BF2S Forums What's worse; A killer without emotion, or a hot-headed one?

it's not that a soldier kills without emotion, it's they kill without responsibility (mostly) there is a difference..

"..i'm greatful to them"

good for you ,i'm sick of war myself, but then had you grown up surrounded by one all your life maybe you would understand just how fucking senseless war is...

lowing wrote:

A soldier is scared, and yet fights and kills, and is willing to die in defense of his comrades and country, he freely opens himself up to the task, a greater commitment and responsibility than you or I can ever know, but at least I am greatful to them.

I agree that soldiers are scared and still fight on, but believe that only GOOD soldiers are willing to die for their comrades and country. Every army has deserters and cowards. I believe that we have less of these than most armies, though, and more of the heroes.

This is a hard decision to make. I'm gonna say that the emotionless killers are worse, with the assumption that the emotional killers have motive and are more likely to be caught and prevented from killing again.

Good question, BJenkins!

IG-Calibre wrote:

it's not that a soldier kills without emotion, it's they kill without responsibility (mostly) there is a difference..

See, I thought that soldiers killed because the DO have a responsibility; defense of civilians around them, and security of the peace that they (mostly) fight for. Personally, I can't think of any greater responsibility!

lowing wrote:

To answer the OP..........I can't........................ I think anyone who kills/murders regardless of reason is out of their mind already, and equally as dangerous.

lol, good answer. I hadn't actually found a question to debate this thought-provoking since my R.E. exam!

chittydog wrote:

I agree that soldiers are scared and still fight on, but believe that only GOOD soldiers are willing to die for their comrades and country. Every army has deserters and cowards. I believe that we have less of these than most armies, though, and more of the heroes.

This is a hard decision to make. I'm gonna say that the emotionless killers are worse, with the assumption that the emotional killers have motive and are more likely to be caught and prevented from killing again.

Good question, BJenkins!

lol, thanks for the props, man! Appreciated! And well thought out answer to the question too!

Oh, and my philosophy is 'Don't die for your country, find an enemy who's prepared to die for his. That way, both you and he have the same aim in mind!'

hurricane wrote:

A killer without emotion cannot feel the emotion of remorse, and thus could be tried as insane in a court. A killer with emotion is just as bad, but can feel remorse and suffer penalties in the court system that can either rehabilitate him or send him to his death.

Again, a good answer. Though I'm none to sure about the tried as insane in court bit, wouldn't they just say they're far to dangerous to be in public anymore, lock them up for life, as they obviously feel nothing anyway?


I agree, anyone who murders someone deserves to be punished, but I think maybe the question might have been phrased wrong? By a killer without emotion, I may have been thinking 'someone who doesn't think/care/understand why they are doing it, or if they do, they are aware of the consequences this entails, and yet still go through with it. Maybe by hot-headed, I mean also someone who hasn't thought it through, and is so overcome with emotion the aren't thinking straight. This isn't shifting the goalposts IN ANY WAY, it' just something more to think about, if anyone has got down the post this much!

Mr.Pieeater wrote:

Great post mate.  Scary times in the UK!

Unless you're female, addicted to heroin and also a prostitute I wouldn't worry....oh but if you are avoid Ipswich!

I vote for the Emotionless killer as the more dangerous of the two.

Reason being is that the emotionless killer is bound to make less mistakes and is harder to catch.  Emotions tend to blur ones reactions and quicktime judgement.  An emotionless killer can be more methodical, adapt and respond to certain scenarios, decisions, and choices in a way that makes him/her harder to catch. 

This of course is all dependant on the kill being a murder, not just killing someone. (hope that makes sense)

KJ

One who kills without emotion has no capacity for guilt. Guilt is what prevents people from commiting crimes. I don't want to feel guilty, so I don't do bad things. Murdurers can feel guilt, and it prevents them from repeating their crimes. Sociopaths on the other hand cannot feel remorse or guilt, so there is nothing intrinsic inside them to stop them from killing.

sfarrar33 wrote:

A hot headed killer tends to kill only once, unless there are others around who 'got in their way' or they do it for some kind of thrill. This generally means they are easier to catch because an emotionless killer will probably think things through more and find it easier to throw the police off his 'trail'
there are very few true emotionless killers thankfully (except in films), motiveless murder tends to be due to some mental disorder and this means that other factors will exist making the killer just as easy to catch or easier to catch than hot headed killers.

Very true. What do you think drove the Ipswich killer though? I can't see any motive or need to kills those women, and now they have at least two suspects in custody, its got even more confusing!

Some people are just fucked up man thats the end of it...

but who knows mabe killing someone else feels better than sex ? i would'nt know, but then again nither do you

Well, Russian Criminal Law Code says that murders commited in a fit of passion, or temporary insanity (I can't find a better way of putting it in English) are to be punished less severe than those commited in good state of mind. I think it's right, because a wife who kills her husband who gets drunk and beats up her and their children and a contract killer, for whom killing people has become a job, must be punished very differently.

Last edited by Wasder (2006-12-29 07:14:01)

Pubic wrote:

Null vote.

If your only concern is the bodycount, consider which of the two types kills more on average.

IT'S NOT MY ONLY CONCERN; I'm more worried about what they are feeling when they do the deed. But I'll humour you. Who does kill more on average? ( And no, you cannot count soldiers in either)

i voted emotionless killer<--- makes a good serial killer and he could be your smiling neighbor which scares the shit out of me, the hot-headed killer is probably a little crazy/psychotic and he is your angry, yelling at his wife, "im one second from pulling out a shotgun and ending your barking dogs life" neighbor