The Most Dangerous Game - Page 2

MalReynolds · 12-27-2003, 09:56 AM

No, Zaroff clearly owns the island. But technically, it is still hunting, because home owners can still "hunt" criminals through their house. A good example of this fails to come to mind at the time, but it has happened before.

Mal

tristia · 12-27-2003, 11:12 AM

i personally think it would have to still be considered murder. If i remember the story right (and your asking me to go back to freshman english class), hes a general and such right? that would lead me to think that he is from a place that has laws and rules just because it has a government and military, so he is still commiting murder based on a moral level. He would know that it was murder because he is from a society that forbids the act of murder. I suppose it would also depend on what country he is from, but the manner of how zoloff speaks about his servant i guess is what you would call him (his large friend0 makes me think he comes from a highly civilized background. He calls him a savage, because he is def and dumb... just makes me think zoloff should know better than to be hunting men for sport... which would make it murder.

HNJhack · 12-27-2003, 11:34 AM

ok, well these are all good points. here's mine. i don't think anyone said this yet...

The general told the man(i beleive that was rainsford) that he would hunt him. He has stated that he will do it tha tmeans he has thought a bout it making it pre-meditated murder. end of story ^_^

oh yeah, all hunting is murder when you think about it. it's just the way it is.hunting is murder, but murder isn't always hunting. ^_^

12-27-2003, 11:43 AM

At this point, I think the debate is pretty stupid.

It's murder. Who cares what fashion the general kills the shipwrecked man in? Who cares if he gets a head start? The point is, it's still willful, wanton killing of one man by another. Whether or not it's "also hunting" doesn't matter.

hEaLiNgViSiOnAnGeLicMiX · 12-27-2003, 11:52 AM

Well LOGICALLY, it's both. but for some reason, I think it's more murder than anything

Usually hunting is when an animal is killed. Of course it IS possible to hunt humans because animal and humans are alltogether living species. But think about it this way, during the process of hunting, the animals are killed at almost first site, to prevent it from escaping. The general gave the man 3 days, and then afterwards decided to kill him on the spot. Another thing, hunting is usually done for money. Either that or they want to make clothes out of the furr, or eat the meat. Obviously, the human has no furr, and the story never said anything about the general roasting the man atop a fire LOL.

Here's another thing though. Think of these two questions: What is murder? What is hunting? They're almost the same. Theyre both terms used to describe the killing of a living being. Difference is that you will have some kind of reward after hunting, wether it be meat *food* or money or clothes *furr* . But to justify what I said before, food money or even clothes did NOT come out of the idea of killing a human. so I to finish it off...IT WAS MURDER!

Falcon · 12-27-2003, 12:15 PM

Quote:

I think it's still murder without laws. It's not "homicide in the first degree" or anything like that, but isn't murder just murder, and not defined by the law?

what youre talking about is natural laws... the laws that a [normal] person adheres to because he feels they are right, not because they are written as laws by a government. and in that case, i would agree with you.

as for the argument, i would have to say it depends on perspective. if you consider a man, in this case, to be an animal and not a man, then it is purely hunting. if not, then it is murder. i will agree with chardish that it is a perversion... that a person has gotten to a point where he has to hunt so much that he must hunt something smarter than simply an "animal", but something that is as smart as he is.

Quote:

4) its 1 oclock i want to go to bed

"its 3 am and i wanna go to beeeed" -OAR

dancingmaniac3 · 12-27-2003, 12:48 PM

ok this is getting way out of hand. i mean its a great story and all and makes u think hard, but theres just too many perspectives and we're never gonna get the answer. the only answer we get is the one we believe in. thats our answer. there is no RIGHT answer to this story, only the answer that we think it is. so basically, this can go on forever, ppl saying its murder, ppl saying its hunting, ppl saying its both, ppl saying its neither. i predict this thread will go on for a while with everyones opinion...

HNJhack · 12-27-2003, 12:59 PM

indeed it will. isn't that the point to these threads. they consist of very complicated sublects with no easy answer. in makes u as all think extemely hard to find an answer. eventually we will agree. because there is an answer to everything. ^_^

MalReynolds · 12-27-2003, 01:50 PM

But Rainsford is tresspassing, and if Zaroff feels threatened, then his is full in his right to kill Rainsford.

Mal

VxDx · 12-27-2003, 04:22 PM

It's both, end of discussion. Plus the story sucked.

HNJhack · 12-27-2003, 07:21 PM

yo!!! the story wasn't all that bad. and yes it is both. but that is my opinion based on the way i was raised in this society.
that is what will determine the answer. where when and how you where raised and what went on during that time. ^_^

Anticrombie0909 · 12-27-2003, 09:27 PM

Wow, gone for one day and there's 30 responses waiting for me. Ok, I think that it would have been murder in the story, but if Rainsford agreed to it, it would be hunting. So, hypothetically, say there was a reward...one million dollars if he could survive for three days. If Rainsford took on the quest willingly, I think he would have given Zaroff rights to do with him as he would. But in this situation, killing another man in these circumstances, it should be considered murder.

And stop saying that the discussion is stupid. If you actually stopped to think about it, you'd see there actually are deep insights into this topic.

makaveli121212 · 12-27-2003, 10:26 PM

your talking hypothetically here with the money...how can you say A) that it isnt hunting and B) that it isnt murder

Anticrombie0909 · 12-27-2003, 10:38 PM

I'm saying in the story it was murder, but under a different set of circumstances it could be considered hunting.

makaveli121212 · 12-27-2003, 10:44 PM

what?! what the hell are you talking about, how is it not hunting...his prey is out running in the wild, he hunts it down and tries to kill it...it doesnt matter if its a deer or a man

...hey isnt that the book where he finds the man hiding on the first day, and could have shot him, but didnt because it was too easy...im not saying it has any particular relevance, but...

hEaLiNgViSiOnAnGeLicMiX · 12-28-2003, 10:36 AM

Above poster obviously didn't read my post.

When you go hunting and you see a deer, do you wait three days before you decide to shoot the bastard? nope, you'd shoot him probably no later than a couple seconds after you see it. the man was given three days. He could've escaped, but he didn't. In a way, he led himself to his demise. because he WAS given three days but then he was a bastard and got killed. he wasn't dying willingly, he was just an idiot.

VxDx · 12-28-2003, 11:28 AM

GAHHH you're so dumb. It's hunting, because he was being hunted. There's no debate. He was being stalked by someone who has the intent to kill. That is hunting. It's murder because one person is killing another. It doesn't matter if there was money, or he was given three days.

There's no deep insight in that story. There's no relevance at all. It's a terribly predictable story.

IAMTHEEVILBEAN · 12-28-2003, 11:29 AM

I hate that story

I read it this year

I think its mystery/psycho

makaveli121212 · 12-28-2003, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hEaLiNgViSiOnAnGeLicMiX

Above poster obviously didn't read my post.

When you go hunting and you see a deer, do you wait three days before you decide to shoot the bastard? nope, you'd shoot him probably no later than a couple seconds after you see it. the man was given three days. He could've escaped, but he didn't. In a way, he led himself to his demise. because he WAS given three days but then he was a bastard and got killed. he wasn't dying willingly, he was just an idiot.

are you saying its hunting or murder...becuase hunting is seaking out your objective...thats it, not even necissarily killing it either...i can hunt for my socks in my dresser...

hEaLiNgViSiOnAnGeLicMiX · 12-28-2003, 06:21 PM

I typed out that entire paragraph to justify my point of view. my point of view is that in this situation, it's more considered murder than hunting. but logically it's both.

12-27-2003, 09:56 AM	#21
MalReynolds CHOCK FULL O' NUTRIENTS Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: A Denny's Bathroom. Age: 36 Posts: 6,571	No, Zaroff clearly owns the island. But technically, it is still hunting, because home owners can still "hunt" criminals through their house. A good example of this fails to come to mind at the time, but it has happened before. Mal __________________ "A new take on the epic fantasy genre... Darkly comic, relatable characters... twisted storyline." "Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback!

12-27-2003, 11:12 AM	#22
tristia FFR Player Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: NJ Age: 38 Posts: 419	i personally think it would have to still be considered murder. If i remember the story right (and your asking me to go back to freshman english class), hes a general and such right? that would lead me to think that he is from a place that has laws and rules just because it has a government and military, so he is still commiting murder based on a moral level. He would know that it was murder because he is from a society that forbids the act of murder. I suppose it would also depend on what country he is from, but the manner of how zoloff speaks about his servant i guess is what you would call him (his large friend0 makes me think he comes from a highly civilized background. He calls him a savage, because he is def and dumb... just makes me think zoloff should know better than to be hunting men for sport... which would make it murder. __________________ Yay MySpace

12-27-2003, 11:34 AM	#23
HNJhack FFR Player Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 101	ok, well these are all good points. here's mine. i don't think anyone said this yet... The general told the man(i beleive that was rainsford) that he would hunt him. He has stated that he will do it tha tmeans he has thought a bout it making it pre-meditated murder. end of story ^_^ oh yeah, all hunting is murder when you think about it. it's just the way it is.hunting is murder, but murder isn't always hunting. ^_^ __________________ - 無秩序の神

12-27-2003, 12:48 PM	#27
dancingmaniac3 FFR Player Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: San Antonio...where tortilla is pronounced right. Posts: 1,873	ok this is getting way out of hand. i mean its a great story and all and makes u think hard, but theres just too many perspectives and we're never gonna get the answer. the only answer we get is the one we believe in. thats our answer. there is no RIGHT answer to this story, only the answer that we think it is. so basically, this can go on forever, ppl saying its murder, ppl saying its hunting, ppl saying its both, ppl saying its neither. i predict this thread will go on for a while with everyones opinion... __________________

12-27-2003, 12:59 PM	#28
HNJhack FFR Player Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 101	indeed it will. isn't that the point to these threads. they consist of very complicated sublects with no easy answer. in makes u as all think extemely hard to find an answer. eventually we will agree. because there is an answer to everything. ^_^ __________________ - 無秩序の神

12-27-2003, 11:43 AM	#24
User6773 Guest Posts: n/a	At this point, I think the debate is pretty stupid. It's murder. Who cares what fashion the general kills the shipwrecked man in? Who cares if he gets a head start? The point is, it's still willful, wanton killing of one man by another. Whether or not it's "also hunting" doesn't matter.

12-27-2003, 11:52 AM	#25
hEaLiNgViSiOnAnGeLicMiX FFR Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Hi Linus. Posts: 1,663	Well LOGICALLY, it's both. but for some reason, I think it's more murder than anything Usually hunting is when an animal is killed. Of course it IS possible to hunt humans because animal and humans are alltogether living species. But think about it this way, during the process of hunting, the animals are killed at almost first site, to prevent it from escaping. The general gave the man 3 days, and then afterwards decided to kill him on the spot. Another thing, hunting is usually done for money. Either that or they want to make clothes out of the furr, or eat the meat. Obviously, the human has no furr, and the story never said anything about the general roasting the man atop a fire LOL. Here's another thing though. Think of these two questions: What is murder? What is hunting? They're almost the same. Theyre both terms used to describe the killing of a living being. Difference is that you will have some kind of reward after hunting, wether it be meat food or money or clothes furr . But to justify what I said before, food money or even clothes did NOT come out of the idea of killing a human. so I to finish it off...IT WAS MURDER!

12-27-2003, 01:50 PM	#29
MalReynolds CHOCK FULL O' NUTRIENTS Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: A Denny's Bathroom. Age: 36 Posts: 6,571	But Rainsford is tresspassing, and if Zaroff feels threatened, then his is full in his right to kill Rainsford. Mal __________________ "A new take on the epic fantasy genre... Darkly comic, relatable characters... twisted storyline." "Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback!

12-27-2003, 04:22 PM	#30
VxDx FFR Player Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 1,871	It's both, end of discussion. Plus the story sucked.

12-27-2003, 07:21 PM	#31
HNJhack FFR Player Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 101	yo!!! the story wasn't all that bad. and yes it is both. but that is my opinion based on the way i was raised in this society. that is what will determine the answer. where when and how you where raised and what went on during that time. ^_^ __________________ - 無秩序の神

12-27-2003, 09:27 PM	#32
Anticrombie0909 FFR Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 4,683	Wow, gone for one day and there's 30 responses waiting for me. Ok, I think that it would have been murder in the story, but if Rainsford agreed to it, it would be hunting. So, hypothetically, say there was a reward...one million dollars if he could survive for three days. If Rainsford took on the quest willingly, I think he would have given Zaroff rights to do with him as he would. But in this situation, killing another man in these circumstances, it should be considered murder. And stop saying that the discussion is stupid. If you actually stopped to think about it, you'd see there actually are deep insights into this topic.

12-27-2003, 10:38 PM	#34
Anticrombie0909 FFR Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 4,683	I'm saying in the story it was murder, but under a different set of circumstances it could be considered hunting.

12-28-2003, 10:36 AM	#36
hEaLiNgViSiOnAnGeLicMiX FFR Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Hi Linus. Posts: 1,663	Above poster obviously didn't read my post. When you go hunting and you see a deer, do you wait three days before you decide to shoot the bastard? nope, you'd shoot him probably no later than a couple seconds after you see it. the man was given three days. He could've escaped, but he didn't. In a way, he led himself to his demise. because he WAS given three days but then he was a bastard and got killed. he wasn't dying willingly, he was just an idiot. __________________ Ananana: Girls are so complicated. That\'s why I\'m not a lesbian. Anuj: Marry me Karen XD Anuj: omfg somebody suck my wee wee >.<

12-28-2003, 11:28 AM	#37
VxDx FFR Player Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 1,871	GAHHH you're so dumb. It's hunting, because he was being hunted. There's no debate. He was being stalked by someone who has the intent to kill. That is hunting. It's murder because one person is killing another. It doesn't matter if there was money, or he was given three days. There's no deep insight in that story. There's no relevance at all. It's a terribly predictable story.

12-28-2003, 11:29 AM	#38
IAMTHEEVILBEAN FFR Player Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Michigan Posts: 3,078	I hate that story I read it this year I think its mystery/psycho

12-28-2003, 06:21 PM	#40
hEaLiNgViSiOnAnGeLicMiX FFR Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Hi Linus. Posts: 1,663	I typed out that entire paragraph to justify my point of view. my point of view is that in this situation, it's more considered murder than hunting. but logically it's both. __________________ Ananana: Girls are so complicated. That\'s why I\'m not a lesbian. Anuj: Marry me Karen XD Anuj: omfg somebody suck my wee wee >.<

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)