How far would you go? Game show tortures man to death

#1
#2
I'm surprised they didn't throw the towel in and ask the Spams for help.
 
#3
#4
I'd be more interested in the reasons why the minority who refused did so. Was it religious, humanitarian, moralistic or too squeamish?

The ones that carried on should be prosecuted to the extent of the law and beheaded. They were, after all, over 10 years old and fully aware of their actions.
 
#5
BrandySoured said:
I'd be more interested in the reasons why the minority who refused did so. Was it religious, humanitarian, moralistic or too squeamish?

The ones that carried on should be prosecuted to the extent of the law and beheaded. They were, after all, over 10 years old and fully aware of their actions.
My bold, all the same thing.
 
#6
Can we start this with the Big Brother contestants?
 
#7
As far as I am aware they have been banned now by the relevant psychological bodies as they had a major effect upon those inflicting the "torture" who in later test were found to have been traumatised by their actions, some ending up with their own psychological problems as a result.
 
#8
GrizzlyPanda said:
BrandySoured said:
I'd be more interested in the reasons why the minority who refused did so. Was it religious, humanitarian, moralistic or too squeamish?

The ones that carried on should be prosecuted to the extent of the law and beheaded. They were, after all, over 10 years old and fully aware of their actions.
My bold, all the same thing.
No. You don't need religion to have the other three. Also you don't need to be moralistic and have the other three...

You see where this is going don't you?
 
#10
wonder is it is possible to apply on someone else's behalf....oh the sound of electrodes on the gonads must be music to the ears. :twisted:
 
#11
BrandySoured said:
GrizzlyPanda said:
BrandySoured said:
I'd be more interested in the reasons why the minority who refused did so. Was it religious, humanitarian, moralistic or too squeamish?

The ones that carried on should be prosecuted to the extent of the law and beheaded. They were, after all, over 10 years old and fully aware of their actions.
My bold, all the same thing.
No. You don't need religion to have the other three. Also you don't need to be moralistic and have the other three...

You see where this is going don't you?
To get serious for a second, whether a person is aware of it or not - they are all rooted in the same social conditioning. You don't need to have a "religion", but religion is a prime influence making up the fundamental base of the social norm in each society, including the base for morality etc, which spurs off to humanitarianism, and all jump in for squeamishness.
 
#12
Noel did it properly.
On 13 November 1986, self-employed hod carrier Michael Lush was killed during his first rehearsal for another live stunt. The stunt, called "Hang 'em High", involved bungee jumping from an exploding box suspended from a 120ft-high crane. The carabiner clip attaching his bungee rope to the crane sprang loose from its eyebolt during the jump. He died instantly of multiple injuries, and the Breakfast Show was scrapped on 15 November after Edmonds resigned.
 
#13
It's a flawed experiment, I would have done it (if a financial prize was offered) because I would assume in these letigious days that it couldn't possibly be real. And I would have been right.
 
#14
GrizzlyPanda said:
BrandySoured said:
GrizzlyPanda said:
BrandySoured said:
I'd be more interested in the reasons why the minority who refused did so. Was it religious, humanitarian, moralistic or too squeamish?

The ones that carried on should be prosecuted to the extent of the law and beheaded. They were, after all, over 10 years old and fully aware of their actions.
My bold, all the same thing.
No. You don't need religion to have the other three. Also you don't need to be moralistic and have the other three...

You see where this is going don't you?
To get serious for a second, whether a person is aware of it or not - they are all rooted in the same social conditioning. You don't need to have a "religion", but religion is a prime influence making up the fundamental base of the social norm in each society, including the base for morality etc, which spurs off to humanitarianism, and all jump in for squeamishness.
You talk funny.
 
#15
06FA56Paderborn said:
As far as I am aware they have been banned now by the relevant psychological bodies as they had a major effect upon those inflicting the "torture" who in later test were found to have been traumatised by their actions, some ending up with their own psychological problems as a result.
If they weren't sadistic little sh1ts, and had the courage in their own morals to say "er, actually I am not going to electrocute this man for $1,000,000" they wouldn't have the problems though.....
 
#16
Bring it over here - voting public with the buttons, politicians attached across the 3 phase. You'd make a fortune on pay-per-view! Never mind the pay-to-play.

And we'd get some straight answers off the mendacious shits for once.
 
#17
chocolate_frog said:
06FA56Paderborn said:
As far as I am aware they have been banned now by the relevant psychological bodies as they had a major effect upon those inflicting the "torture" who in later test were found to have been traumatised by their actions, some ending up with their own psychological problems as a result.
If they weren't sadistic little sh1ts, and had the courage in their own morals to say "er, actually I am not going to electrocute this man for $1,000,000" they wouldn't have the problems though.....
Would I press the button on someone for £1,000,000. Depends on who the person is - some I would press it for free.
 
#18
chocolate_frog

I tend to agree with you here, I would hope the majority of people would have a similar thought, though the circumstances of the original experiment were somewhat different to simply being paid (I can't remember the details but naguere put in a reference to it earlier) or Mr 06 can look it up for my in her psychology text books when she gets home.

I do find it hard to believe that anyone taking part in a TV programme could really believe they would be allowed to harm someone (even in France), if they did just shows how odd some people are these days.
 
#20
06FA56Paderborn said:
chocolate_frog

I tend to agree with you here, I would hope the majority of people would have a similar thought, though the circumstances of the original experiment were somewhat different to simply being paid (I can't remember the details but naguere put in a reference to it earlier) or Mr 06 can look it up for me in her psychology text books when she gets home.

I do find it hard to believe that anyone taking part in a TV programme could really believe they would be allowed to harm someone (even in France), if they did just shows how odd some people are these days.
Get her to look up 'sigmund freud' will your at it.......
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top