Why is revenge acceptable for Shikamaru and Team Asuma

[HiddenWarrior]

Shikamaru wanted revenge.

Please elaborate. By saying this what point are you trying to make?

Already stated that the revenge was a form of justice that didn't threaten to corrupt/change the moral fiber of his being/character like Sasuke's & Naruto's.

Sasuke's Revenge = Turns him into a murdering/treacherous tyrant

Naruto's Revenge = Going against his character & beliefs he holds dearly

Shikamaru's Revenge = Justice for Akuma's death & nothing more (aside from crippling the biggest international criminal organization)

 

[V h o]

Murder in law has more than just two degrees . You over simplify with your own perspective

Yes and the only difference is mediation or not. Either way, the crook would be pre-mediated since he brought a weapon to the bank and had the intention to use it. lel

Funny how you talk about perspective yet ignore the majority's perspective just to satisfy your minorities' perspective. Lol

 

[Nagi]

Cept without evidence you can't prove that BS, also a hate crime is a prejudice motivated crime against member/s of a certain social group

lol Shit don't need to be prove. Just need to talk out of your ass for some media attention then drop the case. Well depend on your goal. People who're innocent can be discredited badly by good lawyers. I know that is not the point here. But okay. Im trying to remember this tv show i saw on Netflix, dude was charge with hate crime against smart people. It was stupid funny.

 

[Nagi]

Nah, I already knew that, though, people would have to have kindergarten level IQs to fall for such an argument.

lol It not even the IQs level that matter. It just some people lack self-awareness or just fall for a lawyer that can sell water to a well.

 

[KingHashirama]

Please elaborate. By saying this what point are you trying to make?

Already stated that the revenge was a form of justice that didn't threaten to corrupt/change the moral fiber of his being/character like Sasuke's & Naruto's.

o-o form of justice? no, he wanted to kill Hidan, because he killed Asuma. "justice" would involve law or something. Shikamaru wanted revenge for the death of his teacher, it was personal to him.

 

[Nagi]

Yes and the only difference is mediation or not. Either way, the crook would be pre-mediated since he brought a weapon to the bank and had the intention to use it. lel

Funny how you talk about perspective yet ignore the majority's perspective just to satisfy your minorities' perspective. Lol

Them minorities' perspective can sometimes....well rarely overcome the majority's perspective.

 

[Corvo]

Glad more people see that kishi contradicted hisself. Revenge is revenge

What Shikamaru did wasn't justice at all

 

[Darth Uchiha]

o-o form of justice? no, he wanted to kill Hidan, because he killed Asuma. "justice" would involve law or something. Shikamaru wanted revenge for the death of his teacher, it was personal to him.

It was personal, but, who cares, it wasn't fueled purely by hatred, Hidan was an irredeemable mass murderer who was also a threat, Sasuke's hate was wrong because it got too obsessive, and Naruto's just wasn't in his character.

 

[TrollKing]

Yes and the only difference is mediation or not. Either way, the crook would be pre-mediated since he brought a weapon to the bank and had the intention to use it. lel

Funny how you talk about perspective yet ignore the majority's perspective just to satisfy your minorities' perspective. Lol

Actually no, unless the robber confessed he gonna kill regardless, its not pre mediated murder and it won't be considered as intentional killing based on the situation. This judgement is typical and its far from being minority

 

[V h o]

Them minorities' perspective can sometimes....well rarely overcome the majority's perspective.

I mean the Crook's perspective should outweigh the established legal system, am i right lel


Edit:

Actually no, unless the robber confessed he gonna kill regardless, its not pre mediated murder and it won't be considered as intentional killing based on the situation. This judgement is typical and its far from being minority

lol you don't need a confession to prove mediation. The crook bringing a weapon to a bank proves mediation (he had thought/option to not use/bring said weapon).

 

[KingHashirama]

It was personal, but, who cares, it wasn't fueled purely by hatred, Hidan was an irredeemable mass murderer who was also a threat, Sasuke's hate was wrong because it got too obsessive, and Naruto's just wasn't in his character.

but it was fueled by hatred... thats why he wanted to be the one to kill Hidan.


but yea i know they had different types of "revenge" motive. Sasuke was just going into it.

 

[SIR HERDERP PRESIDERP SDO]

Justice is serving what is due, revenge is not.

Sasuke wants retribution on Konoha which would include those without acquiescence of the Uchiha Massacre aka the innocents, therefore it is not justice but revenge.

Naruto taking it out on Obito would not be giving due to the good-hearted kid that was manipulated and corrupted by Madara, therefore it is also not justice but revenge.

 

[Darth Uchiha]

Justice is serving what is due, revenge is not.

Sasuke wants retribution on Konoha which would include those without acquiescence of the Uchiha Massacre aka the innocents, therefore it is not justice but revenge.

Naruto taking it out on Obito would not be giving due to the good-hearted kid that was manipulated and corrupted by Madara, therefore it is also not justice but revenge.

With Obito, you gotta admit, manipulated or not, that would be friggin justice (and I'm an Obito fan) however, that's just not who Naruto is, he'd have never killed Nagato, that's why he stopped, because fundamentally, Naruto isn't a vengeful person.

 

[KingHashirama]

alrighty i'm leaving the thread, so i can go play my star wars game xD

 

[Nagi]

With Obito, you gotta admit, manipulated or not, that would be friggin justice (and I'm an Obito fan) however, that's just not who Naruto is, he'd have never killed Nagato, that's why he stopped, because fundamentally, Naruto isn't a vengeful person.

Hold up! Okay I guess we gonna forget the fact that he brutally killed kakuzu with that shuriken rasengan. We just gonna look the other way.

 

[Darkakatsuki]

Kakashi talked shit about Sasuke's revenge cuz Sasuke's revenge includes the village, something Kakashi wants to protect, while Hidan and Kakuzu were already targets so why not?

False. Kakashi talked shit about Sasuke's revenge even when it was just about Itachi, you know, when he tired Sasuke up with ninja wire and gave him a bs speach after Sasuke's first encounter with the sound 4.

 

[RikudouMadara]

[video=youtube_share;Or8G_jDcLNo]http://youtu.be/Or8G_jDcLNo[/video]

XD

 

[V h o]

Hold up! Okay I guess we gonna forget the fact that he brutally killed kakuzu with that shuriken rasengan. We just gonna look the other way.

Kakuzu isn't a criminal at all, and was not going to kidnap Naruto and then proceed to kill him. Nope, Kakuzu was brutally outnumbered and was not given a trial; he was innocent.

 

[Darkakatsuki]

But did Naruto kill Nagato? No. He overcame the want for revenge. Nagato committed suicide bringing back the people he killed. He never killed out of revenge. Sasuke on the other hand....

Don't make Naruto seem like a saint when he aint. The only reason Naruto didn't kill Nagato was coz of valid talk no jutsu from Nagato. Nagato made Naruto's actions seem hypocrital because Nagato asked him what the difference was between what he did to Konoha for what they did to Ame (destroyed Ame for their wars against Iwa by using them as a battlefield) and what Naruto was trying to do to him because of what he did to Jiraiya (although that was honestly and literally self defense as Jiraiya was the one who invaded and attacked).

 

[TrollKing]

I mean the Crook's perspective should outweigh the established legal system, am i right lel


Edit:



lol you don't need a confession to prove mediation. The crook bringing a weapon to a bank proves mediation (he had thought/option to not use/bring said weapon).

Bringing a gun to the bank is not a crime of premeditated murder. It's a crime called armed robbery