Morality in Death Note? Do the ends justify the means?

[Neux]

Originally Posted by musouka

It would certainly be easier to evade him if Light didn't keep on giving him huge hints about himself and his habits. L is hard to evade, but killing the FBI agents just makes L realize that he was on the right track. Any tactical advantage Light gained by forcing L to make a move is lost when you realize he just narrowed down who Kira could be substantially. The smartest move in this case is to evade and deflect L's probes as best he can, not meet them with a reaction that lets L know when he's getting close.

Those hints were intentional, and were meant to lure out L, and make L lose some of his advantage in terms of having a sizable police force working with him. How else are you going to find someone like L, who no one knows about.

Evading as long as possible...is not a viable long term solution. If Light waits it out, L may be brought off the case...but if he's gonna do that, Light might as well and pray for a better world instead of him trying to create one himself. Light wants to take things into his own hands and not rely on fate and luck..

Anyways ignoring L will be difficult. If L prevents Kira from knowing the names of criminals, how else is Kira gonna continue doing what he's doing? Besides, if Kira ignores L, L may take longer to find Kira, but eventually he will. Building his world is gonna take time, and Kira is thinking of creating a "better" world now and not sometime in the future.

[AK-kun]

Good one.

Whatever it is, do you think Light would be an ideal God of Justice, this way?

[musouka]

Originally Posted by Neux

How else are you going to find someone like L, who no one knows about.

My point is you don't. Go on the defensive, make him work to find you. If he can't, eventually it'll be a moot point since he'll be taken off the case if he fails to get results. Time is on Kira's side, not L's.

Evading as long as possible...is not a viable long term solution.

It most certainly is, especially in this situation, where Light will be leaving absolutely no physical evidence to tie him to the crimes.

If Light waits it out, L may be brought off the case...but if he's gonna do that, Light might as well and pray for a better world instead of him trying to create one himself. Light wants to take things into his own hands and not rely on fate and luck..

Luck? I'm talking about logic. The police want Kira caught. L can't catch Kira? Bye bye L. What better way to discredit someone than to prove that you can't be caught? Oh, sure, L might continue on his own, but without anyone on his side and with no tangible leads, he'll have a hard time of it.

If L prevents Kira from knowing the names of criminals, how else is Kira gonna continue doing what he's doing?

Media blackouts cannot be sustained indefinitely. There are other avenues of getting information.

Besides, if Kira ignores L, L may take longer to find Kira, but eventually he will.

How? Without Light's "help", L wouldn't be nearly as far on the path as he is now. Of course, L has also taken Kira's personality into consideration, so...

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by Nuex

That's not always true. Sometimes they "victim" can't speak or communicate that they want to die. But they are in a lot of pain. Anyways, euthanasia is murder in some places....and is against the law. After all, another person knowing does something to kill someone...that is murder to some people, even if it's "assisted suicide"

This is only partially true. In the cases where the "victim" is unable to communicate, he usually has given someone the authority to speak on his behalf. In addition, doctors are generally brought in to determine if euthanasia is actually called for. In any case, euthanasia is only supposed to be performed after all other alternatives are considered impossible. Done properly, it definitely qualifies as suicide.

If you claim that euthanasia is morally wrong in the areas where it is illegal, but morally right where it is legal, then that is a moral system called legalism. Since it's possible for laws to be immoral, I don't think that legalism is a valid moral system.

Originally Posted by Nuex

Same thing with the jury system. They don't always make the right choices and can be susceptible to bribes among other things. Neither system is perfect, and no human is perfect. The question is whether the end result will be better or worse.

This is more an argument against capital punishment or the jury system than it helps Light's case. The thing is that no system is going to be perfect, and that this lack of perfection is not the problem with Light's actions.

The jury system has two moral advantages over Light: authority and due process. Society gives juries the authority to weigh the guilt and innocence of suspected criminals. Light has no such authority: he has only power. It would be no different if he had an assault rifle and an invisibility cloak. Why would anyone want to place their trust into his judgments?

The jury system is also relatively fair: they study all the aspects of a case before pronouncing a verdict. Also, the more severe the case, the more it is the onus of the prosecution to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Even if convicted, a criminal is often still given chances to prove his innocence. This system exists to cut down on the number of people punished unjustly. There are no checks on Light. He simply punishes whomever he feels is guilty. He doesn't even take the time to make certain that those he kills deserves it (this is impossible to do in just 5 days). And the punishment is always the same - death. By no measure of the imagination can this be considered fair. Again, Light is little more than a serial killer who preyed upon the equivalent of a prison population. This does nothing to mitigate the severity of his crimes.

[Neux]

This is only partially true. In the cases where the "victim" is unable to communicate, he usually has given someone the authority to speak on his behalf. In addition, doctors are generally brought in to determine if euthanasia is actually called for. In any case, euthanasia is only supposed to be performed after all other alternatives are considered impossible. Done properly, it definitely qualifies as suicide.

If you claim that euthanasia is morally wrong in the areas where it is illegal, but morally right where it is legal, then that is a moral system called legalism. Since it's possible for laws to be immoral, I don't think that legalism is a valid moral system.

I am not gonna take sides on whether euthanasia is morally right or wrong. My point is that, the act of killing by itself does not mean it's automatically evil as some people were saying. That different people think that some forms of killing is acceptable and that some don't. For example euthanasia. But, you say qualified doctors determine whether that needs to be done...just because the person can't communicate, what gives the doctors the right to decide if the person should die or live? Even if that person can communicate that he or she wants to die, who knows if the person is just not thinking properly and doesn't really want to die? For example, if that person has some mental illness and says he or she wants to commit suicide but cannot do so. Anyways, I'm not taking sides, I"m just pointing this out.

The jury system is also relatively fair: they study all the aspects of a case before pronouncing a verdict. Also, the more severe the case, the more it is the onus of the prosecution to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Even if convicted, a criminal is often still given chances to prove his innocence. This system exists to cut down on the number of people punished unjustly. There are no checks on Light. He simply punishes whomever he feels is guilty. He doesn't even take the time to make certain that those he kills deserves it (this is impossible to do in just 5 days). And the punishment is always the same - death. By no measure of the imagination can this be considered fair. Again, Light is little more than a serial killer who preyed upon the equivalent of a prison population. This does nothing to mitigate the severity of his crimes.

I agree, and I have mentioned some of what you mentioned before, but I would say that what Kira is doing is similar to capital punishment. They both use that as a means to deter criminals from doing crimes. Whether they are effective, is another matter. But something doesn't have to be fair to work. And not everything is fair in real life.

My point is you don't. Go on the defensive, make him work to find you. If he can't, eventually it'll be a moot point since he'll be taken off the case if he fails to get results. Time is on Kira's side, not L's.

Take the defensive? Until when? Wait 10 years? 20? 30? Why even assume L will be taken after the case, what if instead L gathers even more support from the police until it's too much for Kira to handle? Again, I would call that wishful thinking. "...wait until L gets taken off the case...hopefully...whenever that may be"

Media blackouts cannot be sustained indefinitely. There are other avenues of getting information.

The other avenues can also be blocked. L has almost unlimited access to the police all over the world and has a lot of influence. Another reason why L cannot be underestimated.

It most certainly is, especially in this situation, where Light will be leaving absolutely no physical evidence to tie him to the crimes.

The death note is evidence. Giving time (especially long term) to someone like L to find Kira and his book is just asking for trouble. Even if there's no physical evidence, doesn't mean there aren't other kinds, or that Light is uncatchable.

Whatever it is, do you think Light would be an ideal God of Justice, this way?

Well, considering his ideals, I guess would fit the description as I said in another post. But I suppose, if he was one, he would show no mercy to criminals no matter what (no bribery would make him change his mind etc), and I guess, that's one of the reasons why some people don't like that type of justice. Because he is merciless to the criminals, among other reasons. But, personally, I would not call him the "ideal" God of Justice. His justice is a bit too "extreme" for my liking.

[musouka]

Take the defensive? Until when? Wait 10 years? 20? 30? Why even assume L will be taken after the case, what if instead L gathers even more support from the police until it's too much for Kira to handle? Again, I would call that wishful thinking. "...wait until L gets taken off the case...hopefully...whenever that may be"

I think you might have confused Death Note with Lupin III. L is not Zenigata. If he doesn't get results he will be taken off eventually. It's completely illogical to think that the entire world will give L ten years without progress to catch Kira. It's not a hope or a wish, it's a logical assumption.

Spoiler for manga:

And one that is borne out by the manga, though that was also due to political pressure.

The other avenues can also be blocked. L has almost unlimited access to the police all over the world and has a lot of influence. Another reason why L cannot be underestimated.

You think all media outlets can be blocked indefinitely? Even the internet? You think L is going to shut down the world until Light is caught? L is powerful, but not that powerful.

The death note is evidence. Giving time (especially long term) to someone like L to find Kira and his book is just asking for trouble. Even if there's no physical evidence, doesn't mean there aren't other kinds, or that Light is uncatchable.

That's too nebulous. What other kinds of evidence would Light be leaving behind? Brainwaves? About the only thing is patterns of movement, but the Death Note itself can compensate for that. Also, Light already has the notebook rigged when he's not using it. That isn't an issue.

[ThisIsDream]

For people who are going to continue posting Raito doesnt have the "Right" to do this or that, Raito breaks the "LAW", he killed "innocent" people such as FBi agents, something call "unfair" exist in the "Kira world" etc........
I am not going to repost or requote again.

For people who are going to think hard and expose more Raito's mistake go ahead. LOL I understand people are demanding perfection . Something like Raito got provoked and kill the Fake L, so L can narrow down the location etc.... Even Raito himself know he made a mistake,

Spoiler for manga:

and he said to himself "the same tricks wont work twice"

Spoiler for manga:

when L was trying to sending a msg on tv 1500 agents to scare him and see his reaction.

And for people like 4Tran, using ur "moral" or the NOwaday Current world "moral" "Law" to judge Yagami Raito. Like I said this is a REVOLUTION.

4Tran, Raito is not killing the people HE think is guilty

Originally Posted by ThisIsDream

For people who gonna compare Countries Vs Countries, Nations Vs Nations etc.. to Yagami Raito, it is a little bit different.

European taking other people lands, colonized areas, destroying other nationals' cultures, Hitler eliminating Jews, White people slaving different skin's colour people, a country invading another country for own benefits, Communist Vs Capitalism, Liberalism VS Conservative etc......... Compare to Yagami Raito eliminating "Criminals"

As you can see the differences

- First are a group of people (I am right) VS a group of people (I am right)

- Second are "Criminals" which are Everyone (or most ppl? Some may think Criminals are good who knows) in the world recognize as "Criminals" - People who are doing Bad, evil things. It is really hard and rare for Everyone to accept on one thing or come up with a same statement.
However, u can say is majority judge minority.

Ok now lets move on to the next step. Since "Criminals" exist, everyone will think what actions should take and it will be the penalty problems.
Some will say this crime should stay in the jail for 3 years, some say 4, some say stay in jail forever, some may even say kill them, torture them etc............What Yagami Raito is doing. Yagami Raito was killing major criminals, and yea he did kill some minor criminals, Yagami Raito is not perfect. May be we should find a "Perfect" human being to do this
(Note) : if u gonna come up with the "right" problems, please read earlier posts.)

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by Neux

I am not gonna take sides on whether euthanasia is morally right or wrong. My point is that, the act of killing by itself does not mean it's automatically evil as some people were saying. That different people think that some forms of killing is acceptable and that some don't. For example euthanasia. But, you say qualified doctors determine whether that needs to be done...just because the person can't communicate, what gives the doctors the right to decide if the person should die or live? Even if that person can communicate that he or she wants to die, who knows if the person is just not thinking properly and doesn't really want to die? For example, if that person has some mental illness and says he or she wants to commit suicide but cannot do so. Anyways, I'm not taking sides, I"m just pointing this out.

This is why I always differentiate between killing and murder. In the case of euthanasia, the doctors don't determine what needs to be done. They are there to determine whether there is an hope of recovering from what seems to be a terminal illness. It's the patient's spokesman who makes the final decision - this is taken to be representative of what the patient would have wanted for himself. If a person has a mental illness, then they are declared incompetent; and their rights, including that of self-determination, are severely curtailed.

Euthanasia is completely different from what Light does. Euthanasia is the ultimate expression of self-determination while Light doesn't give a damn about what his victims want. Murder is the illegal act of taking away someone's right to live - this is essentially what Light does. Euthanasia is quite the opposite: it is the act of allowing a patient to choose his manner and timing of death.

Originally Posted by Neux

I agree, and I have mentioned some of what you mentioned before, but I would say that what Kira is doing is similar to capital punishment. They both use that as a means to deter criminals from doing crimes. Whether they are effective, is another matter. But something doesn't have to be fair to work. And not everything is fair in real life.

Light's actions are also quite different from capital punishment. Capital punishment is merely the most serious type of punishment in a wide series forms of punishment after progressing through the legal system. Deterrence is really only secondary to goal of punishment. Light's actions ape this only in the intent of deterrence. However, intent is no defense against evil actions. Killing a man because you think he's a criminal is no more moral than killing a man because you don't like him.

The one gives you a trial and then sentences you. The other simply offers a summary execution. While they may seem to serve similar ends, the latter has no basis in morality.

In general, killing is murder. There are a few caveats, and euthanasia and capital punishment meet the conditions of qualifying; the way Light kills falls far short.

Originally Posted by ThisIsDream

And for people like 4Tran, using ur "moral" or the NOwaday Current world "moral" "Law" to judge Yagami Raito. Like I said this is a REVOLUTION.

Why not? Why shouldn't we use our understanding of morality to judge Light? Besides, a single jerk declaring that it's a revolution doesn't make it so; and revolution doesn't absolve his acts of murder.

Originally Posted by ThisIsDream

4Tran, Raito is not killing the people HE think is guilty

Irrelevant. As I've said before, intent has no bearing on the morality of an action.

[ThisIsDream]

When did i say u shouldn't do that -_-?? I was just pointing out the fact.

Originally Posted by 4Tran

He simply punishes whomever he feels is guilty.

Not he feels, but EVERYONE in the world think, so ur "intent" should go to everyone in the world. He erased "Major Criminals"

May be u skipped this part

Originally Posted by ThisIsDream

"Criminals" which are Everyone (or most ppl? Some may think Criminals are good who knows) in the world recognize as "Criminals" - People who are doing Bad, evil things. It is really hard and rare for Everyone to accept on one thing or come up with a same statement.
However, u can say is majority judge minority.

So, like I mention before, the penalty problems.

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by ThisIsDream

Not he feels, but EVERYONE in the world think, so ur "intent" should go to everyone in the world. He erased "Major Criminals"

Intent is still irrelevant to morality. You should have posted more of my statement: "There are no checks on Light. He simply punishes whomever he feels is guilty." I wasn't trying to use it as an argument that Light was immoral, I was using to show how a jury system works differently from Light's. If want to be more precise, I could have worded it as "He simply kills whomever he feels deserves to die." The former is a little more artful in the context of the rest my post, but the latter is more accurate.

In addition, there's no indication that those people were guilty of anything outside of Light's words. At best, this is shaky justification; at worst, it's nothing more than wanton slaughter. Even if they were, murder of a "major criminal" is no better than murdering someone like you. The question isn't whether Light is "perfect", it's how much of a monster he is.

Originally Posted by ThisIsDream

May be u skipped this part

Incorrect. What you posted earlier wasn't an argument; it was just a tautology. I read it, and I dismissed it without second thought.

[ThisIsDream]

Ok he kill "major criminals" Why they are "major criminals"? Because they were judge by the jury system u mentioned, and that is why they are "major criminals".

Now return to the penalty problems, and the reason u are saying he is a murderer is probably because what have people mentioned before, he doesnt have the "right".

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by ThisIsDream

Ok he kill "major criminals" Why they are "major criminals"? Because they were judge by the jury system u mentioned, and that is why they are "major criminals".

Pay attention to the actual show. They are only "major criminals" (please note the quotation marks) because Light deemed them to be. We have no proof besides this. If they had already been convicted of their crimes, then haven't they already been judged as deserving something other than the death penalty?

Originally Posted by ThisIsDream

Now return to the penalty problems, and the reason u are saying he is a murderer is probably because what have people mentioned before, he doesnt have the "right".

Incorrect. He is a murderer because it is the default definition of someone who deliberately kills another human being. There are mitigating cases where the default doesn't apply, but Light does not qualify for any of them. If you are really interested, I could go into the philosophy of why murder is considered to be so heinous, and how it differs from lawful killing, but it's rather irrelevant to the topic.


I'm sort of curious; why do you think that Light has the right to kill people?

[ThisIsDream]

Originally Posted by 4Tran

They are only "major criminals" (please note the quotation marks) because Light deemed them to be.

Well, I kind dont get it. Some Criminals are already in jails (which judge by the jury system), or they are actually committing the crimes and (the jury system send) police to arrest them(in some situation the police can kill them).

Originally Posted by 4Tran

We have no proof besides this.

Some people who have committed crimes and escape from the court, some people who are innocent and they went to jail or even eletric chair. Unfair judge do exist

Originally Posted by 4Tran

If they had already been convicted of their crimes, then aren't they already judged as deserving something other than the death penalty?

yea, I can see u are not satisfied with the penalty problems ^^.

Originally Posted by 4Tran

I could go into the philosophy of why murder is considered to be so heinous, and how it differs from lawful killing, but it's rather irrelevant to the topic.

So Raito wasin't lawful killing, he broke the laws. And that is why i think this is a revulotion. "Law" created by human being.

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by ThisIsDream

Well, I kind dont get it. Some Criminals are already in jails (which judge by the jury system), or they are actually committing the crimes and police are arresting them(in some situation the police can kill them).

Some people who have committed crimes and escape from the court, some people who are innocent and they went to jail or even eletric chair. Unfair judge do exist

I'm not sure if you get it. Light said that all of the people he killed were the worst kind of criminals and that they all deserved to die. However, while he may be right in some cases, there's no proof of it other than what he claimed. Light's judgment is not necessarily reliable (he's a little on the unhinged side), so there's no reason to believe that his victims were major criminals in the first place.

Whether or not the current justice systems are perfect has no bearing on Light's actions.

Originally Posted by ThisIsDream

So Raito wasing lawful killing, he broke the laws. And that is why i think this is a revulotion. "Law" created by human being.

You don't have any arguments here - it's just a series of tautologies. Why would Light simply claiming a revolution make his murders moral all of a sudden? What if an American declares a revolution and goes on a killing spree - would this be moral as well?

[ThisIsDream]

Originally Posted by 4Tran

I'm not sure if you get it. Light said that all of the people he killed were the worst kind of criminals and that they all deserved to die.

Yea, I know u are not agree with the die thing.

Originally Posted by 4Tran

However, while he may be right in some cases,

OK, so u think some crimes really deserve to die. (penalty problem)

Originally Posted by 4Tran

there's no proof of it other than what he claimed.

What do u mean by no proof ? Those criminals were judge by the current jury system. And that is why they are criminals in jail and have criminals records. Those criminals wasnt judge by Light to put them in jail. So it will come down to the penalty problems.

Originally Posted by 4Tran

Whether or not the current justice systems are perfect has no bearing on Light's actions.

Wow, perfect !! Did i just see this word lol. Alright there are no holes in this jury system(law) everyone are happy and satisfied with the law today, no one can escape from the current system ^^

Originally Posted by 4Tran

What if an American declares a revolution and goes on a killing spree - would this be moral as well?

For people who gonna compare Countries Vs Countries, Nations Vs Nations etc.. to Yagami Raito, it is a little bit different.

European taking other people lands, colonized areas, destroying other nationals' cultures, Hitler eliminating Jews, White people slaving different skin's colour people, a country invading another country for own benefits, Communist Vs Capitalism, Liberalism VS Conservative etc......... Compare to Yagami Raito eliminating "Criminals"

As you can see the differences

- First are a group of people (I am right) VS a group of people (I am right)

- Second are "Criminals" which are Everyone (or most ppl? Some may think Criminals are good who knows) in the world recognize as "Criminals" - People who are doing Bad, evil things. It is really hard and rare for Everyone to accept on one thing or come up with a same statement.
However, u can say is majority judge minority.

Originally Posted by 4Tran

Why would Light simply claiming a revolution make his murders moral all of a sudden?

What do u mean by murder? It was because Light didnt have the law to support him to execute criminals? There are people executing or doing something to anther human being according to some laws(they are allow to).

There are people(police) who kill criminals from harming innocent. (short term)
Criminals after sitting in the jail and go out harming innocent again. (long term)

No one can guarantee those criminals will go harm people again or not for the 2nd or more times.

Light's way is just more effective and frighten, which preventing people from committing crimes for the first time. People will be more aware of their attitude and actions.

There are people demanding penalty stronger to prevent more people committing crimes.

[NoSanninWa]

Originally Posted by ThisIsDream

What do u mean by murder? It was because Light didnt have the law to support him to execute criminals? There are people executing or doing something to anther human being according to some laws(they are allow to).

Murder is when one human being kills another human being. The execution of criminals is law. The difference is that when the law decides to do this, it is only at the end of a process where humans only act as mediators. In the end, a criminal's execution is not because of a human deciding to kill another human, but only because humans are acting in accordance with law. You could argue that the law kills the criminal using humans as its medium. The death is not the result of human desire. (Even if some people desired the criminal's death, that desire didn't cause the death.)

Alternately you could define the difference in another way. (This is complementary to the above paragraph, not contradictory.) Murder is a selfish act while lawful execution is a selfless act. It seems a nice tag-line, but perhaps that's way too simplistic.

[Trax]

Originally Posted by ThisIsDream

OK scales problem , but i dont know what the possibly revenge has anything do with kira and ya "eventhough they symphatize with the intention, they would probably prefer that the vigilante gets caught." is true, but light is not going to kill them like a dictator.

Actually, when Light kill the criminals which L used to test where Kira located. The msg is kind shown - Who ever want to find "Kira" out and stop him he will hunt them down.

Hate to say it, but you're making absolutely no sense by bringing in irrelevant points over and over again. It doesn't matter what spurred on the vigilante in my example, it could have been for similar reasons as Light or it could have been revenge. It's about the situation that is created as a result. And just like that example, Light would kill off innocent people (investigators or other people accidentily finding out something) caught in the crossfire and turn him from someone people would sympathize with into someone people would start being wary of. If it were made public that he killed off those FBI agents I'm sure support for him would drop dramatically.

Originally Posted by Neux

He even made a promise to himself: if Kira kills his father, he will take himself down.

That was just an act, I can't imagine he was serious about that. I think he'd kill off his father if it turned out to be necessary. But for now, he's using him to get information on the police investigation.

Originally Posted by ThisIsDream

Wow, perfect !! Did i just see this word lol. Alright there are no holes in this jury system(law) everyone are happy and satisfied with the law today, no one can escape from the current system ^^

No offense, but it's getting obvious your understanding of english is far from perfect, which makes it hard to have a proper discussion because you regularly misunderstand what is being said. In this case, it was never said the current system is perfect, because no system is perfect. The point was that discussing the current justice systems is irrelevant to discussing Light's actions.

[Nightengale]

To be completely honest, I hardly found Light any subject to moral ambiguity at all. I don't know about anyone else, but it's extremely obvious half his actions are driven solely by his egoistic nature and his need to prove that his penis is bigger than L's, or whoever is challenging him in a direct manner.

First off, there's no proof that judging by law, all of the criminals Light killed deserve murder. Clearly there's even some who's not in prison, but just because a criminal does a crime and is sentenced to decades, that is because the law deems a criminal whether that person deserves inprisonment, death or any other punishment as deemed by law. Each nation has their own appliance of how they treat criminals as judged by their moral laws and unless someone tells me Light is murdering while taking into account technicalities of criminal and human rights, then Light's acts are far from even gauging the moral line.

The weakness of the justice system is hardly relevant. Every society system written by humans are undoubtedly flawed, be it government bodies to justice systems. Our world is far from perfect, but that doesn't give Light the right to murder people. He has the power to, but this hardly equates to morality. Being humans, there are always time when people wished "criminal A" would just die, etc etc etc, but there's a large gap of right, human ethicalism, and other factors between actually thinking and doing it. Light crossed that gap.

[Trax]

Some more musings on Light... I forgot how he phrased his original intentions but ridding the world of evil is essentially a good goal. However, his desire to rule the world as a malevolent god is already a huge indication that he's not as righteous as he likes to think. He's essentially a tyrant acting on his own, eventhough he does gain supporters that sympathize with his actions. However, he has already crossed the line by killing off law enforcers to protect his own desire, and from there I imagine it can only get worse. Where does it end? It doesn't seem unlikely that he might start killing off people that commited light crimes at some point, and eventually even people that speak out against him openly, or other petty reasons. Ofcourse in his own mind, he does this to protect his "justice" but he's really protecting his own perverse desire to play god and will truely have become the evil dictator. Might makes right, as they say, but doesn't necessarily make righteous. And history is written by the victors, but is always biased.

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by ThisIsDream

OK, so u think some crimes really deserve to die. (penalty problem)

You are completely missing the point.

Originally Posted by ThisIsDream

What do u mean by no proof ? Those criminals were judge by the current jury system. And that is why they are criminals in jail and have criminals records. Those criminals wasnt judge by Light to put them in jail. So it will come down to the penalty problems.

Why should we believe that this is true?

Originally Posted by ThisIsDream

Wow, perfect !! Did i just see this word lol. Alright there are no holes in this jury system(law) everyone are happy and satisfied with the law today, no one can escape from the current system ^^

You are completely missing the point.

Originally Posted by ThisIsDream

As you can see the differences

- First are a group of people (I am right) VS a group of people (I am right)

- Second are "Criminals" which are Everyone (or most ppl? Some may think Criminals are good who knows) in the world recognize as "Criminals" - People who are doing Bad, evil things. It is really hard and rare for Everyone to accept on one thing or come up with a same statement.
However, u can say is majority judge minority.

You didn't answer the question. Would a random person declaring a revolution and going on a rampage be acting morally?

Originally Posted by ThisIsDream

What do u mean by murder? It was because Light didnt have the law to support him to execute criminals? There are people executing or doing something to anther human being according to some laws(they are allow to).

There are people(police) who kill criminals from harming innocent. (short term)
Criminals after sitting in the jail and go out harming innocent again. (long term)

No one can guarantee those criminals will go harm people again or not for the 2nd or more times.

Light's way is just more effective and frighten, which preventing people from committing crimes for the first time. People will be more aware of their attitude and actions.

It is murder because Light deliberately killed people. ThisIsDream, do you actually know why it's wrong to kill people? The reason doesn't actually have anything to do with the law, you know.

Can you address the actual point? Intent is irrelevant to morality, so you can't use it as an excuse for committing murder.

Let me put it in a different context. Let's say that you are caught littering. This is obviously a (minor) crime. The police are afraid that you will commit more crimes in the future. Would they then be justified in executing you?