Original link: https://onojyun.com/2022/07/05/6262/
△ 186｜The Game of Love
Some time ago, there was a hotly discussed news, which was used as a talk after dinner: roughly speaking, there was a couple in India who had an incestuous relationship, and they met to jump into a river to die in love. As a result, the man regretted the fake jump at the last moment, while the woman found herself being “deceived” after jumping into the river and swam to the river bank to call the police.
In fact, this kind of news is not surprising for a long time, and because it happened in India, this news is a ridicule and “As long as B is proved wrong, then A must be right.” Most Chinese netizens think logic, It also has a different “realistic meaning”. Let’s go back to the story itself. As for what kind of crowd climax this kind of news makes, we will talk about it next time.
In the process of studying the law, there are often many judicial issues that “coexist by chance” that need to be discussed and analyzed. For example, if two people commit suicide together, one of them survives and the other dies. In judicial application, how should such a case be defined? Logically speaking, we should start from the link where two people meet to commit suicide, and determine whether both parties have assistance, their subjective desire to survive, and whether there are various factors that allow others to commit suicide. At the same time, there are all kinds of “coincidences” in such topics, for example, one of the bottles of pesticides is counterfeit and inferior, or the one who survived and divided a bottle of pesticides but was afraid of suffering and did not drink enough “lethal dose” ”, or one of the parties wanted to see if the other party had really drank the pesticide, and when the other party foamed at the mouth, he felt ugly and gave up suicide, etc.
Of course, some people will be surprised, what kind of discussion meaning these illusory “coincidences” constitute the topic of discussion, it has no practical effect on the actual judicial application at all, more like a group of lawyers aloof “self-hearted”. Here I have to come forward and admit it – indeed. Because in the actual judicial application, the first level of practical application that Chinese people value should be “the dead are the greatest” , which I also discussed in “The Crime of Creating Conditions for Suicide by Others” .
Under the highest principle that “the dead are the greatest”, which can break through the application of justice, two people who commit suicide, one survives and the other dies, is a bit unreasonable in terms of emotion and reason – the living person is morally The “betrayal” of the promise, at the level of “dead is greater”, he is the culprit behind the death of the client, at the legal level – oh, we don’t need to use the legal level at all, they won’t listen to a lot of laws People’s “self-healing”, to analyze the relationship between the parties, assistance or not, intention to die, etc.
“Two people commit suicide, one survives.” For most people, the essence is the same as “two people walk together, one frees a single.” “One person is exempted from the bill”, then who the hell is exempted from the bill, there must be someone to enjoy this “discount”, in fact, the two of them can’t change their minds to think from a different angle, is it considered that both of them have spent half of it? price. Since it is said that one person is exempted from the bill, which means that this kind of discount can only be enjoyed exclusively-then if the party concerned brings his friends to consume, and in the end he does not spend a penny, his friends will naturally feel that he is not. Was “sold”, why is this kind of discount not enjoyed by myself. The same is true of “two people commit suicide, one survives”. It was clearly stated that two people died together, but one person survived. Although this “discount” was not explicitly stated in the agreement before suicide, it was enjoyed. This “preferential” person naturally has a new understanding and a new beginning. Of course, if a person does enjoy such a “preferential”, he must also bear the pressure from the highest adjustment rule of “the dead is the greatest”.
The most absurd thing is that two people enjoy the “discount”, one person does not want to die, the other cannot die, and the two people who originally agreed to die in love want to prove to the world that they are the true love that cannot be separated. become enemies and each other’s sins. At this time, neither of them died, but a “sinner” must be found. What should we do? Then the person who is “closest to death” is regarded as the victim, and the other person who does not want to die but violates the contract between the two is regarded as the sinner – this is quite scientific, and the definition of “incident” is known. .
I pondered hard for a while, when is it that people would rather live up to the uncontested supreme rule of “the dead are the greatest”?
A person drives a car and knocks down a person. Do you think the driver of the car wants this person to be “hit to death in one breath, or a hundred times” or to “hit half to death and save his life, but he wants to be a sinner who pays for his sins for the rest of his life.” ? This topic is not something that can be discussed publicly. Everyone has an answer, but it is a bit difficult for them to tell the answer and the reason, because the answer does not conform to the basic values of a harmonious society.
At this time, you will find that “the dead are the greatest” is indeed the highest criterion that Chinese people love and use to adjust and instruct others, but it does have a very strong “blocking”. If a person is hit by an accident, his death will be converted into a specific amount of compensation according to the cold law; but if a person is hit half-dead, he cannot be converted at the moment, because He needs an injury appraisal, a negotiation, a tearful reassessment of how important his existence is on one side, an absolute choice between cruelty and kindness on the other side because there is no compromise… It is no wonder that some people are eager to “the dead are the greatest”.
It’s a pity, now we can only see people being forced to sign the “No Suicide Pledge” , but no one recognizes the legal effect of the “No Accountability Pledge for Suicide Survivors”, or they don’t want to admit it, but What they actually hoped was not that they were really dead, but that the person who promised to stay with them for the rest of their lives lived on, and lived to love the world they lived in even more.
Is that so? I don’t think anyone will admit it.
This article is reproduced from: https://onojyun.com/2022/07/05/6262/
This site is for inclusion only, and the copyright belongs to the original author.