OT: Henry Ruggs

[HuskyCLT]

"Feeling bad for someone" like you're giving them some kind of free pass is different than having compassion. Ruggs' actions were reprehensible and he should absolutely be held accountable for what he did. He killed an innocent woman and her dog by being completely reckless, irresponsible, and negligent of others.

At the same time, it's sad that he ruined his own promising career, tarnished his life and he will always have to live with what he did. It's okay to empathize that sucks. Both things can be true. Hopefully he takes his time and punishment to take a deep look at himself, become a better person, and learn the impact his actions have - like Maurice Clarett mentioned above.

 

[Deepster]

I hope Henry Ruggs is in anguish over what happened, not because I wish him ill, but because it would indicate he is an empathetic person who feels remorse for his actions. But even though I "hope" he is in anguish, I still feel heartbroken for him and his situation. I can hear a lot of you screaming, "Forget his anguish! There is a dead girl and a grieving family!" I feel just as heartbroken for her and her loved ones as you do. I just feel compelled to encourage compassion for the other party as well, because I have not seen anyone else do it.

I guess I just don't feel heartbroken for him.

You have choices. Choices have outcomes and consequences. When you make a bad choice, like driving 156 mph at double the legal limit, you deserve every consequence you get as a result of that choice.

Would I hope he comes out the other side of this a changed, better person? Sure. But I have no compassion for the road he's going to need to take to get there. He deserves every bit of it.

 

[J187Money]

In the bell curve of decision making, this was a 3rd degree SD bad choice. We all make bad choices. But my level of compassion is really dictated by circumstance and how far out the curve the bad choice is...

 

[YearoftheHusky]

TMZ realesed video Of Ruggs and his girlfriend sitting on the curb watching the car burn after the accident. It was absolutely harrowing. I can’t believe they would release that video. I pray the family does not have to see it.

 

[Chin Diesel]

How your heart breaks for the killer as much as the deceased is hard to comprehend. No personal attack, I simply cannot relate to the rationale of such thinking.
A young innocent woman had her life taken by a also young out of control college educated professional. High paid athlete on a drunk mission of thrill also that could have killed him and his girl friend. They were the lucky ones.
Compassion for the victim and her family 100%, for the accused party not a bit.

The hardest part of humanity is showing compassion and mercy for those who are undeserving of it. Not saying I disagree with your viewpoint

 

[husky429]

The hardest part of humanity is showing compassion and mercy for those who are undeserving of it. Not saying I disagree with your viewpoint

Why is that a necessary part of humanity at all? And why is it the HARDEST part? That's a bold claim to make without any sort of rationale. I mean there's about 99% of philosophers that study ethics that would disagree with you to some extent or another.

You're operating under a totally different moral paradigm than @Woof 101 is... he's saying that they don't deserve that compassion to begin with... so I'm not sure your argument makes much sense from a structural standpoint.

 

[Chin Diesel]

Why is that a necessary part of humanity at all? And why is it the HARDEST part? That's a bold claim to make without any sort of rationale. I mean there's about 99% of philosophers that study ethics that would disagree with you to some extent or another.

You're operating under a totally different moral paradigm than @Woof 101 is... he's saying that they don't deserve that compassion to begin with... so I'm not sure your argument makes much sense from a structural standpoint.

It's what separates us from the rest of the animal kingdom and it's hard because it's irrational.

Love how you say I make a bold claim with nothing to back it up and then throw out a "99% of philosophers that study ethics that would disagree" and have nothing to back up that claim. I'm 100% sure that was unintentional irony on your part.

 

[husky429]

It's what separates us from the rest of the animal kingdom and it's hard because it's irrational.

Love how you say I make a bold claim with nothing to back it up and then throw out a "99% of philosophers that study ethics that would disagree" and have nothing to back up that claim. I'm 100% sure that was unintentional irony on your part.

It isn't irrational--if anything it takes exceptional rationality to be compassionate towards those that have done reprehensible things, because your gut instinct is to punish

Saying "we're not animals" is irrelvant. Animals don't murder in cold blood, rape, or commit genocide either , so the idea that not being an animal is better somehow isn't a helpful point. They don't have any morality, so that can't do "wrong" in the sense that a human can, they can't do "right" either... they just "do."

Still waiting to hear WHY good people show compassion to people who do reprehensible things. I don't even disagree with you... I'm just not quite sure you have the ability to formulate a cohesive argument here... I'm asking for your opinion and all you're responding with is tu quoque.

This isn't a situation where it's a universal ethic. Unnecessary murder is bad. Rape is bad Helping old people with their taxes = good. Rescuing old dogs = good. Giving compassion to people who do bad things isn't some kind of obvious or nearly universal good. It needs to be explained. What purpose does giving compassion serve in this case?

You're not wrong... I made an ironic point. But you still haven't said anything of value other than "compassion good because we aren't animals". That's like saying "I like red because my coffee cup is white." You haven't explained why you like red. And you haven't said why people need to show compassion towards criminals to be fully human.

Ethical philosophers disagree with everything you say, even if they agree with you lol. I'm marrying one. But many would probably say that compassion (depending on how you define it) is appropriate when it doesn't deny justice for victims. For Suggs, that probably wouldn't disqualify him from receiving people's "compassion" in some way since he will be in the justice system. He will still be punished legally, but giving him compassion now is more likely to result in him overcoming his personal demons and becoming a productive member of society. <-- that was the answer to my question. Or at least an answer.

 

[NJHusky]

TMZ realesed video Of Ruggs and his girlfriend sitting on the curb watching the car burn after the accident. It was absolutely harrowing. I can’t believe they would release that video. I pray the family does not have to see it.

Just saw it....Girlfriend is screaming for help (for Ruggs) totally unconcerned that someone just burned to death in a car because of Ruggs. Meanwhile Ruggs is sitting there talking to her....The level of indifference is mind numbing to me.

 

[Chin Diesel]

It isn't irrational--if anything it takes exceptional rationality to be compassionate towards those that have done reprehensible things, because your gut instinct is to punish

Saying "we're not animals" is irrelvant. Animals don't murder in cold blood, rape, or commit genocide either , so the idea that not being an animal is better somehow isn't a helpful point. They don't have any morality, so that can't do "wrong" in the sense that a human can, they can't do "right" either... they just "do."

Still waiting to hear WHY good people show compassion to people who do reprehensible things. I don't even disagree with you... I'm just not quite sure you have the ability to formulate a cohesive argument here... I'm asking for your opinion and all you're responding with is tu quoque.

This isn't a situation where it's a universal ethic. Unnecessary murder is bad. Rape is bad Helping old people with their taxes = good. Rescuing old dogs = good. Giving compassion to people who do bad things isn't some kind of obvious or nearly universal good. It needs to be explained. What purpose does giving compassion serve in this case?

You're not wrong... I made an ironic point. But you still haven't said anything of value other than "compassion good because we aren't animals". That's like saying "I like red because my coffee cup is white." You haven't explained why you like red. And you haven't said why people need to show compassion towards criminals to be fully human.

Ethical philosophers disagree with everything you say, even if they agree with you lol. I'm marrying one. But many would probably say that compassion (depending on how you define it) is appropriate when it doesn't deny justice for victims. For Suggs, that probably wouldn't disqualify him from receiving people's "compassion" in some way since he will be in the justice system. He will still be punished legally, but giving him compassion now is more likely to result in him overcoming his personal demons and becoming a productive member of society. <-- that was the answer to my question. Or at least an answer.

Guess you haven't ever seen animals kill each other for no other reason than clearing out competition for mating, territory or reasons other than for food. Really odd statement to suggest animals don't kill each other or commit genocide. They most certainly do. It's way beyond my knowledge base to even try to discuss if animals are capable of raping each other.

As for why people show compassion to those who act way beyond societal norms, you'd be better off asking them than asking me why I think they do what they do.

 

[husky429]

Guess you haven't ever seen animals kill each other for no other reason than clearing out competition for mating, territory or reasons other than for food. Really odd statement to suggest animals don't kill each other or commit genocide. They most certainly do. It's way beyond my knowledge base to even try to discuss if animals are capable of raping each other.

As for why people show compassion to those who act way beyond societal norms, you'd be better off asking them than asking me why I think they do what they do.

You can't possibly be this obtuse dude. Duh, animals kill each other. But they aren't murdering each other in cold blood like humans do, or making the personal choice to drive 160mph while drunk. They operate on instinct absent of morality. An animal doesn't think "he slept with my wife so I'll shoot them both"--they CAN'T.

Your second paragraph also makes no sense. Why someone acts outside of a social norm is irrelevant. People do things for all sorts of reasons. The question is why to show them compassion when they hurt other people? I already answered the question FOR YOU, and you still don't have an answer.

I'm done with this man. You need a critical thinking class.

 

[Umami Zen]

Very poor judgment. Tragic results. Amazing that more damage to human lives wasn't done given the reckless nature of his actions.

Sad

 

[uconnfan68]

You can't possibly be this obtuse dude. Duh, animals kill each other. But they aren't murdering each other in cold blood like humans do, or making the personal choice to drive 160mph while drunk. They operate on instinct absent of morality. An animal doesn't think "he slept with my wife so I'll shoot them both"--they CAN'T.

Your second paragraph also makes no sense. Why someone acts outside of a social norm is irrelevant. People do things for all sorts of reasons. The question is why to show them compassion when they hurt other people? I already answered the question FOR YOU, and you still don't have an answer.

I'm done with this man. You need a critical thinking class.

You said animals don’t kill each other in cold blood. Never watched Nat Geo?

 

[Scoe]

I can understand the anger and the difficulty to forgive the "killer". He behaved in a horrifically irresponsible way that resulted in the tragic death of another person. I just think it's intellectually lazy to wash your hands of the matter by saying, "Poor girl. Hope the driver rots in prison." Why wouldn't you want him to be held accountable for his actions (prison time, money, etc.), and then come out on the other side of this a changed person? I suspect many of you would say, "Oh, I do want that, but we all know it's not going to happen." Would you say that if this was your son? I hope Henry Ruggs is in anguish over what happened, not because I wish him ill, but because it would indicate he is an empathetic person who feels remorse for his actions. But even though I "hope" he is in anguish, I still feel heartbroken for him and his situation. I can hear a lot of you screaming, "Forget his anguish! There is a dead girl and a grieving family!" I feel just as heartbroken for her and her loved ones as you do. I just feel compelled to encourage compassion for the other party as well, because I have not seen anyone else do it. This forum has a newly-minted champion in Maurice Clarett. When he went through his troubles, there were a lot of privileged, ignorant, intellectually lazy people who knew nothing about him personally who said, "I hope this guy rots in jail." Luckily he did not rot in jail, and he is now out there helping to prevent Maurice Clarett and Henry Ruggs scenarios from occurring. I am pretty sure he would agree with my take on this. Also, there is a fictional character, whom a lot of you think was real, whose morals are held in the highest regard by a lot of you (and me for that matter). I guaran-god-damn-tee you he would agree with my take as well. And you people gleefully fantasizing about Henry Ruggs being sexually assaulted: grow up.

I can understand the anger and the difficulty to forgive the "killer". He behaved in a horrifically irresponsible way that resulted in the tragic death of another person. I just think it's intellectually lazy to wash your hands of the matter by saying, "Poor girl. Hope the driver rots in prison." Why wouldn't you want him to be held accountable for his actions (prison time, money, etc.), and then come out on the other side of this a changed person? I suspect many of you would say, "Oh, I do want that, but we all know it's not going to happen." Would you say that if this was your son? I hope Henry Ruggs is in anguish over what happened, not because I wish him ill, but because it would indicate he is an empathetic person who feels remorse for his actions. But even though I "hope" he is in anguish, I still feel heartbroken for him and his situation. I can hear a lot of you screaming, "Forget his anguish! There is a dead girl and a grieving family!" I feel just as heartbroken for her and her loved ones as you do. I just feel compelled to encourage compassion for the other party as well, because I have not seen anyone else do it. This forum has a newly-minted champion in Maurice Clarett. When he went through his troubles, there were a lot of privileged, ignorant, intellectually lazy people who knew nothing about him personally who said, "I hope this guy rots in jail." Luckily he did not rot in jail, and he is now out there helping to prevent Maurice Clarett and Henry Ruggs scenarios from occurring. I am pretty sure he would agree with my take on this. Also, there is a fictional character, whom a lot of you think was real, whose morals are held in the highest regard by a lot of you (and me for that matter). I guaran-god-damn-tee you he would agree with my take as well. And you people gleefully fantasizing about Henry Ruggs being sexually assaulted: grow up.

I think there’s plenty of time to have sympathy for Ruggs and his family. I just can’t help but feel so angry about it because it was so avoidable and his gf was with him how does she not see that he is too intoxicated to drive, being that he is a father to a 2 year old making the selfish decision letting his family and teammates down then of course taking a life I just can’t comprehend it all.

 

[husky429]

You said animals don’t kill each other in cold blood. Never watched Nat Geo?

Jeezum sometimes I wonder if the collective IQ of this place is less than a tortoise.

Yes I have watched too many hours of nat geo in my life.

No animals don't kill in cold blood. They are cognitively incapable of a cold blooded killing. They kill for meat, territory, etc. They don't kill out of spite or hate.

I think the exception would be thosr orangutans that Goodall wrote about. They did some messee up stuff.. but they're a lot closer to han intellect than most species.

 

[NJHusky]

No animals don't kill in cold blood. They are cognitively incapable of a cold blooded killing. They kill for meat, territory, etc. They don't kill out of spite or hate.

I think the exception would be thosr orangutans that Goodall wrote about. They did some messee up stuff.. but they're a lot closer to han intellect than most species.

actually a male lion will kill all the cubs of the prior male when he takes over a new pride.

 

[YearoftheHusky]

Just saw it....Girlfriend is screaming for help (for Ruggs) totally unconcerned that someone just burned to death in a car because of Ruggs. Meanwhile Ruggs is sitting there talking to her....The level of indifference is mind numbing to me.

Right? Almost like, “come help him, he’s Henry Ruggs,” like that matters any more than that poor soul burning in front of them. It’s disgusting.

 

[husky429]

actually a male lion will kill all the cubs of the prior male when he takes over a new pride.

Yes. And that isn't vengeance, stupidity, or anything. The male lion doesn't think "f these guys. They could get in my way I'll kill them". It's an instinct.

Surplus killings and other weird/cruel stuff exists in the animal kingdom. It isn't cold-blooded killing. It's just the circle of life. Instinct. Evolutionary adaptations.

Congrats on joining the council of dimwits though. How you people can't get that animals aren't capable of complex rational thought it beyond me.

 

[Huskyforlife]

Compassion? For Ruggs? Did someone spike his drinks? Or did someone drop a heavy rock on his gas pedal? He's losing everything because of the poor decisions he's made, and she got the worst of it. You should save your compassion for the victim and her family.

 

[Mr. Wonderful]

Jeezum sometimes I wonder if the collective IQ of this place is less than a tortoise.

Yes I have watched too many hours of nat geo in my life.

No animals don't kill in cold blood. They are cognitively incapable of a cold blooded killing. They kill for meat, territory, etc. They don't kill out of spite or hate.

I think the exception would be thosr orangutans that Goodall wrote about. They did some messee up stuff.. but they're a lot closer to han intellect than most species.

What special meaning does "in cold blood" have?

Compared to the things I've witnessed mother nature do, I'm failing to understand why that distinction should be made?

 

[husky429]

What special meaning does "in cold blood" have?

Compared to the things I've witnessed mother nature do, I'm failing to understand why that distinction should be made?

It's the opposite of "heat of passion." Think cold, calculated, deliberate, ruthless, cruel, calm, without remorse. An animal can't kill in cold blood or in the heat of passion. They can't rationalize anything in that way. They just kill by instinct--they don't have critical thinking... unless you're one of those maniacal chimps I guess. It's super interesting to read about.

Gombe Chimpanzee War - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

A Brief History of the Gombe Chimpanzee War

How the brutal splintering of a primate community echoed human conflict.

www.discovermagazine.com

 

[Get a Job]

It isn't irrational--if anything it takes exceptional rationality to be compassionate towards those that have done reprehensible things, because your gut instinct is to punish

Saying "we're not animals" is irrelvant. Animals don't murder in cold blood, rape, or commit genocide either , so the idea that not being an animal is better somehow isn't a helpful point. They don't have any morality, so that can't do "wrong" in the sense that a human can, they can't do "right" either... they just "do."

Still waiting to hear WHY good people show compassion to people who do reprehensible things. I don't even disagree with you... I'm just not quite sure you have the ability to formulate a cohesive argument here... I'm asking for your opinion and all you're responding with is tu quoque.

This isn't a situation where it's a universal ethic. Unnecessary murder is bad. Rape is bad Helping old people with their taxes = good. Rescuing old dogs = good. Giving compassion to people who do bad things isn't some kind of obvious or nearly universal good. It needs to be explained. What purpose does giving compassion serve in this case?

You're not wrong... I made an ironic point. But you still haven't said anything of value other than "compassion good because we aren't animals". That's like saying "I like red because my coffee cup is white." You haven't explained why you like red. And you haven't said why people need to show compassion towards criminals to be fully human.

Ethical philosophers disagree with everything you say, even if they agree with you lol. I'm marrying one. But many would probably say that compassion (depending on how you define it) is appropriate when it doesn't deny justice for victims. For Suggs, that probably wouldn't disqualify him from receiving people's "compassion" in some way since he will be in the justice system. He will still be punished legally, but giving him compassion now is more likely to result in him overcoming his personal demons and becoming a productive member of society. <-- that was the answer to my question. Or at least an answer.

Although you weren't addressing me, here's my two cents: I don't claim it is good or right (in the ethical sense of the terms) to have compassion for people who do harm to others. The reason I jumped in with my original comment was to whine about what I perceive as hypocrisy. I get the impression that the majority of people who would say "tough guy" things about how Ruggs should be punished are the same people who would say that compassion for all people is morally good (probably because they were taught that in a religious context).

As a non-believer and staunch critic of religion, I am often told (either directly by individuals or by osmosis in society) that I am a morally defective person. It therefore grinds my gears when I perceive others to be acting/talking in a way that goes against their proclaimed morals, especially when I find myself in accordance said morals, as is the case in the present discussion.

TL;DR: Why is it good to have compassion for bad people? I dunno. I am not saying it is. But don't tell me compassion is a virtue and then casually write off a young man to waste his life away in prison (or worse).

 

[husky429]

Although you weren't addressing me, here's my two cents: I don't claim it is good or right (in the ethical sense of the terms) to have compassion for people who do harm to others. The reason I jumped in with my original comment was to whine about what I perceive as hypocrisy. I get the impression that the majority of people who would say "tough guy" things about how Ruggs should be punished are the same people who would say that compassion for all people is morally good (probably because they were taught that in a religious context).

As a non-believer and staunch critic of religion, I am often told (either directly by individuals or by osmosis in society) that I am a morally defective person. It therefore grinds my gears when I perceive others to be acting/talking in a way that goes against their proclaimed morals, especially when I find myself in accordance said morals, as is the case in the present discussion.

TL;DR: Why is it good to have compassion for bad people? I dunno. I am not saying it is. But don't tell me compassion is a virtue and then casually write off a young man to waste his life away in prison (or worse).

Re: the part I put in bold. SO TRUE, man. I've alluded to how fraggin crazy my family is... I've got 5 siblings-in-law, 3 are felons (1 for ACCOMPLICE TO MURDER), and one is currently awaiting trial for beating someone up with a tire iron while he was high. Obviously, the parents are not thrilled about that... but the amount of crap we took for not having a wedding, the shaming we get for not attending church weekly, that we don't participate in grace at family dinners when we go down south for visits is insane. I love them... they grew up dirt poor with no prospects... how my fiance was able to get out of that Appalachian s-hole and get a law degree and PhD is beyond me (there's the compassion! ).... but the last people who should be judging our actions are them.

The show "Midnight Mass" made me think about this a lot. Religious people who use religion as a crutch or a way to try to demonstrate their own morality are some of the most annoying kinds of people. You either do or don't do good things. Research pretty much unequivocally shows that religion doesn't affect morality in a positive way and if anything might have a slightly negative effect depending on how you measure it.

I think a lot of this argument comes down to semantics. We haven't really established a working definition of what we're referring to with compassion. There is definitely a lot of tough guys in the world that say "throw the book at 'em!" that would never follow through if it was someone in their family being treated that way. I'm pretty strongly in favor of fairly long sentences and a well-funded restorative justice program.

 

[Get a Job]

Re: the part I put in bold. SO TRUE, man. I've alluded to how fraggin crazy my family is... I've got 5 siblings-in-law, 3 are felons (1 for ACCOMPLICE TO MURDER), and one is currently awaiting trial for beating someone up with a tire iron while he was high. Obviously, the parents are not thrilled about that... but the amount of crap we took for not having a wedding, the shaming we get for not attending church weekly, that we don't participate in grace at family dinners when we go down south for visits is insane. I love them... they grew up dirt poor with no prospects... how my fiance was able to get out of that Appalachian s-hole and get a law degree and PhD is beyond me (there's the compassion! ).... but the last people who should be judging our actions are them.

The show "Midnight Mass" made me think about this a lot. Religious people who use religion as a crutch or a way to try to demonstrate their own morality are some of the most annoying kinds of people. You either do or don't do good things. Research pretty much unequivocally shows that religion doesn't affect morality in a positive way and if anything might have a slightly negative effect depending on how you measure it.

I think a lot of this argument comes down to semantics. We haven't really established a working definition of what we're referring to with compassion. There is definitely a lot of tough guys in the world that say "throw the book at 'em!" that would never follow through if it was someone in their family being treated that way. I'm pretty strongly in favor of fairly long sentences and a well-funded restorative justice program.

Sounds like a wild family situation!

All I mean by compassion is the difference between viewing a criminal as an animal who hurt someone and can therefore be dealt with as such vs. viewing a criminal as a human being with a potential for redemption. I advocate for the latter, and then we can argue about how to deal with the specifics of criminal justice.

 

[ucp990411]

Can someone explain to me why cars are made that can reach 156mph?