Tuesday, January 04, 2005
Justifiable Homicide
I have a few ideas about what constitutes justifiable homicide, and I'm not afraid to admit that they're a bit outlandish. For instance, if you are one of those people that see flashing tow truck lights on the side of the road, and slow down to watch the incredibly unique sight of a slightly dented car being loaded on said truck, well, I think I should have every right to run you off the road without repercussions. Or, if you are the person in my building who refuses to wait ten minutes for me to unload my clothes from the washer, and instead takes them out with your grubby little mitts and places them in whatever random nastiness is on top of the dryer, while you place your clothes into the washer, well, I should be allowed to set fire to your apartment, even if you are inside.
As I said, I'm willing to admit that I might be alone in my extreme beliefs listed above, but there is one instance that I truly have to wonder if it would hold up in court: Tickling. If you are ticklish, you know what I mean. When I am being tickled, there is only one thought going through my head: "Do whatever it takes to stop being tickled". Normally, I can regain my composure enough to escape, but if enough time passed, I really lapse into a state that I think could reasonably be considered as mentally incapable of valuing human life. And I firmly believe that if I was being tickled for long enough, and the only way I had of ending the tickling was to kill the tickler, I would do so...and I think I should get off. I realize that I probably should at least verbally warn the tickler of his or her impending fate, but when I'm being tickled, I am often unable to speak, so you can't really blame me. I certainly think the "not guilty by reason of tickling-induced insanity" is completely legitimate.
The only time I can recall actually intentionally inflicting pain on someone while I was being tickled happened a few years ago. I had a girlfriend at the time who was as tall as I was, and strong enough that it was no trivial matter to stop her from tickling me. She persisted, and I could not escape, so I started to freak out. Somehow, the only thing I could do was kick her in the butt. I remember thinking that I didn't want to hurt her, but if she didn't stop tickling me, I would die, and that if I didn't kick her hard enough, she would continue to tickle, as her butt had a decent amount of padding. And, having almost gone out of my mind, I lost sense of proportion, and gave her a swift ass kick. I don't think it caused her to cry, but it certainly caused her to stop tickling me. And I felt bad for hurting her, but, your honor, I really believed I had no other option.
Does tickling count as assault? I think it actually would be an effective form of torture. At any rate, if I was arrested, I can only hope that the jury would have had ticklish people on it. Because they, my brethren in ticklishness, would understand.
As I said, I'm willing to admit that I might be alone in my extreme beliefs listed above, but there is one instance that I truly have to wonder if it would hold up in court: Tickling. If you are ticklish, you know what I mean. When I am being tickled, there is only one thought going through my head: "Do whatever it takes to stop being tickled". Normally, I can regain my composure enough to escape, but if enough time passed, I really lapse into a state that I think could reasonably be considered as mentally incapable of valuing human life. And I firmly believe that if I was being tickled for long enough, and the only way I had of ending the tickling was to kill the tickler, I would do so...and I think I should get off. I realize that I probably should at least verbally warn the tickler of his or her impending fate, but when I'm being tickled, I am often unable to speak, so you can't really blame me. I certainly think the "not guilty by reason of tickling-induced insanity" is completely legitimate.
The only time I can recall actually intentionally inflicting pain on someone while I was being tickled happened a few years ago. I had a girlfriend at the time who was as tall as I was, and strong enough that it was no trivial matter to stop her from tickling me. She persisted, and I could not escape, so I started to freak out. Somehow, the only thing I could do was kick her in the butt. I remember thinking that I didn't want to hurt her, but if she didn't stop tickling me, I would die, and that if I didn't kick her hard enough, she would continue to tickle, as her butt had a decent amount of padding. And, having almost gone out of my mind, I lost sense of proportion, and gave her a swift ass kick. I don't think it caused her to cry, but it certainly caused her to stop tickling me. And I felt bad for hurting her, but, your honor, I really believed I had no other option.
Does tickling count as assault? I think it actually would be an effective form of torture. At any rate, if I was arrested, I can only hope that the jury would have had ticklish people on it. Because they, my brethren in ticklishness, would understand.
Comments:
Tickling is definitely a form of torture. When I was a kid my cousin who is ten years older than me would torment me with tickling. That made me afraid of him and to this day being tickled scares me. I get panicky and want to get away as quickly as possible. It is in no way funny. If I was on the "not guilty by reason of tickling-induced insanity" jury you would definitely get an "innocent" vote from me.
I enjoyed your description of your old girlfriend.
And yes, tickling is torture and the only good tickler is a dead one.
Other cases of justifiable homicide should include people who should know better but use double negatives. Ok, maybe that is overboard, but there are too many people anyway, thin the herd.
And yes, tickling is torture and the only good tickler is a dead one.
Other cases of justifiable homicide should include people who should know better but use double negatives. Ok, maybe that is overboard, but there are too many people anyway, thin the herd.
# posted by 
: January 6, 2005 at 12:24 PM
: January 6, 2005 at 12:24 PM
I mean, although homicide is bad, there are, unfortunately too many people on this planet. So, while using double negatives should probably not be a way to determine if you should die, neither should not having enough food to eat because the river you fish in is polluted.
Really, has nothing to do with the nature of the post, I was tired when I responded.
Laurel
Post a Comment
Really, has nothing to do with the nature of the post, I was tired when I responded.
Laurel
# posted by : January 7, 2005 at 6:44 AM
: January 7, 2005 at 6:44 AM
