who's to blame for this..?

if a man is high on drugs and has no idea who he is and what he is doing and then kills a man for no reason whatsoever who's to blame? is it the man, the drugs, the drug seller, the inventor of the drug... god..?

Originally posted by rooktakesqueen
if a man is high on drugs and has no idea who he is and what he is doing and then kills a man for no reason whatsoever who's to blame? is it the man, the drugs, the drug seller, the inventor of the drug... god..?

the devil made him do it

Originally posted by rooktakesqueen
if a man is high on drugs and has no idea who he is and what he is doing and then kills a man for no reason whatsoever who's to blame? is it the man, the drugs, the drug seller, the inventor of the drug... god..?

The man ... he decided to use drugs and must face the consequences of his own behavior or actions. Nobody made him take drugs.

Originally posted by Sushill
The man ... he decided to use drugs and must face the consequences of his own behavior or actions. Nobody made him take drugs.

Mens rae

Originally posted by frogstomp
Mens rae

I don't agree with Mens Rae.

Originally posted by rooktakesqueen
if a man is high on drugs and has no idea who he is and what he is doing and then kills a man for no reason whatsoever who's to blame? is it the man, the drugs, the drug seller, the inventor of the drug... god..?

STANG.

Originally posted by rooktakesqueen
if a man is high on drugs and has no idea who he is and what he is doing and then kills a man for no reason whatsoever who's to blame? is it the man, the drugs, the drug seller, the inventor of the drug... god..?

The man is guilty of murder. The seller is guilty of selling illegal drugs.

Besides this, there is a responsibility on the part of society. Society should create a safe environment for all wherein people have no easy access to dangerous drugs.

Originally posted by Sushill
I don't agree with Mens Rae.

Too bad ,,it's the law in civilized countries.

Originally posted by ivanhoe
The man is guilty of murder. The seller is guilty of selling illegal drugs.

Besides this, there is a responsibility on the part of society. Society should create a safe environment for all wherein people have no easy access to dangerous drugs.

The man may or not be guilty under the law, and since it's the law that defines "murder" ,you had better start with Mens rae.

edit,, did you actually read in the first post that the drugs were illegal?

Originally posted by frogstomp
Too bad ,,it's the law in civilized countries.

I don't agree with a lot of laws in civilized countries ... that doesn't mean that I am not civilized, especially when there is no clear definition of what "civilized" is in the first place ... but that is not up for debate now.

The law is created to support society ... not the other way around. A bad law is still a bad law.

Originally posted by Sushill
I don't agree with a lot of laws in civilized countries ... that doesn't mean that I am not civilized, especially when there is no clear definition of what "civilized" is in the first place ... but that is not up for debate now.

The law is created to support society ... not the other way around. A bad law is still a bad law.

it's STILL is tha law, whether you like it or not.

Originally posted by rooktakesqueen
if a man is high on drugs and has no idea who he is and what he is doing and then kills a man for no reason whatsoever who's to blame? is it the man, the drugs, the drug seller, the inventor of the drug... god..?

Are you talking about Bush killing Saddam?

Originally posted by frogstomp
it's STILL is tha law, whether you like it or not.

I have broken many laws in my life ... so what that its a law? Whenever enough people oppose the law the law will be changed ... at least that is how it is supposed to happen ... the law serves men.

The original question of the topic didn't refer to any particular set of laws so I gave my personal opinion: ... he is guilty.

Originally posted by Sushill
I have broken many laws in my life ... so what that its a law? Whenever enough people oppose the law the law will be changed ... at least that is how it is supposed to happen ... the law serves men.

The original question of the topic didn't refer to any particular set of laws so I gave my personal opinion: ... he is guilty.

the drugs may or may not be illegal.
The fellow might have known about the side effects and he might not have.
The core notion is that of capacity: if D, the person who has brought about the actus reus of an offence, is adjudged to have lacked the capacity to make a rational judgment about what s/he was doing, then D is excused as not being responsible and so not criminally liable for the crime charged

I realise we aren't quite this advanced yet, but what IF a dead man got injected with drugs(legal or illegal) which brought the dead man back to life and he went out and killed a person. Kind of like a zombie or something. Who would be to blame for this?