If you killed someone in self-defense...

32 Comments

...would you tell the police? Choose an option:

1. Yes. Concealing my involvement in the death will only incriminate me more. I know that I will be exonerated in court if I cooperate with the authorities fully from the start.

2. No. In today's society, the chances of being charged with manslaughter or even murder for a death caused during the course of self-defense are far too great. The jury will likely be too ignorant of human psychology, weapon use, and other related matters to make an appropriate decision. Even if I win the case, the court fees will bankrupt me. I will hide any evidence linking me to the death and hope for the best.

1. 105
2. 32
Other. 15
Help us keep this site organized and clean. Thanks!
[ Report Post ]
Comments ( 32 )
  • jondoerandom
    11 years ago

    Oh, I'd go to the copshop right away. I don't mind the jail at all -free education, free food, free accomodation and a little bit of community work in the garage. Keep your head low, don't get involved in shit and you'll be fine. They even do your freaking laundry for you.

    Now that I mention it.. maybe I should kill someone.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    3
    3
  • [Old Memory]
    11 years ago

    Nobody picked option 2?...Given that I myself have experienced the incorrect conclusions made by the law, I am amazed by the majority of people choosing option 1.

    I got charged for assault for defending and winning against a fight with two others, they started it, I finnished it, somehow that means I was in the wrong...I got charged with assault simply because one of them were damaged more by me defending myself.

    Option 2. I turst my "cover up" skills more than I trust the law to make a correct conclusion.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    3
    3
      -
    • Anonymous Post Author
      11 years ago

      Your experience is a common occurrence, and is why I made this poll. People who believe that the legal system is infallible and is on their side are delusional.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      3
      3
        -
      • Mrman10
        11 years ago

        Our legal system (Swedish) is alright. It does have flaws, but so does most thing.

        I put my trust in the legal system in case of "Murder self-defense". Running or hiding would only make things worse if they found me.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
        1
        1
      • RomeoDeMontague
        10 years ago

        Well it depends on the judge. Though given my background I doubt it would go over well. Also the jury would probably be very ignorant of psychology. They pick any random moron to be on a jury.

        We have to face that the worlds population is not very intelligent. Most people see stuff black and white so they are only going to see you killed them. Though if you are cute they might have some sympathy since you look harmless.

        Though given the accusations in my past I really don't think I would make it out of court.

        In court there is 3 ways it can go down. They send you to the nuthouse, they send you to jail or they let you go. If I was not going to be let go I would be begging for prison. Rather be a dog on a leash than a rat in a cage.

        I would call 911 for the injured victim. Go to court but try and get a decent lawyer. Not that I have any faith I would win the case. Just hope by some miracle I am freed.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
        0
        0
    • AssBurgers
      11 years ago

      I didn't hesitate to go with option 2. I've never been in trouble with the law myself, but I have very little trust in the legal system.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      0
      0
  • PalestinianGuy
    11 years ago

    I'd put his body in a bag, and dump him in the ocean (Dexted style).

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    2
    2
  • TerryVie
    11 years ago

    Uhm, EITHER there were witnesses(or video surveillance) that will confirm i acted in self defense, OR i'm the only witness left.
    In the later case, there's no one to contradict my story, only question it, and that, they can.

    Either way trying to "hide" it would only incriminate you, because if you hid evidence and then were found out, it will be doubtful if "self-defence" will be seen as plausible.

    Of course, self-defense is always a question of the scenario that happened. If a 100 kilo man shoots a 50 kilo woman 30 centimeters smaller charging at him empty-handed because she COULD know martial arts is a different case than a young woman shooting a physically trained guy slashing at her with a knife in the womens parking lot. (Extreme examples just for sake of showing how different things COULD be.)

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    2
    2
      -
    • disthing
      11 years ago

      You have separate parking lots for women? :/

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      1
      1
        -
      • TerryVie
        11 years ago

        yes, closer to entrances, with more lights, and usually video surveillance.

        it's a "perceived safety"-feature.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
        0
        0
  • NotFloydzie
    11 years ago

    Depends on the scenario.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    2
    2
  • Aleks85
    11 years ago

    Well considering 1 = self defense and 2 = murder. I'll go with 1.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    1
    1
  • lalaaa
    11 years ago

    I think i will start to cut the body....eat a little ...make a psichotic episod and go in hospital taking drugs forever ...better than in jail :-/

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    1
    1
  • bananaface
    11 years ago

    I couldn't live with myself. Not only would I be constantly worrying that I left any evidence that could trace back to me, but the family of the person need closure, so even if it were self defense I couldn't justify causing the family that much pain.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    1
    1
  • ogreirae
    5 years ago

    the advesarial system is you vs the govt aka prosecutor. That is so unfair. Most dont have the money for a decent defence lawyer. IN a non advesarial system the judge might be understanding and determine your case impartially AT little COST TO YOU. Expert witnesses and specialists are all impartial court officers. U just need a lawyer during police questioning MAYBE

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
  • White__October
    10 years ago

    If it would be self defence, yes, I'd go to the police straight away. I'd have nothing to fear, self defence is not a crime.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
  • Musician
    11 years ago

    Other. You don't need to kill...incapacitate. Carry around zip-ties with you all the time...you never know when they may come in handy!

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
  • umadbro?
    11 years ago

    i say no bcuz i dont wanna get shot by teh copz0rz...

    plus im a nihilist, so i want to kill people >:J

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
  • Eternal_Wisdom
    11 years ago

    too many flaws in the law, too many variables to take into consideration. i don't have anywhere near enough trust in the law to judge the situation realistically to just hand myself in. I couldn't live with myself if i got a sentence for handing myself in but i could live with myself if i got a sentence because i got caught.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
  • [Old Memory]
    11 years ago

    It depends on if there were any witnesses. If I knew I would get away with it, I wouldn't tell anyone. If it looked like I would be caught, I would admit it.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
  • GuessWho
    11 years ago

    Option 1 is the right thing to do and a proper investigation will reveal that.
    If you go with option 1, you should be fine.
    If, however, you go with option 2 and get caught, you'll never get away with it.

    --- That being said... ---
    With the dumb fucks in the police and courts where I live, you'll probably be safer going with option 2 unless the incident happened right in front of a security camera.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
  • nobleserpent
    11 years ago

    Completely irrelevant to the discussion here but why is it a person can be held for Man Slaughter when by way of in-action they let someone die

    -but-

    Someone who by no action of their own, allows a market place to be robbed isn't held responsible in any way for the robbery?

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
      -
    • izakthegoomba
      11 years ago

      Because the law is not perfect. It is made over long periods of time, often making it vary widely. Alarmingly often, it doesn't even conform to common sense.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      0
      0
  • Angel_in_a_Glass_Dress
    11 years ago

    As a gun-ower I would always pick option 1.

    It is the responsible thing to do.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
  • Captain_Kegstand
    11 years ago

    Hmm... I would most likely go with option number one. Simply because option number two comes with insanely higher consequences!

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
  • Allistalla
    11 years ago

    you can make them pay your compensation . you know this right " ? Also make them give you a free lawyer

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
  • suckonthis9
    11 years ago

    It depends on the situation and society that you live in.
    Most societies today are Autocratic or Semi-Autocratic (no matter how much they brainwash you into believing that it is a Democratic society) and the criminal / justice systems are mostly based on "rights", rather than on "responsibility". This formula will always lead to corruption, to some extent, in both the law enforcement and criminal communities.
    In a society where the primary basis of law is based on responsibility, it helps to eliminate these 'shady' areas of law. For instance, in this type of situation, an individual has a responsibility to defend themselves and those around them from an aggressor. It should then be fairly easily determinable by a tribunal (jury), which party acted as the aggressor.
    For clarification: In a responsibility-based legal system, an individual does not have any 'guaranteed' rights, but must earn them through responsible behaviour. Should any individual act irresponsibly, they would then automatically forfeit their rights.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
  • Lucy-loo
    11 years ago

    depends on the situation i suppose

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
  • misca
    11 years ago

    No way. 2.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
  • dappled
    11 years ago

    My obvious instinct is to say option 1 but the more I think about it, the more I don't know what I'd do.

    If I knew with absolute certainty that I'd acted correctly, but also had a strong feeling that I was going to be judged for thoughts, feelings and actions I didn't possess or carry out, I may consider that it would be unfair to let an innocent man be charged (even with all the moral complications coming about from that innocent man being me).

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
  • howaminotmyself
    11 years ago

    I chose option 1, but I don't think people would believe me.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
  • zchristian
    11 years ago

    I would probadly try my best to make the person unable to fight instead off killing the person because killing someone can be pretty hard to explain unless there is witness or the like...

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0