Killing in war is something that can’t be helped and there are reasons why people kill others. According to the article “Is War ever Morally Justified?” many deaths occur and they happen because of the enemy shooting at U.S. troops. A 19 year old boy gets in a gunfight with a young
However, it also shows that although Jack is becoming a savage he still has civilization in him. This is demonstrated when Golding uses the word “shuddering” because although Jack was laughing he seemed uncomfortable and frightened. This shows that Jack has not lost himself completely because he still has trouble killing others without feeling guilty or sick. Finally, when Jack says “ You should have seen it” he is really trying to influence Ralph and the boys to brutally kill the animals on the island. This encourages the rest of the boys to become hunters since they too want to feel the sense of power that Jack appears to have.
I disagree with the statement “killing is never justified”. Killing another is never justified in some circumstances, but in other circumstances, killing can be justified. Killing cannot be justified if crime was intentional or was planned beforehand. This is murder because the event was planned and it one person was killed by another. For example, if someone plans to kill someone beforehand, then killing in that case will not be justified because that person did it knowingly.
So this meaning without particular tasks in life, there would be no excitement or ways of happiness, or no challenges because challenges are what makes life fun and tricky. This quote also indicates that when some particular task, the person itself no longer has the lack of interest in something that the person has developed skill in. Lastly, in this short story, The Most Dangerous Game, what we think is trying to be said is that the hunter is an expert at hunting large game, but boredom has changed his mind and has turned his focus to hunting human beings because he is bored of hunting
It says that I kill myself to avoid taking the decision. But then, that would be a cowardly thing to do. I had the chance to save lives. I didn’t. Instead, I kill myself.
Allow him to kill me? Back down? They’re so wrapped up in a different culture – what I’m trying to say is – they’re in the wrong culture; the culture that promotes killing an officer. Young people use the legacy of racism as an excuse, it’s not a race issue at all. The fact is the brute attacked me, I couldn’t get my taser
Richard Connell once quoted, “There is no greater bore than perfection.” This exemplified perfection is something many people lust for, but can’t understand. Imperfections are what make people different from one another but, without imperfections, humans would be boring. Similarly, in Connell’s, “The Most Dangerous Game,” the antagonist, Zaroff, mentions being perfect is boring. As if he is referring to himself, he’s saying he’s a perfect hunter, but grows bored hunting animals, so he’s stepping up the game and starting to hunt humans instead.
In the text read in class, “The Most Dangerous Game”, Rainsford displayed many instances where he persevered. Not only does General Zaroff respect Rainsford as a hunter, but his intentions are to now make this hunter his prey. The reader does not expect Rainsford to make it out alive but he now conquers the game General Zaroff has worked so hard on to master, hunting humans. Leading up to Rainsford killing General Zaroff, Rainsford showed his many different acquired hunting skills when fighting on the island. He made several different traps in attempt to kill Zaroff that ended in failure, but when Rainsford jumped into the ocean and swam to the house of General Zaroff, he showed signs of perseverance.
The chance for those people to change for the better; to become a better person and a chance to have a bright future was destroyed in one single law. This is so inhumane. Is one single mistake/crime equivalent to death? Is death the answer? You could say that they cannot repeat their mistakes if they were killed, but have you thought or realized that he/she can regret his/her crimes, repent and change?
The flaw in Cassian’s logic, as well as in the logic of utilitarianism, is that the act of killing becomes morally shaky ground. It is impossible to determine whether or not the Rebel Alliance or the Empire is more justified in their acts of “good” as they both see their rationale for killing as necessary to reach their goals and provide the most good for the most amount of people (McLarney 2018). In the eyes of the Empire, Cassian and the rest of the rebels are traitors and terrorists to the lawful regime, thus killing them weeds out instability and insubordination as punishment for attacking imperial troops. For the Rebellion, the occupation, exploitation, and oppression of people is more morally reprehensible than any act of murder they
Think about the harmless animals that haven 't been doing anything to hurt people. They get killed for no reason. Some people just want a new fur coat, some need a head on their wall, and others just want to kill for fun. Rabbits, deer, dogs and other animals get killed for stupid things like skins and fur. This will cause extinction and a change needs to happen.
The Unit command could not allow one of its own to just leave. This would create moral problems, this war was unpopular, to allow one of their own to troll the streets back in America without the standard debrief would only court certain disaster. The solution turned out to be simple. Send one of their own to “chase” and apprehend Greeley.
Zaroff is barbaric, it doesn’t matter how effortless hunting animals had become, why resort to hunting humans? After I realized the meaning of prey meant the title changed significantly for me. Humans should not be prey for other humans. But the title also changes because The Most Dangerous Game is now even more dangerous since human life is at stake.
He is trying to kill me. He got bored with hunting animals so he hunts people instead. He has made a game of it.” “What are we going to do?” asked Whitney.
People ignore how merciless hunters and businessmen are when they hunt and make those furs as goods for selling. With time going, people start to realize that killing uncommon creatures for people’s privacy desire is not a good thing. One of those people is the Dalai Lama. He declares, “We must be willing to be revolted when science—or for that matter any human activity—crosses the line of human decency, and we must fight to retain the sensitivity that is otherwise so easily eroded. ”(139)