[–] TAThatBoomerang [S] 0 points 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) 4.6 years ago (edited 4.6 years ago)
If you're really good at scaring people, could you hypothetically kill people by shock without even physically hurting them?
EDIT: changed "chock" to "shock"
[–] lordtyp0 0 points 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) 4.6 years ago (edited 4.6 years ago)
Eh? Chock = Choke?
I think killing someone by default is hurting them, if asking for hiding physical evidence... I'll just bow out. Probably on enough lists as is.
Edit: Just realized 'chock' was shock.
http://www.medicinenet.com/shock/page2.htm
I guess extreme emotional distress could do it... I would think anyone that aimed for doing that do another being would deserve the death penalty by default.
[–] TAThatBoomerang [S] 0 points 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) 4.6 years ago
Oh sorry, I make that spelling mistake all the time. I meant to write "shock". (Chock is the Swedish spelling of the word.)
[–] lordtyp0 ago (edited ago)
Eh? Chock = Choke?
I think killing someone by default is hurting them, if asking for hiding physical evidence... I'll just bow out. Probably on enough lists as is.
Edit: Just realized 'chock' was shock.
http://www.medicinenet.com/shock/page2.htm
I guess extreme emotional distress could do it... I would think anyone that aimed for doing that do another being would deserve the death penalty by default.
[–] TAThatBoomerang [S] ago
Oh sorry, I make that spelling mistake all the time. I meant to write "shock". (Chock is the Swedish spelling of the word.)