By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kasz216 on 18 April 2010
Edit Thread
Mise said:
Kasz216 said:
,

1) I also disagree.  However I think your level of outrage is far out of place.

2) Agreed.

3) Sure it does.  They are trained proffesonals.  There was no risk of them actually beating him to death.  (outside of malice.)  You argued that it doesn't take a trained person to kill soemone with a blow... which is true... however if you are a trained person you can make sure you won't kill someone with a blow.

1) Fair enough. I don't really agree, but you're free to think so IMO.

3) There's always a risk in such things IMO - you could say that the risk in this case is minute, but it's there by external/unknown factors alone - hell, they didn't know that the kid had a fatal condition in the first place.

Thing is - my biggest problem isn't really that they could have killed him, the problem was that they were beating him in the first place. But that's a different discussion entirely.

1) definitly an agree to disagree situaton.

3) This kids fatal condition was in no way exaberrated by went on however.  If this boot camp didn't employ corporal puishment... the kid still would of died.  It was the running beforehand that activated his condition.  They thought he was faking... this wouldn't of changed if they weren't beating him.  In fact it probably would of took them LONGER to figure out he wasn't faking. 

Additionally a condition not being reported to them, is in no way there fault.  It's like saying driving is wrong because there is always the risk somebody could have narcelpsy and the person who does the drivers liscense test wouldn't know that.  Did what they do have risks?  Yes.  Were those risks large or even signficiant?  No.  There are much larger risks with plenty of stuff we allow.