The Dark Passenger

[Sophus]

I've recently got into the TV show Dexter. If you're not familiar with it you should at least give it a try. It will draw you in. Promise.

A common theme in the show seems to be moral ambiguity and that everyone is both good and evil. This seems like a very cultural Christian view, almost like original sin. I'm sure that everyone pretends to be something they're not at times and that we all have the inner instinct to inflict harm which sometimes surfaces to our thoughts in anger, but that doesn't mean one ever acts on it. I have hard time believing everyone has a Dark Passenger.

Oh and I'm only on season 2 so don't spoil anything for me... or I will kill you!!!  

[PoopShoot]

I watched the first season and loved it, but I no longer have access to it.

[Ihateyoumike]

Oh and I'm only on season 2 so don't spoil anything for me... or I will kill you!!!  

Just be prepared to be really sad in season 3 when the busload of orphans drives off a cliff.

But no, amazing show. I can't wait for the newest episode tonight.

[The Magic Pudding]

Dexter has an urge to inflict harm because it makes him feel a high, and the rest of his life is numb.
I don't have such a dark passenger, causing harm gives me no joy.
I find it interesting people are able to accept a psychopath as the hero of the story.
Does the satisfaction of seeing the villain punished allow people to accept a truly fucked up character?
Do we enjoy vicariously meeting out the justice?
Does the catchy intro tune and Dexter's impeccable personal hygiene excuse the odd murder?
He is good with the kids.

I do enjoy Dexter and I don't usually watch crime shows, Life On Mars is the only other crime series I've watched in years.

[PoopShoot]

Nah.  I vicariously enjoy inflicting painful death on people.  Fuck I need to get some money and netflix that motherfucker.

[Sophus]

Dexter has an urge to inflict harm because it makes him feel a high, and the rest of his life is numb.
I don't have such a dark passenger, causing harm gives me no joy.
I find it interesting people are able to accept a psychopath as the hero of the story.
Does the satisfaction of seeing the villain punished allow people to accept a truly fucked up character?
Do we enjoy vicariously meeting out the justice?
Does the catchy intro tune and Dexter's impeccable personal hygiene excuse the odd murder?
He is good with the kids.

I do enjoy Dexter and I don't usually watch crime shows, Life On Mars is the only other crime series I've watched in years.

What if he only shot them instead of butchering them, would you feel different? The way I see it he is actually not that much different from other "heros" on TV other than that he enjoys the kill and has serial killer rituals. He's a serial killer who kills serial killers, therefore saves innocent lives.

[Asmodean]

when the busload of orphans drives off a cliff.

I'm SO getting it!  

[The Magic Pudding]

What if he only shot them instead of butchering them, would you feel different? The way I see it he is actually not that much different from other "heros" on TV other than that he enjoys the kill and has serial killer rituals. He's a serial killer who kills serial killers, therefore saves innocent lives.

I wouldn't want to know someone who enjoyed killing people by gun, knife or sabotaged school bus.
I wouldn't want to know some who enjoyed killing chickens, even though dead chickens are useful.
The plot says Dexter knows the villains are guilty, in real life this would be questionable.
Dexter doesn't seem to put any effort into gathering evidence to help the incompetent legal system do the job.

If you knew a Dexter would you tell the police?  
He wont hurt you, he has a code.
How about police who fabricate evidence?

[PoopShoot]

Dexter doesn't seem to put any effort into gathering evidence to help the incompetent legal system do the job.

Of course not.  If they were convicted, Dex wouldn't get to kill them.  He gathered evidence (at least in the first season he did), he just kept it to himself.

If you knew a Dexter would you tell the police?  

I'm not sure.  Maybe.

How about police who fabricate evidence?

Fabricated evidence isn't evidence.  Dexter gathered real evidence so that he would know a person was guilty.  Fabricating evidence doesn't help knowledge to be gained, it merely makes someone appear guilty regardless of whether they really are.

[The Magic Pudding]

Fabricated evidence isn't evidence.  Dexter gathered real evidence so that he would know a person was guilty.  Fabricating evidence doesn't help knowledge to be gained, it merely makes someone appear guilty regardless of whether they really are.

We have all seen the shows, the cop knows the bad guy did it, we know it and we know he'll do it again.
So why not plant an incriminating blood stained shirt?
But the problem is if too much power is given to a person it tends to get abused, not just for the good.
So many of those shows had the theme that an individual didn't have the right to "take justice into their own hands"
Dexter seems to have broken that convention.

I had a guy tell me once he came into a room and found a housemate molesting his children, in theory at least I think making that person dead, out of site of the children of course, but without delay would have been the best thing to do.

[PoopShoot]

We have all seen the shows, the cop knows the bad guy did it, we know it and we know he'll do it again.
So why not plant an incriminating blood stained shirt?

It seems to me that a cop who KNOWS that the bad guy did it has evidence.  I've seen shows where the evidence is presented and the jury fails to convict, in which case fabricated evidence probably won't help and is potentially something by which the defense can plant reasonable doubt, making planted evidence more detrimental than helpful.  The alternative to this is the "gut feeling" a cop has.  While this kind of intuition is often right, the cop doesn't KNOW the bad guy did it.  In the context of a fictional TV show, the cop could be psychic or something, in which case I could understand the premise of he KNOWS it, but can't prove it so he fabricates evidence, but I doubt that would have the same kind of fan appeal that Dexter does.  In real situations, however, I would consider the evidence fabricator to be dishonest, as he doesn't know without the evidence, whereas the serial killer hunter would at least be honest (assuming he gathered enough evidence to know his guys were guilty).

But the problem is if too much power is given to a person it tends to get abused, not just for the good.
So many of those shows had the theme that an individual didn't have the right to "take justice into their own hands"
Dexter seems to have broken that convention.

It's mindless entertainment.  In real life, nobody does have the right to take justice in their own hands, but rights aren't always congruent to morality.  I would say a guy killing serial killers is outside of his rights and deserving of prison, but that doesn't mean he's fulfilling his desire to kill in an immoral way.

I had a guy tell me once he came into a room and found a housemate molesting his children, in theory at least I thing making that person dead, out of site of the children of course, but without delay would have been the best thing to do.

Had it been me who personally saw someone molesting children, I probably would have killed the molester.  Were I to go to prison for it, I would understand and accept my sentence, but I would still feel morally justified in killing the guy.

[The Magic Pudding]

Had it been me who personally saw someone molesting children, I probably would have killed the molester.  Were I to go to prison for it, I would understand and accept my sentence, but I would still feel morally justified in killing the guy.

I don't think you would go to jail if you acted straight away.
The courts may have improved since I formed this idea, they probably treat kids better, maybe they give video evidence and don't have to face their abuser, but I'll stick with it for now.

[PoopShoot]

I don't think you would go to jail if you acted straight away.

In America, unless I killed him right in front of the kids, it would be premeditated murder, which is a life sentence.  Even if I killed him in front of the kids, I'd be charged, but it's the only way I'd potentially get off by jury misvote.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I don't think you would go to jail if you acted straight away.

In America, unless I killed him right in front of the kids, it would be premeditated murder, which is a life sentence.  Even if I killed him in front of the kids, I'd be charged, but it's the only way I'd potentially get off by jury misvote.

Jury nullification is your friend.

[PoopShoot]

I don't think you would go to jail if you acted straight away.

In America, unless I killed him right in front of the kids, it would be premeditated murder, which is a life sentence.  Even if I killed him in front of the kids, I'd be charged, but it's the only way I'd potentially get off by jury misvote.

Jury nullification is your friend.

Explain.