Extreme special circumstances special circumstances of extreme eating is justified Human right

Document Sample
Extreme special circumstances special circumstances of extreme eating is justified Human right Powered By Docstoc
					Extremely exceptional circumstances, in extreme exceptional circumstances justified
Human eating it?

 Human exceptional circumstances of extreme eating

  in the rule of law, there is not an extremely special circumstances, that cannibalism is
justified then? Difficult to imagine such a situation. In 1884, the British trial judge 劳
德科勒里奇 Stephen Dudley and Edwin was charged in July 25, 1884 murder of
Richard Parker's case is one such extreme case. In my mind, domestic literature
translated only in reality an "English Criminal Law", a book mentioned in this case,
but no details of the case, I've always wanted to see the whole picture of this case. Just
now I do have a case of Professor Jin Jue Williams textbook provides the criminal
case      (JoshuaDressler,       Caseandmaterialoncriminallaw,      thefifthedith,    west,
ThomsonBusiness, 2003.P48-49). Circumstances of the case is this:
  1884 年 7 月 5, two years later and love German criminals 托马斯杜德 and
another crew member Stephen Brooks, and later eaten by, a 17-18 year-old boy Parker,
is a UK registered vessels seafarers, due to the storm, the ship sank in the sea 1,600
miles away from the Cape of Good Hope, they were forced into a boat belonging to
the ship, and, in addition to filling the first radish 2 outside their 3 consecutive days
without enough water and food. The fourth day they caught a turtle, but also to
maintain a few days, their problems is that this may be only after 20 days of food, in
the 20th day, sea turtles are finished.
  after eight days time they may have nothing to eat, except to take over the water
from the linoleum on the outside, they did not water the boat drifting at sea, there are
still about 1,000 miles from land. In the first 18 days, when there are still about 7 days
without food and water, Dudley and Steven on Brooks said that if for help does not
come, they must be some sacrifice to save others, but Brooks did not agree that boys,
clearly they are referring to the victims, of course, not involved in discussions. Time
to July 24, the date closer to the action, Dudley recommendations made by drawing
lots to decide who will sacrifice in order to rest, but Brooks refused to agree, things
still did not tell the boy, in fact, there is no draw up the final.
  Day, Dudley and Steven say they have families, it is best to kill that boy to to save
their life. Dudley suggested that until tomorrow morning if there is still no help from
ships, took the boy to kill. The next day, which is dated July 25, ship or no, standard
Dudley told Brooks about the best go to bed, and beckoned to Steven and Brooks to
kill the boy. Dudley and Stephen Stephen agreed action, Brooks refused. The boy is
sleeping under the cabin, due to hunger and drinking water, his body growing weak,
he could not resist, of course, do not allow themselves killed.
  Dudley prayed that if they thus have a sin, I hope God forgive them, for their souls
to enter heaven. Dudley in Stephen's consent, approached the boy, telling him his time
is up, then pierce with a knife to his throat. The bodies of three boys ate, drank his
blood and later maintained for 4 days. On day 4, after the vessel found them, and they
saved, and survived, but as large Lauder judge said, they "live in a gesture of the
lowest, they were from the Fall spear Williams Port brought Aikesite trial. "
  subsequent investigation, if not the boy in the flesh and blood, they can not wait for
help when, in the fourth day will die of hunger. The boy is also in a very weakened
state, of course, they will die before. They kill, there was no ship there, there is no
possibility of rescue. At this point, the only way to save Dudley and Steven is to kill
the boy, who they are not to die of hunger, if no other hope to carry on.
  later, in 1984 by A · V · BrianSimpson book of the "common law" was once a few
instances the parties. Dudley is the captain, is also an experienced sailor, married, a
father of three children, he brought a prayer book to the ship and conduct normal
religious services. He bravely faced danger, and with a life-saving Xiang Pifa people
on board escape. Stephen, also a husband and father of five children, there are
respected in the local image. The investigation was a crew of his career, is the oldest
board staff. Prior to working in the ship, he felt had been very difficult to find a job.
Brooks was not clear in the background. He claimed to be a bachelor, but there is
evidence that he married after the divorce, to the ship's purpose is to avoid his
ex-wife's struggle, he was tried in other charges. Parker is an illiterate, the homeless,
he seeks to come on board boat to travel abroad.
  case can be described as a coincidence, even if the plot of Jin Yong's also hard to
imagine the scene: First, there must be a person dies before their salvation; second
dead man was killed, if not also quickly will die before the others; third person who
was eventually killed by a bachelor, died after the cause of the pain and shock the
living young; Fourth, the death of this man does to others, eventually saved . But for
the extreme last resort under special circumstances to kill a dying person's behavior, is
it should give it legitimacy it? 120 years ago, the jury found and confirmed the fact of
their murder, the judge confirmed that Dudley and Steven accordingly constitute
felony murder. As for who did not participate in killing, but did not stop the killing, he
ate the human flesh of Brooks, we only know that he be convicted, given what is sin,
there is no relevant information found.

  British common law recognized by this case, human life can not be a happy person,
or a means of survival. Kant said that man can only be objective, never be a means, it
was later overturned part of Marxist theory, because as a community of people, both
an end and a means. But we can say that only few people can be some aspects of the
means of others, but always only purpose of life, and not to any person or nation,
society means. Professor Qiu Xinglong, in his doctoral thesis "sentence under the
theory" that the only reason for abolishing the death penalty is the death penalty can
only be inhumane, this argument for the future in terms of the total abolition of all
death penalty is justified. But Can it be said: the abolition of all non-homicide reason
is people's lives can not be any time to any other person under the name means, that is,
unless he killed people and deserve a capital offense, can not because the person's
death to deter others to achieve the purposes of crime prevention to its death penalty.
  true not only for the life of the human body should be so. Unless deserve or
voluntary (and life does not allow even a voluntary, because human life only once, did
not regret the opportunities), the body can not become another useful tool, but only
the end. Rape is forced, under the circumstances, the body of others as their own
means of happiness. The case of the so-called deserve a person is criminal, it may be
state criminal proceedings through administrative procedures or deprivation of
personal liberty. Other cases, the body can not be enforced as a means to seek
interests for others, or as full of evil as rape. But our society has emerged in this
situation.
  report said that on April 14, mentally handicapped girl menstruation because of
"trouble", Nantong, Jiangsu Province, two children's welfare will be about 14-year-old
mentally handicapped girl to the hospital the city east of the city hysterectomy. This
first was a hospital "young doctor" to see immediately after the announcement online:
Nantong orphanage will be sent to the city's two east of the city hospital for mentally
handicapped girls removed their uterus. "Welfare of the people said, two girls recently
came menarche, very troublesome to pack up, after more trouble after sexual maturity,
they can not marry and have children anyway, and now all of their uterus, saving a lot
of trouble." Journalists by interviews confirmed this, the interview, director of the
hospital and doctors involved have not only said that there have been such a thing, but
also insisted that they "are doing a public good." Found east of the city hospital's vice
president of soup. He frankly said that welfare first Affiliated Hospital of Nantong
University found gynecological asked to do a hysterectomy two children, the hospital
gynecologist repeated consultations to find east of the city hospital, "taking into
account is a public good, we do this surgery ".
  interview for" removal of the uterus to reduce menstrual trouble, "the statement,
Vice President Tom east hospital, said that while the operation is illegal is still under
investigation," In fact, certain other places are doing this, but there is no cause for
concern. light I am familiar, there are around two cases. " Director Zhang Yuquan
Hospital Gynecology told this paper in mind from www.5udoc.com [worry
documentation] to collect and organize, for the original author! Persons, "as these
people (mental retardation), after menstruation, mess everywhere, on their own is
really not good." Dr. Wang said, this operation had previously: "From me to the
hospital, there are welfare commission to do this surgery at our hospital. "It seems that
this sort of thing is not the first chapter. (Welfare mentally retarded girl who was
cutting someone's uterus, said the hospital is doing public good, the Chongqing
Evening News →                China News, April 22, 2005 14th Edition,
http://www.cqwb.com.cn/webnews/htm / 2005/4/22/136641.htm, 2005 年 04 22).
  in this case, the mentally retarded girl was the reason why hysterectomy, the
situation of juveniles who were eating, how is: First, do the community and others is
useful, "because, after menstruation, mess everywhere, "the management and care
really very complicated one; second, there is no damage on their own, because" they
can not marry and have children anyway. " Third, they are not voluntary, for mentally
retarded people in the law, unless it is for their benefit, or the presumption that they do
not agree. These girls in these seemingly reasonable grounds to be removed under the
uterus.
  A leadership said it "is a public good." What a stupid and cruel excuse. Like some
people say "no farmers stability, there is no social stability," the same, are themselves
the happiness and well-being can not be an end in itself, it? Why become a stable
means there is reason to be. Public, it is other people's business, and "my" life, "I"
independent body. Like a young man on board, as both noble and humble life, dull
and wisdom, useful and useless, short-term and long-term, they are equal in terms of
their own is the most important.
  body is the same, regardless of beauty and ugliness, sound and disability, useful and
useless, are inviolable. Like those retarded girl's womb, even if not always used, but it
is part of the body as a sign of a woman, can not be denied. Who Tangyuan Zhang
said, "This operation is illegal is still under investigation," Maybe the fact that the
verification is the need to investigate, but in fact the case without objection, "it is
illegal," also need to investigate it? If such behavior is not illegal, then it must be
allowed to eat people's draconian laws. This paper from www.5udoc.com [worry
documentation] to collect and organize, for the original author! / Center>

				
DOCUMENT INFO