What makes a person irredeemable?

[TWRule]

I'm wondering what people on here think is the line that someone must cross to become truly irredeemable, the point at which you think a person should be killed. So, fire away.

I would not link redeemability of people with my own willingness to kill them. In my mind, everyone, just by virtue of being human, is always redeemable. However, when I would kill a person is another matter. To me, when dealing with someone that is spiritually dead (which still doesn't mean irredeemable), it's not that big of a deal for me to extend that state to their flesh for them; perhaps when they are threatening the lives of my loved ones, for example.

 

[StashAugustine]

As some have said, everyone is redeemable. But sometimes you can't take the chance.

 

[orangeban]

I wouldn't kill anyone, redeemable or not.

Mainly because I would associate being irredeemable with someone who simply doesn't care about their actions or their effects. And that is the same person who I would prescribe psychiatric help.

 

[JimB]

Then at no point was he really irredeemable, as that means 'not redeemable.'

Yeah, that was my point, as I'd intended to make clear with that final sentence. It was a bit obtuse. Sorry about that.

 

[NinjaDeathSlap]

When their continued existence becomes directly contrary to my survival instinct. When they honestly give me no other choice but to kill them if I, or my loved ones, want to continue breathing. That is the point when they deserve to die from my perspective. Although to be honest, even then they don't really 'deserve' it. That's just the point when I start to value my own life over theirs.

I'm not sure I can express just how much it pisses me off when I hear people say stuff like "X person did Y bad thing. He/she shouldn't be breathing our air" as if air is a precious and painfully finite resource that we must only share out among the deserving.

Revenge killings, legally sanctioned or not, achieve nothing; and what's the point in even having 'Justice' if it's not working towards achieving something greater than the current situation. When you kill someone, you remove all possibility of redemption, rehabilitation and compensation, if ever it existed (but I've never actually seen anyone with the kind of credentials to state that it never did endorse such action, make of that what you will); nothing is gained or learned; the guilty party isn't even really punished (most deaths are quick, and once you're dead, you don't have the consciousness to be sour or sorry about anything); and the people you really end up hurting are the guilty party's loved ones, who most likely didn't do anything to you and are now only more likely to seek revenge of their own, perpetuating the vicious cycle. This is without even touching on the possibility of you getting it wrong, and killing an innocent in your righteous anger at crimes they didn't commit.

 

[spartan231490]

I think those are two separate issues. I don't think anyone is truly irredeemable unless they do not desire redemption. Anyone can change if they want to, one way or another. However, some people don't want to change, and frankly, some people don't deserve the chance. So I believe vicious murderers and rapists deserve to be killed for their crimes, along with true pedophiles.

 

[Alexi089]

Being Jared Leto.

Bludgeoning baby seals with other baby seals whilst anally raping their mother whilst spit roasting her and tearing off the crackling whilst progressively crushing a bag full of puppies under your foot.

Giving birth to Jared ducking Leto!

 

[applesandoranges]

edit

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

When they lose remorse, guilt, care or perspective on their actions.

Sooo...when a person becomes a nihilist?

OP:Unprovoked genocide seems pretty irredeemable.

 

[Aslyn]

I personally don't think we should kill people. We never know when someone is irredeemable, so we shouldn't guess and play God.

 

[Astoria]

It's not so much what they do but how they feel about it. If they feel some guilt then a part of them is redeemable but if they just see it as some sort of achievement or are indifferent to what they did then they're irredeemable.

 

[Vegosiux]

No such thing, since if "irredeemable" existed, the opposite would have to exist too - and I am not comfortable with a concept of someone being untouchable no matter how much bad stuff they do by virtue of having done something exceedingly good in the past.

 

[MammothBlade]

No-one is iredeemable. Everyone can find redemption through death or sacrifice, no matter how grave their crime.

A mass murderer is redeemed when they die, they just have to pay a bit more for their crimes than a petty thief. I can't hold a grudge against a corpse. Though it is preferable that those who have caused a lot of unnecessary pain and suffering for others die a suitably painful death, it will be easier to forgive them and stroke their skull in affectionate rumination.

 

[CODE-D]

When they lose remorse, guilt, care or perspective on their actions.

Sooo...when a person becomes a nihilist?

OP:Unprovoked genocide seems pretty irredeemable.

Even a nihilist should/would have perspective on their actions and recognize they may be harming others and stop.
Just cause someone believes in nothing doesnt make them a bastard/monster.

 

[theSteamSupported]

Considering people irredeemable, is a horrible crime in of itself.

 

[JoesshittyOs]

This girl. There is no punishment too just to deal with the sheer bitchocity of this girls words.

 

[FalloutJack]

When somebody does something bad and everybody tries to top each other screaming "He should be killed" "No, he should be killed twice" "No, he should be tortured, killed, then tortured again and then killed and his ashes then stomped upon!" just like kindergarten children.

I sense that, somehow, the point has been missed here. The question was to determine what YOU think, not what others do while making cynical commentary. Granted, cynical commmentary has its place, but not when people are feeling particularly sadistic over the bastard of the month.

OT: I tend to believe that a good start and a guideline is the law. Not the letter of the law, but what it stands for. The spirit of it, made to punish for crimes and not for lawyers to defend the obviously guilty via a small technicality. If you kill without reasonable cause, and I mean a PROPER reason, you die. There are others, I'm sure. I also hold no love for businesses and businessmen who deliberately screw others for profit and skew the economy, rapists and pedophiles, and people who do not even TRY to comprehend the world that's rushing by them at breakneck speed.

Oh, and I happen to believe that people who ARE irredeemable should indeed suffer. Be it ironic or viceral or whatever the law dishes out - just make it hurt. They need to understand that what they did was a BAD idea in some deeply personal way, since their upbringing did nothing to render this fact clear to them.

 

[DoPo]

When somebody does something bad and everybody tries to top each other screaming "He should be killed" "No, he should be killed twice" "No, he should be tortured, killed, then tortured again and then killed and his ashes then stomped upon!" just like kindergarten children.

I sense that, somehow, the point has been missed here. The question was to determine what YOU think, not what others do while making cynical commentary. Granted, cynical commmentary has its place, but not when people are feeling particularly sadistic over the bastard of the month.

Yes, I agree - you really missed the point. It's when society denies people redemption. That's when I think redemption is impossible.

 

[Random Fella]

I run by the rule of an eye for an eye really
To deserve death, they would have had to committed unjust murder
Or maybe other foul acts such as rape

 

[deadpoolhulk]

way i see it is as such. kill, sexually abuse, or cause serious harm to a child,on purpose and that's the point i wish a slow and horrific death upon you. i can think of no way anyone could ever be punished enough for it, except for the fact i believe hell exists so, you know, that will do nicely.