really gauge what sort of thing you were suggesting (hence the above clarification) so, if you have any thoughts that don't fall under the arguments of my extreme interpretation of human-value, feel free to ignore the above.


I was trying to link it to the gun ban issue. As mentioned before, less people have been killed by airguns than have been killed by wasps in the UK - where is the government push to eradicate wasps?

Someone has clearly decided "It's not worth the effort of killing all wasps for the sake of keeping the 2 or 3 most sting-susceptible Britons alive" - and this has not created a public outcry, so clearly the vast majority of the population agrees with this notion whether tacitly or not.
  • 0

User avatar
jackssmirkingrevenge
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 24225
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
Country: Holy See (Vatican City State) (va)
Reputation: 66

Unread postAuthor: ramses » Mon Jan 14, 2013 1:08 pm

jackssmirkingrevenge wrote:
Zeus wrote:marginally legal compared to any modern centrefire.


I presume you mean "marginally lethal". Depends in whose hands I guess, an accurate 22 with scope and suppressor is not to be taken lightly.


Ironically, I own a .22lr rifle that was considered 'less lethal' for riot control purposes in Russia. Although I suppose they did take it out of service because too many people died after being shot with it.
  • 0

POLAND_SPUD wrote:even if there was no link I'd know it's a bot because of female name :D
User avatar
ramses
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1679
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 6:50 pm
Reputation: 3

Unread postAuthor: jackssmirkingrevenge » Mon Jan 14, 2013 1:21 pm

ramses wrote:Ironically, I own a .22lr rifle that was considered 'less lethal' for riot control purposes in Israel. Although I suppose they did take it out of service because too many people died after being shot with it.


*cough*

;)

edit:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VyQipO4miw[/youtube]

oh god tears are streaming down my face LOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!
  • 0

User avatar
jackssmirkingrevenge
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 24225
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
Country: Holy See (Vatican City State) (va)
Reputation: 66

Unread postAuthor: MrCrowley » Mon Jan 14, 2013 4:07 pm

After all, not preventing a violent rape isn't the same as actually raping somebody, but you would have to be a cold hearted bastard not to prevent a rape which could save another person's life.
Not so cold-hearted if not preventing that one rape says 5 others from rape :P

The reason I find this interesting, is because the morally indifferent person can potentially save millions, while having only killed a few, thus realizing a greater moral good. Whereas the morally righteous person will be faced with the realization that they have allowed for millions upon millions of deaths because of their refusal to sacrifice one for the many. An act which no greater moral good can be found.
Well the ratio was 5:1 but now it's made out to be at least 1000000:1? But that brings me on to another point. I wonder what the threshold is for people choosing to throw the fat man over the bridge; how many lives have to be put on the line for a person who initially chose not to throw the fat man to now throw the fat man? Also, I wonder if that threshold would be much lower if they weren't doing the throwing.

*Duh, should've kept reading before typing as they addressed the threshold in the very next paragraph :D

I think the closest these scenarios will come to reality in a major sense would either be in a nuclear disaster or biochemical warfare. In the 24-esque nuclear bomb plot, we can move the bomb but we only have enough time to move it to lower populated area, we can't get it out of the city in time. With the biochemical one, I'm envisioning 24 weeks later (I think) when the army starts shooting all the people in the quarantine zone because the virus breaks out. If there is no cure at hand, 100% containment might not be possible, and there's a risk that the virus could break out and infect the rest of the world, I wonder what a government would decide to do.

Have you seen 24 season 3? I can't remember the exact circumstances but Bauer has to execute the head of CTU as per terrorist demands or some biochemical weapon would be released in the city.

where is the government push to eradicate wasps?

Might not be good for the ecosystem :D
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSXMKr2mbhM[/youtube]

This is getting close to the "why don't we ban knives?" argument that I've seen too often after the recent school shooting. There are way too many factors that vary depending on the 'object' (in this case, knives) as to why knives may be less restricted than an air rifle or gun. For example: knives can be easily fashioned (making a ban difficult), are required in everyday life (cooking, hunting, fishing, building, etc), a ban on knives would require a ban on other sharp objects that are potentially just as dangerous (screwdrivers, forks, etc). A good case can be made to not outlaw air rifles but a better case can be made to licence air rifles than to licence knives, for example.

In NZ, you're not allowed to carry a knife without a valid reason (self-defence doesn't count as a valid reason), you generally have to be over 18 to buy a knife, and being caught in public with a knife could mean you get charged with possession of a deadly weapon. The laws for air guns pretty much mirror that of knives. I think the laws for knives is justified too; we (NZers) don't need a weapon for self-defence when we're out in public and bringing a knife out in self-defence might just get you killed as suddenly everyone is playing for survival and if you're not physically and mentally ready to kill the other person with the knife, they might be so desperate to survive that they will manage to use your own knife to kill you.

Someone has clearly decided "It's not worth the effort of killing all wasps for the sake of keeping the 2 or 3 most sting-susceptible Britons alive"
Well there's a lot more factors than that, it would hardly be a purely economic question. It might not even be possible considering the lax biological border control the UK would have. NZ must have one of the most strict and efficient biological border controls in the world but every now and then something still gets through. Maybe make a comparison with smoking instead of wasps as we know that is purely economic question.
  • 0

User avatar
MrCrowley
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 10207
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 10:42 pm
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Country: New Zealand (nz)
Reputation: 4

Unread postAuthor: POLAND_SPUD » Mon Jan 14, 2013 7:14 pm

Let me make it even more complicated...
MrCrowley wrote:
After all, not preventing a violent rape isn't the same as actually raping somebody, but you would have to be a cold hearted bastard not to prevent a rape which could save another person's life.
Not so cold-hearted if not preventing that one rape says 5 others from rape :P

what about raping a woman who falsely accused you of rape ? would that constitute double jeopardy ? :D

interesting statistical data ->> http://www.theforensicexaminer.com/archive/spring09/15/
  • 0

Children are the future

unless we stop them now
User avatar
POLAND_SPUD
Chief of Staff
Chief of Staff
 
Posts: 5405
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 4:43 pm
Country: Israel (il)
Reputation: 10

Unread postAuthor: jackssmirkingrevenge » Tue Jan 15, 2013 2:04 am

MrCrowley wrote:Have you seen 24 season 3? I can't remember the exact circumstances but Bauer has to execute the head of CTU as per terrorist demands or some biochemical weapon would be released in the city.


Smacks a bit of this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ticking_time_bomb_scenario

Haven't watched 24, so far Breaking Bad is the only US series to have lived up to my expectations.

Actually LOLOLOL look what it says in the wiki!

Works of fiction, such as the television series 24, often rely on ticking time bomb scenarios for dramatic effect. According to the Parents Television Council, given that each season represents a 24-hour period, Jack Bauer encounters someone who needs torturing to reveal a ticking bomb on average 12 times per day.


:D :D :D

Might not be good for the ecosystem :D


Hehe of course I meant that with a pinch of salt ;)

Maybe make a comparison with smoking instead of wasps as we know that is purely economic question.


Lets say alcohol as it is a more socially acceptable vice than smoking. Every 27 minutes a study comes out saying x glasses of wine a day or x pints of beer a week are good for you and doctors recommend it, nothing like that is ever going to come out for cigarettes.

According to the CDC (really wanted to link to a Crudely Drawn Cock there :D):

Alcohol Use and Health

There are approximately 80,000 deaths attributable to excessive alcohol use each year in the United States.1 This makes excessive alcohol use the 3r d leading lifestyle-related cause of death for the nation.2 Excessive alcohol use is responsible for 2.3 million years of potential life lost (YPLL) annually, or an average of about 30 years of potential life lost for each death.1 In 2006, there were more than 1.2 million emergency room visits and 2.7 million physician office visits due to excessive drinking.3 The economic costs of excessive alcohol consumption in 2006 were estimated at $223.5 billion.3


Nobody *needs* to drink alcoholic beverages, unlike knives there is no use for the stuff other that to dull your senses. So in view of the above, why don't we ban it?

Oh...

what about raping a woman who falsely accused you of rape ? would that constitute double jeopardy ?


I guess you would have to replicate the exact circumstances of the imagined rape, might be a bit difficult to set up - otherwise you might do something slightly different and she could accuse you of additional trauma, which cannot be quantified and so the odds are stacked against you.

This is what happens when you let feelings have the same validity as facts.

This is a fringe view but a disturbing reflection on the general picture: http://www.shrink4men.com/2011/10/18/an ... -is-abuse/

Some pretty shocking stuff in that link you provided...

Charles P. McDowell, a researcher in the United States Air Force Special Studies Division, studied the 1,218 reports of rape that were made between 1980 and 1984 on Air Force bases throughout the world (McDowell, 1985). Of those, 460 were found to be "proven" allegations either because the "overwhelming preponderance of the evidence" strongly supported the allegation or because there was a conviction in the case. Another 212 of the total reports were found to be "disproved" as the alleged victim convincingly admitted the complaint was a "hoax" at some point during the initial investigation. The researchers then investigated the 546 remaining or "unresolved" rape allegations including having the accusers submit to a polygraph. Twenty-seven percent (27%) of these complainants admitted they had fabricated their accusation just before taking the polygraph or right after they failed the test. (It should be noted that whenever there was any doubt, the unresolved case was re-classified as a "proven" rape.) Combining this 27% with the initial 212 "disproved" cases, it was determined that approximately 45% of the total rape allegations were false.


This too:

Essentially, there are no formal negative consequences for the person who files a false report of rape. Not only did the false allegation serve a purpose for the accusers, they actually never have to fully admit to themselves, their family, or their friends that the report was a lie. Although there are grounds for bringing legal action against the accuser, it is virtually never done. Even should a charge be filed, in most jurisdictions filing a false report is only a misdemeanor.

When rape cases go to trial, alleged victims are protected by "rape shield statutes." In brief, these statutes are designed to prevent defense attorneys from using the accuser's sexual history "against" her. At the same time, these rape shield laws may suppress evidence related to the woman's history that is relevant to the issue before the court. In particular, they have been used to exclude prior false accusations of rape filed by the alleged victim.
  • 0

User avatar
jackssmirkingrevenge
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 24225
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
Country: Holy See (Vatican City State) (va)
Reputation: 66

Unread postAuthor: MrCrowley » Tue Jan 15, 2013 6:00 am

  • 0

User avatar
MrCrowley
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 10207
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 10:42 pm
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Country: New Zealand (nz)
Reputation: 4

Sponsored

Sponsor
 


Unread postAuthor: jackssmirkingrevenge » Tue Jan 15, 2013 6:06 am

Nice one :)

This is totally me in the lab: http://www.theonion.com/articles/procra ... pas,30886/
  • 0

User avatar
jackssmirkingrevenge
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 24225
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
Country: Holy See (Vatican City State) (va)
Reputation: 66

Unread postAuthor: POLAND_SPUD » Tue Jan 15, 2013 12:01 pm

Some pretty shocking stuff in that link you provided
yup...

this is also quite entertaining -> http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog ... visualised

somehow women logic assumes that those not found guilty of rape are not innocent but just people who haven't been found guilty by the court

so if you're accused of murder but you get aquited you're a murderer anyway...

ohhh and in case you're wondering how did they get this data on rape that hasn't been reported...
well ->>> some people asked some random women - god only knows how many and from what background and they asked them questions like
have you ever had an intercourse you later regreted ?


FACEPALM
  • 0

Children are the future

unless we stop them now
User avatar
POLAND_SPUD
Chief of Staff
Chief of Staff
 
Posts: 5405
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 4:43 pm
Country: Israel (il)
Reputation: 10

Unread postAuthor: Labtecpower » Tue Jan 15, 2013 12:22 pm

Farmers yay!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTJzTjnIEsU[/youtube]
  • 0

"ñøw mÿ šįg šüçkś!"
User avatar
Labtecpower
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1267
Joined: Sat Feb 20, 2010 6:38 am
Location: Herb Island
Reputation: 7

Unread postAuthor: jackssmirkingrevenge » Tue Jan 15, 2013 12:25 pm

Again, *Dutch* farmers hehehehehehe.... brilliant!

edit:

Image

PUI enough to agree but not enough to fork up the image code. i hope.

some good tips http://www.quickmeme.com/Actual-Advice-Mallard/
  • 0

User avatar
jackssmirkingrevenge
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 24225
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
Country: Holy See (Vatican City State) (va)
Reputation: 66

Unread postAuthor: MrCrowley » Wed Jan 16, 2013 12:15 am

Image
  • 0

User avatar
MrCrowley
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 10207
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 10:42 pm
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Country: New Zealand (nz)
Reputation: 4

Unread postAuthor: Zeus » Wed Jan 16, 2013 4:03 am

I'm staying out of the politics, but my condolences to all the residents of New York state, and I wish you all a safe trip to Arizona,
  • 0

/sarcasm, /hyperbole
User avatar
Zeus
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1422
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 7:34 pm
Location: 'Straya, C*nt
Reputation: 2

Unread postAuthor: jackssmirkingrevenge » Wed Jan 16, 2013 12:44 pm

  • 0

User avatar
jackssmirkingrevenge
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 24225
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
Country: Holy See (Vatican City State) (va)
Reputation: 66

Unread postAuthor: Lockednloaded » Wed Jan 16, 2013 7:07 pm

Neat. Anything special about the arrow shooting setup? Or is it as simple as it looks?
  • 0

I love lamp
User avatar
Lockednloaded
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1558
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:38 pm
Location: Texas, USA
Reputation: 0

PreviousNext

Return to Non-Spudgun Related Discussion

Who is online

Registered users: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], jimmy101, Yahoo [Bot]

Reputation System ©'