Does societies laws kill homeless people?

Really, you've seen uncivilized humans and you find them unpleasant? You know why they're not pleasant? Its because you can't comprehend living by their standards. This is exactly what I was talking about. We the so called "civilized" humans look at "uncivilized" humans and the majority of us will be disgusted. The truth is that those disgusting people who are more human than any one of us could ever be. If one day, all technology just stops functioning a good portion of our civilization would die, a good portion of the survivors would go completely apeshit and start rioting, looting, and all the other shit that comes with it. I'd be one of the people sitting somewhere that's out of the way, but with a good enough view, sitting back with a bottle of liquor, watching and maybe every so often I'd yell "I told you so" as loud as I could. Of course, I'd take part in the all the chaos for a while because it would be fun, but when I get tired I'll just go back to being a spectator.

I'm really tired of these bullshit standards regarding who is fit to live and who isn't. I make generalizations and rarely say "so and so should be killed because they're inferior." That's something that needs to be left up to nature to decide. There are some people who we can agree upon that should be killed, but that's a case by case basis and people like that should only be dealt with at the appropriate time. We can't just go out killing people all willy-nilly because then things like racism and prejudices get in the way.

I came up with a pretty interesting idea as to how we should deal with people that nature itself might have a problem taking care of itself. We build rather large and elaborate "survival camps." In these camps people are forced into situations where they must find a way to survive. They'll be given a 10 minute preparation time where they are warned that there will be some sort of survival challenge and to prepare for the worst. When the time comes a number of wild animals are released into the camp to do as they please. After a period of let's say 24 hours, the survivors are congratulated and sent home to continue their lives. It would be great if we could use dinosaurs like raptors or something, but that's kind of a long shot.

Nobody is inferior to one another regardless of where they are in their lives or how financially stable they are or not.

That is why no matter who you are or who you kill it will always and should always be deemed wrongful unless the instance was self defense or accidental or something like that.

I don't particularly like your idea The Jesus. It sounds too much like the Saw movies to me. Very, very sick.

And it's sort of contradictory to want to treat all humans equally humane and then turn around and want to treat them all inhumanely like that. Or are you treating them all equally inhumanely in this example? Would you too be forced into these camps, forced to fend for yourself...against, raptors? Sounds like something out of Jurassic Park. lol

You know, I don't think you're giving people enough credit either. There are a hell of a lot of charities and people who do selfless community services out there to help people like this.

http://nymag.com/urban/articles/charityguide/homeless.htm
http://www.allaboutgod.com/homeless-charities-faq.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Homelessness_charities
http://charity.lifetips.com/cat/61496/homeless-charities/
http://search400.techtarget.com/news/article/0,289142,sid3_gci1196210,00.html

Regarding the OP: No, society does NOT kill people, it is the people that kill the society. Even though it is fictional and "bad drama" as I would like to call it, the logic behind it is severely lacking.
Most urban regions offer help for those without homes, giving out food and helping them get back on their feet somehow. Incase the town doesn't do it in official ways, the church helps out often aswell. The problem is that people have to actively work to do something for the society, however I know that many beggers and other people in extreme situations don't care and have an attitude that so to speak "kills" or rather denies themselves their own right in the society for help

Regarding the "civilized" term, we know the world is uncivilized. It may be in different forms, but look at the large companies, law firms and financial networks. I know from my practica that these branches can often be more merciless than wild enemies, screwing over everything in their path to save money. Isn't that the same as survival instinct, treading upon others, trying to use the misfortune / problems of others, exploit them and strive for "survival"? Because in my opinion it is.

Kinda off-topic but I always found the term "civilization" to be somewhat offensive (at least when used to describe human beings). I always hate it when someone thinks they're more civilize than others because they have a higher standard of living.

As history has teach me, Europeans believed Native American were uncivilized (which wasn't clearly the case) because they didn't have the same values they did or because they didn't require money or cities to live. They also hunted for food and performed rituals which they consider backward.

Yeah, I just wanted to give my thoughts on something.

I think Kais seems to mistake Impaired with Uncivilized.

I've seen people with Mental Handicaps, and while I do find them generally unpleasant, its not because I'm looking down on them. Rather, it's because I pity them. Heavy mental handicaps, which leave people incapable of functioning on the level of a child, exist, and people insist on making these people suffer through their lives.

I spent second grade in special ed, because I had a slight nervous breakdown due to culture shock after moving to the US from Russia. I've seen retards. I think, for their sake, they should have been put down as soon as someone noticed their missing chromosomes. I thought this in second grade, though with smaller words. Not from hate, but from pity.

There was a kid who could only Moo. All he said was Moo. Growled moo. Cried moo. It was so very pathetic.

Uncivilized, on the other hand, I find much more repulsive. A homeless man is not uncivilized, he's down on his luck.

Uncivilized would be something like a "Gangsta", or a self-image boated celebrity. Societal trash that is incapable of behaving like a normal, intelligent being. I equate them with monkeys.

The sad thing is that, they have every opportunity to become respectable members of society, and simply say "Fuck it".

And, to answer your point, I agree that I don't know how the average Hobo lives. However, I also think the average non-drunk hobo would not want me to know. Complete poverty is not something you wish on another.

And, of course a large portion of the population would die. Do you, for a moment, think that humanity, so accustomed to cars, toilets, and electricity would survive a month in the wild?

However, to argue the point, I must ask: How long would you survive? Do you have survival skills that others so lack that enable you to sit back with your scotch and scoff at everyone else?

Huh..and here I was thinking it was because they were murdering and raping people when they weren't eating or sleeping. Turn back the clock 400 years or so and I can point at almost any random mercenary(admittedly this is on a person to person basis as well) and call them uncivilized, because they are, civilization is order, but humans are not they are chaos incarnate no other species is capable of doing such random things which have such a potentially devastating effect on the area around them. We pen ourselves in so that they weakest among us can survive, which I think is folly because it allows that which nature intends to weed out to keep going. I don't look upon the uncivilized with disgust, frankly I envy them I wish that I could do whatever I damn well please, hang the consequences, but I don't want a world like that I understand fully why laws are put in place, and I appreciate those laws. I wouldn't partake of the chaos were civilization to crumble, I would begin building a new civilization, after all civilizations are strength they give us numbers and the power to create armies with which to protect ourselves from invaders, true no civilization is perfect and there will always be those who go against it, but that is why we set up people to enforce the laws which keep civilization from crumbling.

No I don't mistake uncivilized for impaired they are 2 completely different things, one is being incapable of making good decisions due to a random mutation which makes the brain not function properly, the other is simply ignorance of the ways of "civilization". I also don't envy the impaired in any way, except that they get people to take care of them.

:!:

If we really looked at it, who were more civilized? The colonials who would back stab and pushed the Indians to desperation, or the Indians who protected the wilderness and lived in harmony with it?

Our perspectives are skewed by the standard of living that is all around us, and when we see a difference, we find it offensive without cause and harm others without trying to realize the position of the victim.

Very true. Unfortunatly, mankind has so far managed quite neatly to always find something that makes a difference to them and needed to be "eradicated" or "taught civilized behavior". Even today with all the religious conflicts going on, we really didn't evolve much from the time when people started crusades over belief.

Sorry for being a bit offtopic there.

My idea is sick, but so what? The Earth is overpopulated with people. A vast majority of them, who are not sick and are not physically handicapped, are ignorant to the point where if they were put into a situation where they would need to use their base instincts, they'd be totally fucked. Its fucking ridiculous that we've not only let our numbers, but our ignorance go unchecked for millennia. The society we've created is bringing us to a point where something will give. On our present course, the only thing that exists in the future for mankind as a species is extinction.

Humans are equal on a very basic level. We are all of the same species and we all have the same instincts. The reason why I can say that and seemingly contradict myself by saying that there are some people who would do a great deal of good for the species by dying is because we've come to a point where there are people who are incapable of utilizing the base instincts that all humans possess. My idea is so sick because we condone the degeneration of human society. Time and time again our civilized society has created new ways to cheat death or attempt to play god and there's a point where we put an end to it. I'm fine with nature killing people off at its own pace, but the fact that we have technology to thwart nature's attempts means that there has to be a level of human influence to lend a hand.

My idea isn't sick, throwing people to hungry lions for the sake of killing them is sick. What I'm saying is that we need a way to weed out the people that fail at being human on a basic level. It would be the same as dumping people in the wild and forcing them to fend for themselves. Human instinct is to survive and in this world you can simply make your way through life riding on the backs of others. Society allows people to pay others to take care of them when there's absolutely nothing preventing them from being able to do so themselves. They even embrace it because it helps put food in the servants' families mouths.

@Eranikum:
I get what you're saying, but still you come up a little short. As I've already stated the programs that give out food and as you say "help them get back on their feet" have proven to be ineffective. The homeless population continues to grow despite the "effort" to help these people. I've actually expressed this opinion in the past, but for the sake of this discussion I'll repeat it, homeless people don't necessarily live the horrible lives we perceive them to be. Most of the homeless people who have complaints were people who lost everything and were forced out onto the street. There are actually people who choose to live on the streets. Despite the fact that it appears to be hell, the homeless have a level of freedom that we can't comprehend.

Large corporations and other establishments stomping on the little people for their own benefit is far from survival instinct. The only reason they do the things they do is to have even more than what they already have. Someone who lives a privileged life doing whatever they can to get more is a perfect example of how humans have abandoned their survival instincts and these are the types of people that would be the best candidates to be put into my theoretical survival camps. They have no sense of humanity in the sense that their lives revolve around material bullshit.

lol im going to keep mine short...i think that wat he did was right ..at the time he thought that that was his only option and if i was in his position i would have done the same thing....u tend to think of wat u would do but u cant really say cuz u arent in that position and until u are or u are able to understand wat hes going threw u will think that wat he did was wrong that all i have to say(i kept it short for the most part lol)

@Pasithea There is such a thing as an inferior human, say there isn't is like saying that ALL watermelons are the same, which as we all know isn't true. Killing people is still considered wrongful even if the corpse in question belonged to an inferior human, because they still had the potential to provide some sort of service to society, like homeless people serve as a warning to the not homeless.

I like his idea, the huge difference between what Saw did and what The Jesus is suggesting is the level of difficulty involved, he isn't putting them in nearly impossible situations, he is putting them in one that a normal person can survive. If they make it then Kudos if not, well then they were probably not going to help society in any way.

@The Jesus: at one point in history we did have a check against our population growth, as late as the 1700s disease and war were what kept the population down, but the smart people kept on living until they devised a way to conquer disease to a limited degree and then the population exploded. Once some crazy scientist discovered fungus creates penicillin(in 1928) it was all over for disease, well in large numbers anyhow. So diseases have evolved and so have our methods of combating them, hell some diseases we wiped out of existence because it couldn't adapt.

Nothing makes a person inferior. Maybe it's your personal choice if you want to treat criminal and other humans as inferior but they're still the same as me and you even if they committed a crime.

In my opinion, it's not about equality but more more of a person being unique. Nobody is the same in this world so you can't really say you're superior to them just because you have something they don't.

Also, homeless people are not a warning to the world. I don't think some of them want to be outside living the kind of life they do. What if they had dreams of success before they turned the way they did? You cna't really categorize people like that.

And so what? Do we as humans HAVE to be in such situations? Do we all HAVE to experience such things?

Why must we all go back to our basic instincts and live like other animals when we don't have to?



This is true. So let us go extinct. From what you're saying would it not be better for the Earth anyways for humans to be completely eradicated in the end?

But then of course this leads to the question of what makes this planet so special anyways? Why does anyone or anything deserve life or existence more than anything else or at all?

I suggest joining VHEMT by the way. They sound just like your cup of tea. http://www.vhemt.org/



I'll keep reading because I still don't see your point...



I see it as sick because it condones the killing of other humans. Forgive me but I have a species bias for humans.



What is so wrong with choosing to extend your life for a while longer if you can? You can cheat death, but you cannot cheat death forever. We all die eventually and the cycle continues. I see nothing wrong with paying some doctors to hook you up to a bunch of machines or to get medication that will extend your life and keep you alive.

Why do you see that as wrong?



You have me confused here. First you claim it is sick and now you don't. I will let you correct yourself or make yourself clear however before I jump to any conclusions.



WHY? Why is it so necessary for us to utilize our primal instincts? So what if people 'fail' at being YOUR definition of human? As far as I'm concerned every human (and this is the species bias talking) deserves a right to live regardless if they utilize their instincts or not.



So what about these others? Shall we place them in the same position as the people riding them to make it in life? Shall we stick them in a dangerous environment and force them to try and survive based on their primal instinct? Chances are they aren't that different in this category as the guy using them to get up in life. Shall we punish them as well?



What exactly are you complaining about here? Let's put a face on what it is that bothers you about society.

Is it all of these government funded programs that assist people and the fact that it's being taken advantage of by many of them? Don't like where your tax dollars are going or something?

Or is these big corporations that are pissing you off and how the CEO's that run the place are making shit-loads more than their employees?

I'm trying to understand exactly what it is that is bothering you because I am sure there are other answers to fix this problem than dropping people into an hostile environment and watching while they attempt to survive.


@ Kai: I disagree. As far as I can tell all humans are equal and no one is inferior to anyone and everyone DESERVES the same rights granted to any other human at birth.

I know of people that are very productive in society that could never survive out in the wild like that.

Just because someone lacks survival skills or instincts in a hostile environment does not show that they cannot do something for society.

That is a ridiculous notion.


EDIT: Sorry for the crazy cut quotes etc. I am used to debating in forums like this. Dx Oh and I have to go for a bit. Gotta head over to my dad's girlfriend's place for dinner. But I will be back ready to read your rebuttals and attempt to pathetically respond like I know what the fuck I am talking about. Haha! xD

Its not so much that they are inferior, its that they can't properly utilize the natural instincts that all humans have. The instincts are there, but they're to ignorant to figure out what the fuck to do. All humans are born equal, but through life experiences they set themselves apart from others and become inferior in certain areas. That doesn't mean that they are inferior in general because they could excel at something else.

I never said that humans who are born with lesser capability than an average person doesn't deserve to live, if they can provide a service to the rest of society without being a danger. I said that there are humans with less capacity for innovation or for general labor, or generally providing something useful for our civilization, which this generally, especially when the individual in question has all of this, should be considered an inferior human, just not in so many words. While I think there is inferior humans there is no reason to treat them any differently when it comes to laws and general behavior(people forget that they should always be polite), they are still humans who deserve the same rights and opportunities as everyone else, they just won't be able to actually partake in those opportunities because they are mentally incapable of doing so.

I believe that some humans are superior then others. But never completely. Maybe that one person is smarter then the other. But that person can play basketball better then the smart dude. Think about it, otherwise we would never have had kings and people outranking on another in the military. But lets not count something like the president of the united states. They're supposed to be superior to other people in running a country. that's why we vote for them for that they can run the government and keep things in check for us.

"The Jesus'" Idea may seem sick and yeah it does resemble jigsaw's plans from the saw movies. If you think about it, all his victims had a chance of escape. But the point is this: Its not about just thrusting people back into surviving off they're base instincts. I suppose its more about making sure that people don't forget where they came from, what they are and what they're capable of. And when they do, that's when people start becoming narcissistic, thinking that the world revolves around them and thinking that they aren't humans, but gods.

WRONG.TERRIBLY WRONG.
they're not superior in running a country.
they're superior in their connection,campaign money,campaign speech,and political background.

that's why we vote them.

we never know whether a guy is good at running a country before they're chosen/voted.

pardon the off-topic post.

Oh that's quite alright. You make a good point. I guess what i meant to say was: "They're supposed to be superior in running a country." Is that why you think some people don't even bother voting? Furthermore, would you go so far as to say that some people running for president or some other political position somehow tries to "Rig" the competition?

That's why I like nature. It is brutally efficient. Each animal is the best for it's environment. There is no excess, nothing is wasted.

The population problem is not going to go away it is going to continue on regardless of any culling process is enacted. What needs to happen is we need to get to get off the earth. We need to colonize another planet/moon. The human population is quickly overgrowing the capacity for life on this planet. All environmental efforts are simply a stall. ... Wow I've gotten quite off topic.

Oh and in the basket of stupidest thing for killing someone for. I saw this one happen. A guy stabbed and shot another guy because the guy put pickles on his burger.

-Reokue

Its not a matter of going back to our basic instincts. Its about being able to use them. Humans aren't just humans because of their DNA, they are what they are because of these instincts that have been a part of us since the beginning of our species. In the worst case scenario, the people who have abandoned those instincts would not survive to begin with and therefore, the fact that they can continue to breed and further their lax, inhuman lifestyle through later generations pose a threat to the future of the species as a whole.


You're totally missing what the point. I don't see how you could misinterpret what I said, the present course we are on will inevitably lead to the extinction of mankind. People are ignorant of that fact and so long as they remain ignorant, we can't change. Despite the fact that humans have come to be quite revolting IMO, I have a profound love for the species. I'm a human and I don't want my species to become extinct. I even said a little bit later in my post, I want the best for mankind. If sacrifices need to be made, it should be the garbage that has completely cast aside their human instincts and pursued a hedonistic life built on the backs of others.


If you are so pro-human why are you so dead set on embracing the very things that will lead to its downfall? While actions have immediate consequences, they have long term effects as well. Reconstructing human society will, in the long run, create a better future for the species.


It may seem like something you want, but when you're laying on your deathbed with a tube down your throat being pumped full of drugs, who's to say you won't be begging to die. All these drugs and shit that have been developed to keep people alive just prolong their suffering. There aren't all many people who live longer than nature intended and actually enjoy that time. I understand the fact that people would want to spend a little more time with their loved ones, but is it fair to them? Have you ever seen a person who is being kept alive with machines, its incredibly disturbing and I don't see how anyone would want to put someone they love through that. They're basically dead, but still out of selfishness and attachment, a family will fight tooth and nail to keep them hooked up to machines with all kinds of tubes and shit in them because they are no longer able to eat or breath for themselves.


Perhaps I should have worded my initial statement a little better. When I said that my idea is sick it was a reference to the way look at it, it should read something a long the lines of "the reason why you think my idea is sick," but I assumed that my position was already clear. I can see where you misunderstood, but still, I don't see anything sick about it.


Well lets just stick with society in its present state. One day, all technology malfunctions. How many people do you think will be able to survive a month, maybe even a week without technology and the perks of the civilized world?


Actually you're wrong because the people who act are employed as servants, or whatever you want to call them, need to actually do work to survive, whereas their employers sit on a nice fat trust fund or whatever and throw money around so that others can do their dirty work. In theory, anyone could be a candidate for the survival camps, but its mostly the people who have abandoned their natural instincts that I'm concerned about.


Its not that hard to figure out. Society has come to embrace the fact that the people on the higher rungs of society can get away with what they do. Yeah people complain about it, but the fact of the matter is that the rich continue to be rich and continue to make their money at the expense of others. All these people need to do in order to avoid scrutiny is act like they give a shit about the "lesser folk." How many people are actively going after Bill Gates or Donald Trump because they have so much money they can pay others to do what they should be doing for themselves? The answer is none, because as with any unfavorable situations, they can throw money at the problem and others will make it go away.


You're bias in favor of humans is hindering your understanding. The society we live in, itself, is completely fucked up. It goes completely against nature. Society is designed for the benefit of the rich and powerful. These people don't even hunt properly, the participate in canned hunts, where animals are in a semi-enclosed area so the chances of the hunter getting to kill something is pretty much 100%.

Getting back to what I was saying, unlike nature, where survival is more likely among those who can provide for themselves, whereas those who can't are more likely to die, the roles are reversed. People with nothing except for the bare essentials and the ability to work to survive, are more likely to die than the people who pay others to feed and bathe them.

You can be pro-human, but look at things realistically. You may be able to derive pleasures from the luxuries modern society provides, but we've created a world that defies nature and when nature destroys one of our cities or kills a lot of people, we are conditioned to look at it as a tragedy.