Alice and Malvin: a hypothetical.

Debate serious and interesting topics, rant about politics or pop culture, or otherwise converse in essay form about your opinions. The rules of conduct here are a little stricter.
User avatar
Bacardi
Posts: 160
Joined: 2009.03.30 (17:48)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/jinxed_07
Location: Inside that seeking drone

Postby jinxed_07 » 2009.10.23 (20:54)

Wait, so if a completely innocent Alice just happens to put peanut butter on her sandwhich, and mallory just happens to have a peanut allergy that she is guilty for what is mallory's fault in the first place? Your exaggerating what applies as manslaughter here.
capt_weasle wrote:Yes, because telling the jury in court that you like rat poison in your sandwich will make them instantly declare you innocent.
Again, how will the court even be able to come to the conclusion that it was Alice's sandwich that killed him in the first place?

User avatar
Remembering Hoxygen
Posts: 969
Joined: 2008.09.27 (21:40)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/
MBTI Type: INFP
Location: SoCal
Contact:

Postby capt_weasle » 2009.10.23 (21:03)

Slapps' scenario specifically stated said sandwich was superfluously saturated with peanut butter to ward off unsuspecting persons, aka Mallory. You, however, propose an entirely different scenario completely, wherein Alice had no intention of inflicting harm upon anyone dumb enough to steal her sandwich. In your scenario, it was a happy accident. In Slapps', she had intentions to catch him off guard, which resulted in his death. Murder? No. Accidental murder? Who knows. Perhaps if Mallory's family had a good lawyer.
Again, how will the court even be able to come to the conclusion that it was Alice's sandwich that killed him in the first place?
Gee, I don't know. Forensics, maybe?
Image
"How happy is the blameless Vestal's lot! The world forgetting, by the world forgot: Eternal sunshine of the spotless mind! Each prayer accepted, and each wish resign'd" ~ Alexander Pope
"Boredom is not an appropriate response to exploding cars" ~ Hugh Laurie

User avatar
Global Mod
Global Mod
Posts: 1416
Joined: 2008.09.26 (05:35)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/scythe33
MBTI Type: ENTP
Location: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0

Postby scythe » 2009.10.23 (21:14)

Lachesis wrote:All you guys are idiots. Put laxatives in the damn sandwich, and not rat poison for gods sakes!!!
For what it's worth:

You can't actually put rat poison on a sandwich and kill anyone who eats it. All rat poison in the US is (IIRC) denatured, and will cause anyone to vomit upon merely tasting it. The danger associated with putting real rat poison on a real sandwich in a real refrigerator is miniscule.

In another universe, simply denaturing the sandwich itself would work, as Mallory would be sick for the rest of the day after trying to eat denatonium. I'd recommend this to anyone whose real sandwich is getting stolen.
What if Obama ate the sandwich?
Hope would change.
Last edited by scythe on 2009.10.23 (21:25), edited 1 time in total.
As soon as we wish to be happier, we are no longer happy.

"Asked ortsz for a name change"
Posts: 3380
Joined: 2008.11.13 (16:47)

Postby otters~1 » 2009.10.23 (21:24)

I think Bob and Charlie's characters need a wee bit of expansion.
the dusk the dawn the earth the sea

User avatar
Legacy Elite
Legacy Elite
Posts: 31
Joined: 2008.09.27 (18:25)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/ianb
Location: Warwick University, UK

Postby iangb » 2009.10.24 (14:48)

Let's say Alice works at some job where there is a group refrigerator, with Bob, Charlie, and Mallory. Alice brings lunch to work and stores it in the refrigerator. Unbeknownst to Alice, Mallory steals Alice's lunch out of the refrigerator every day. Obviously, Alice knows that her lunch is being stolen, but doesn't know who is taking it. Alice requests that whoever is taking her lunch stop, but Mallory continues to steal Alice's lunch.

One day Alice puts rat poison in her sandwich. Mallory dies. Is what Alice did wrong?

Personally, I think Alice is very much in the right here.
Sounds like a metaphor for Castle Doctrine to me...

Alice is in the wrong. She knows that what she has done will directly result in the death of the sandwich-snatcher - the fact that the snatcher has commited a crime does not excuse Alice's vigilanteism. It's premeditated (first-degree) murder.
The truth may be out there, but lies are in your head
Image

User avatar
Oops Pow Surprise
Posts: 635
Joined: 2008.09.26 (22:09)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/
MBTI Type: INTJ

Postby noops » 2009.10.24 (15:14)

Hmm... I am... Unsure. I mean, while Alice is taking things rather extreme, Malaysia shouldn't have been stealing other peoples' food in the first place, you know? In the event that Mallory didn't die, then I should say that they both should be accountable.

But I really don't know.

Also: What if Bob dared Charlie to steal the sandwich from Melinda? Is Bob to be held responsible? What if Melissa saw the rat poison inside, and put it back, allowing Bob to eat it. What then?
Image

User avatar
La historia me absolverá
La historia me absolverá
Posts: 2228
Joined: 2008.09.19 (14:27)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/maestro
MBTI Type: INTP
Location: Beijing
Contact:

Postby 乳头的早餐谷物 » 2009.10.24 (15:21)

Might is right. What are Bronson and Coburn doing in this scenario? They both have moral obligations which they are not fulfilling. They should have stopped McQueen from stealing the sandwich and also prevented Attenborough from adding the poison.
M E A T N E T 1 9 9 2

Image

User avatar
Bacardi
Posts: 160
Joined: 2009.03.30 (17:48)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/jinxed_07
Location: Inside that seeking drone

Postby jinxed_07 » 2009.10.25 (05:33)

What if Obama ate the sandwich?
Then Alice would go to jail for a LOOONNG time. Very long time.


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests