Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Prisoner Who Briefly Died Argues That He’s Served His Life Sentence

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 99 posts

Re: A Prisoner Who Briefly Died Argues That He’s Served His Life Sentence

#11

Post by zozbot234 »

kenjackson wrote: post #8
bleh123 wrote: post #2

I'm not fully convinced the courts got this one completely right. This is a very interesting legal argument and lays emphasis on the need for legislators to express their intentions in writing more fully as opposed to writing laws with such loose and widely applicable terms such as "Life" without giving the term or their intent in using it more context. If, as the Judge argues, that "he did not legally die as his pre…

Legal and medical definitions of death I’ve seen include the terms “permanent” and/or “irreversible”. The prisoner being alive would imply that he never actually died, at least not medically or legally.

I don't think this is correct. People have been declared legally dead simply due to being missing for a long time, and there's nothing "permanent" or "irreversible" about being a missing person - sometimes they show up again.

Re: A Prisoner Who Briefly Died Argues That He’s Served His Life Sentence

#14

Post by MereInterest »

zozbot234 wrote: post #11
kenjackson wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Legal and medical definitions of death I’ve seen include the terms “permanent” and/or “irreversible”. The prisoner being alive would imply that he never actually died, at least not medically or legally.

I don't think this is correct. People have been declared legally dead simply due to being missing for a long time, and there's nothing "permanent" or "irreversible" about being a missing person - sometimes they show up again.

There is a big difference between being dead and being declared dead. One is a fact about the universe, and the other is a fact about what somebody said about the universe. Seeing somebody who was dead and is now alive is cause to start a religion. Seeing somebody who was declared dead and is now alive is cause to doubt that initial declaration.

Re: A Prisoner Who Briefly Died Argues That He’s Served His Life Sentence

#15

Post by bleh123 »

kenjackson wrote: post #8
bleh123 wrote: post #2

I'm not fully convinced the courts got this one completely right. This is a very interesting legal argument and lays emphasis on the need for legislators to express their intentions in writing more fully as opposed to writing laws with such loose and widely applicable terms such as "Life" without giving the term or their intent in using it more context. If, as the Judge argues, that "he did not legally die as his pre…

Legal and medical definitions of death I’ve seen include the terms “permanent” and/or “irreversible”. The prisoner being alive would imply that he never actually died, at least not medically or legally.

I respectfully disagree. There are conflicting provisions under law, but the widely accepted standard is a declaration "by a qualified medical professional"[1]As another comment here helpfully points out, there are scenarios such a person going missing for a legally mandated number of years before being declared legally dead[2]

[1] http://tiny.cc/mbzzfz [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_death

Re: A Prisoner Who Briefly Died Argues That He’s Served His Life Sentence

#18

Post by TomMarius »

harimau777 wrote: post #10

It seems to me that defining clinical death as the loss of heart beat and breathing is outdated and it should instead be defined as the cessation of higher brain activity.[1] Alternately, it seems to me like referring to that as death is playing semantics. It seems to me that the defining feature of death is that you cannot come back from it[2]. I'd be interested to hear other perspectives or if I might be overlookin…

I am sure if the God exists they don't need an exception in our law

Re: A Prisoner Who Briefly Died Argues That He’s Served His Life Sentence

#19

Post by bjt2n3904 »

harimau777 wrote: post #10

It seems to me that defining clinical death as the loss of heart beat and breathing is outdated and it should instead be defined as the cessation of higher brain activity.[1] Alternately, it seems to me like referring to that as death is playing semantics. It seems to me that the defining feature of death is that you cannot come back from it[2]. I'd be interested to hear other perspectives or if I might be overlookin…

An interesting point I heard on [2], Tim Keller if I remember right. Is isn't that God is "violating" the laws of nature, he's restoring things to the way they would have been without the fall in the garden.

Re: A Prisoner Who Briefly Died Argues That He’s Served His Life Sentence

#20

Post by paulcole »

bleh123 wrote: post #2

I'm not fully convinced the courts got this one completely right. This is a very interesting legal argument and lays emphasis on the need for legislators to express their intentions in writing more fully as opposed to writing laws with such loose and widely applicable terms such as "Life" without giving the term or their intent in using it more context. If, as the Judge argues, that "he did not legally die as his pre…

Strongly disagree. Just avoid the mental gymnastics and think like a reasonable person:

If you are currently walking and talking then it is obvious that you have not died.

Alternatively, can a person have more than one life? Unless this is Mario Brothers, no.

This may change in the future with new technology but currently death is a permanent state not a temporary one.

Post reply on HN