Why do people murder?

[Keith Russell]

I haven't read the entire thread, but have the people participating in this discussion so far, come to even a provisional agreement as to what, exactly, "murder" is?

Without knowing what it is, discussing the reasons by murderers engage in murder, seems a futile task...

[ape]

I haven't read the entire thread, but have the people participating in this discussion so far, come to even a provisional agreement as to what, exactly, "murder" is?

Without knowing what it is, discussing the reasons by murderers engage in murder, seems a futile task...

Hi KR,

Murder is simply to hate from the heart and in the heart and mind as in 'Malice-afore-thought,' and then to kill in Hate or kill with Hate.

So Hatred of self as any word for any cause or reason is the first murder: the murder of Love, which Life of Love is what makes life worth living.
John 15:25 But this cometh to pass, that the word might be fulfilled that is written in their law, They hated me without a cause.

Hatred of self as any word is the spirit of murder which then leads to physical murder.

So Hatred in the heart is the first murder or murder 1.
Killing someone one hates is the 2nd murder, and thus is double murder or murder 2.
And if one then murders oneself, that is triple murder or murder 3.

Matthew 5: 21Ye have heard that it was said of them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:

22But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause [that is, whoever hates his brother: when we hate ourselves and so hate others as ourselves, we express negative emotions without any cause,] shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say [in Hate] to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall [with Hate] say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

This Hate of self as any word automatically means Hatred of all others as self: so we then either have physical murder of the hated other and/or physical suicide or murder of self.

This applies to all life and non-life.

Example:
People who hate art or dogs will treat humans they hate like art or dogs, and murder or desecrate humans they hate like the art or dogs they hate and etc.

Isaiah 66
1Thus saith the LORD, The heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool: where is the house that ye build unto me? and where is the place of my rest?

2For all those things hath mine hand made, and all those things have been, saith the LORD: but to this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at my word.

3He that killeth an ox [he hates] is as if he slew a man [he hates]; he that sacrificeth a lamb [he hates] as if he cut off a dog's neck [he hates]; he that offereth an oblation [he hates] as if he offered blood of swine [he hates]; he that burneth incense [he hates] as if he blessed an idol [he hates]. Yea, they have chosen their own ways, and their soul delighteth in their abominations.

In other words, I can't hate art or hogs and love art buchwald and quintin hogg all the way, for instance.

Hope that helps.

Thanx.

[Vulcanised]

the question was Why do people murder?

The same reason without ethics and being human animals do.
Nature murders everyday, volcanoes erupt and earthquakes happen and slaughter many humans and wildlife and animals often, hurricanes and tsunamis..etc but we are conditioned to accept this is natural yet when man does it its suddenly unnatural, by what laws of science is it? [ that is if science is all we go on] Should we blame nature and science?

[Gen66]

the question was Why do people murder?

The same reason without ethics and being human animals do.
Nature murders everyday, volcanoes erupt and earthquakes happen and slaughter many humans and wildlife and animals often, hurricanes and tsunamis..etc but we are conditioned to accept this is natural yet when man does it its suddenly unnatural, by what laws of science is it? [ that is if science is all we go on] Should we blame nature and science?

agree, nature's fault.

[Vulcanised]

Gen66

agree, nature's fault.

I am just asking the question here, and not agreeing either way. It could be man and his error`s fault [science] we know enough about earthquakes and hurricanes

[Keith Russell]

The same reason without ethics and being human animals do. Nature murders everyday, volcanoes erupt and earthquakes happen and slaughter many humans and wildlife and animals often, hurricanes and tsunamis..etc but we are conditioned to accept this is natural yet when man does it its suddenly unnatural, by what laws of science is it?

Not all killing is "murder".

We make distinctions with regards to intent. When a person dies as the result of a car accident--or a hurricane, shark attack, old age, or other "natural" events--we do not call the death, "murder". When a non-human animal kills another animal for food, we also do not call that death, "murder".

When a person dies as the result of another person's intentional action, however, that is what is called "murder".

[Vulcanised]

Keith Russell wrote

We make distinctions with regards to intent.

You might, I don`t. Animals murder for sport not just survival

[Keith Russell]

Keith Russell wrote

We make distinctions with regards to intent.

You might, I don`t. Animals murder for sport not just survival

First, we are animals. Second, I said, "when one non-human animal kills another for food"; I wasn't speaking about non-human animals killing others for reasons other than survival.

Yes, non-human animals certainly do kill others for reasons other than survival.

The chimpanzees even have war.

I still wouldn't consider anything that a non-human animal does, "murder".

Murder is a legal term; it can't apply to non-human animals--nor hurricanes, volcanoes, earthquakes, etc.

[Vulcanised]

Keith is using a circular argument

First, we are animals.

I still wouldn't consider anything that a non-human animal does, "murder".

Hang on! you say we are animals but what other animals do[/b] is not murder just when we do it?

CIRCULAR argumentum

QED

[Keith Russell]

Hang on! you say we are animals but what other animals do[/b] is not murder just when we do it?

You pay such attention to my posts that I'm surprised you overlooked the part where I claimed that "murder" is a legal term. (I even put that part in bold, so you'd be even less likely to overlook it!)

Given that, unless you are aware of a real "kangaroo court" somewhere, then I'll make the claim again that non-human animals cannot commit "murder", since only humans have a legal system.

(And keep your "QEDs" to yourself!)

[athena]

Sometimes people value what they get out murdering someone more than they value the life of the person they murder. They think the benefits of murdering someone is worth the consequences.

For sure. It is not murder if the person killed is a slave, or the declared enemy, or a criminal, nor when the killing is done in self defense. Law and order, simply necessitates killing someone once in awhile. The consequences of sin are death.

As for animals killing. It is not advisable to treat all animals as domesticated pets. It is not advisable to confine or abuse an animal. Like humans, animals can be killers, because of emotional stress. A stressed chimp can ripe the face off a human, or a pet pit bull can mall a baby to death, for the same basic psycho/emotional reasons as a stressed human can become a killer.

When a person dies as the result of another person's intentional action, however, that is what is called "murder".

Not necessarily. Communities intentionally prevent homeless people from sheltering themselves within city limits, and although this can lead to a person's death, we do not call it murder. A doctor can refuse someone life saving medicine if the person is not adequately insured, and we do not call this murder. We do not label these acts homicide by neglect, but if a minimum wage care giver walks away from a needy person and the need person dies, this is homicide by neglect. Social status is important to determining if a crime is committed or not.

[Vulcanised]

Keith Russell wrote

I'm surprised you overlooked the part where I claimed that "murder" is a legal term.

I`m surprised you think the law would stop a murderer intent to murder, do you think they haven`t worked that little detail out? Murderers are rarely caught. Serial killers go for years, many murders are still on file unsolved.

[Keith Russell]

I`m surprised you think the law would stop a murderer intent to murder--

Please show me where I, to any degree, indicated that I think any such thing.

[Jesskazen]

some people are so self centered and ignorant that they are a continual cause of greif for others. these types of people generally grate the nerves of others to the point that they can no longer be tolerated. the right to live should only remain a right if each person assumes their cooperative role in society as a group.

[PaulNZ]

Murder is defined as a culpable homicide. That means one human intentionally kills another human and that killing was blameworthy. To be culpable the killing must have been done in the absence of one of the statutory defences such as self defence, insanity, automatism etc. This is a brief legal definition. The ingredients are therefore:

With intent to kill

kills

another human

and that killing was culpable

That is a good starting point I suppose for a discussion about why people might commit murder. As has already been pointed out there are a myriad of reasons someone might commit murder. There are many people in society who do not find the prospect of committing murder morally reprehensible.