The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
"the cannibal" only had 8 years, i belive for inviting people into his house and eating them he shouldnever be allowed back on the streets
he says he recorded it all and put it on a website (yuk!)
unlitimate thrill YHEA RIGHT!!
he says he recorded it all and put it on a website (yuk!)
unlitimate thrill YHEA RIGHT!!
Page:
El Blokey, again, this is why we have law so you don't have to worry about the grey area. And changing your mind about consentual sex - which hurts nobody involved (relationship issues notwithstanding), is a little different to changing your mind about being stabbed to death by the man who just ate half your penis.
Insane Bartender wrote:
> Borat, every day people kill themselves because they can;t bear to
> live anymore, while nobody they knew considered for a single moment
> that they might be in need of help.
I know that only too well.
> Borat, every day people kill themselves because they can;t bear to
> live anymore, while nobody they knew considered for a single moment
> that they might be in need of help.
I know that only too well.
it don't really matter if they aggreed it's out there ready for us to see somewhere on the web which makes it horrible
and the victims weren't told they were gong to be eaten were they?
i thought they were told they would have a thrill
anyway you were saying?
and the victims weren't told they were gong to be eaten were they?
i thought they were told they would have a thrill
anyway you were saying?
Insane Bartender wrote:
> But in the case of the argument used, the law does not decide what is
> right and what is wrong. And what you choose to ignore when thinking
> in such terms is that the man consenting to be killed was in need of
> psychiatric help and was in no condition to give his consent.
>
> And what if the man had lived one more day? What if he had woken up
> and thought "actually, I don't want to die"? How right is
> it now that was killed the way he was?
I suppose you're in favour of the ridiculous ideas put forward recently in America that women could change their mind about consenting to sex not only during, but AFTER? Your continued fascination with the victim's mental problems is falling on deaf ears because the 'murderer' had no idea. If I were to ask a girl to have sex with me, she did and then after leaving her in the stall and cleaning up I went home, would it make me a rapist if the next day with a clear head she decided it wasn't a good idea, or if it turned out she was clinically depressed and just wanted something to take her mind off of her horrible horrible life?
> But in the case of the argument used, the law does not decide what is
> right and what is wrong. And what you choose to ignore when thinking
> in such terms is that the man consenting to be killed was in need of
> psychiatric help and was in no condition to give his consent.
>
> And what if the man had lived one more day? What if he had woken up
> and thought "actually, I don't want to die"? How right is
> it now that was killed the way he was?
I suppose you're in favour of the ridiculous ideas put forward recently in America that women could change their mind about consenting to sex not only during, but AFTER? Your continued fascination with the victim's mental problems is falling on deaf ears because the 'murderer' had no idea. If I were to ask a girl to have sex with me, she did and then after leaving her in the stall and cleaning up I went home, would it make me a rapist if the next day with a clear head she decided it wasn't a good idea, or if it turned out she was clinically depressed and just wanted something to take her mind off of her horrible horrible life?
Borat, every day people kill themselves because they can;t bear to live anymore, while nobody they knew considered for a single moment that they might be in need of help.
soylent green anyone?
Insane Bartender wrote:
> Well, there is a bit of a difference between killing someone
> mercifully because they are in constant pain and will never recover
> from some injury/long-term illness, and repeatedly stabbing someone
> because they're mentally ill and bored with life.
I agree, but mental illness can be just as, if not more painful, and not everyone can be helped. The fact is he wanted to die, if he didn't do it that way, he might have thrown himself off a building the following week. Who knows why he wanted to die, the fact is he did, and if he was so set on doing it that he did it in such a horrible way, he must have been in some terrible mental state.
You may argue "but he could have been helped by a psychiatrist". Well, where were his friends to suggest this? Why didn't anyone intervene and help this man? Either they were not aware he was in such a terrible way, or there was no-one to care. I believe he would have died in some way or another, sooner or later, if he was so screwed up that he saw this as his salvation.
> Well, there is a bit of a difference between killing someone
> mercifully because they are in constant pain and will never recover
> from some injury/long-term illness, and repeatedly stabbing someone
> because they're mentally ill and bored with life.
I agree, but mental illness can be just as, if not more painful, and not everyone can be helped. The fact is he wanted to die, if he didn't do it that way, he might have thrown himself off a building the following week. Who knows why he wanted to die, the fact is he did, and if he was so set on doing it that he did it in such a horrible way, he must have been in some terrible mental state.
You may argue "but he could have been helped by a psychiatrist". Well, where were his friends to suggest this? Why didn't anyone intervene and help this man? Either they were not aware he was in such a terrible way, or there was no-one to care. I believe he would have died in some way or another, sooner or later, if he was so screwed up that he saw this as his salvation.
More to the point how does anyone know that at the crucial point, the instant where this victims fantasy became reality, he did not change his mind?
Well, there is a bit of a difference between killing someone mercifully because they are in constant pain and will never recover from some injury/long-term illness, and repeatedly stabbing someone because they're mentally ill and bored with life.
to be honest I think the fact that the guy ate him is irrelevant, the truth is that people are disturbed by the fact that a person could consent to being murdered. It is almost the same issue as that of euthanasia.
The person who was murdered wanted to die, and signed a form to this effect. For what reason is irrelevant - people commit suicide all the time, but if another party is involved in the death, it becomes a totally different case. Euthanasia is illegal in most countries, assisting someone to end their life, although morally dubious, remains outlawed, and so people must respect that. The fact that the man was then eaten, although sickening to many, is not really the problem here - as far as I know we don't have laws against eating people, it's the murdering that people worry about.
He should be tried for unlawful killing or manslaughter in my view, but nothing more.
The person who was murdered wanted to die, and signed a form to this effect. For what reason is irrelevant - people commit suicide all the time, but if another party is involved in the death, it becomes a totally different case. Euthanasia is illegal in most countries, assisting someone to end their life, although morally dubious, remains outlawed, and so people must respect that. The fact that the man was then eaten, although sickening to many, is not really the problem here - as far as I know we don't have laws against eating people, it's the murdering that people worry about.
He should be tried for unlawful killing or manslaughter in my view, but nothing more.
Page: