is it okay for me to be an arsonist if i don't set fire to anything that would harm anyone or myself??
2006-10-13 09:52:30 · 23 answers · asked by ciaran_m_o 2 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
yes, as long as u don't harm urslef! and don't get to addicted!
2006-10-13 09:54:32 · answer #1 · answered by Grey_Sweater 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I think.... probably not... because in some way it will always be upsetting someone?
Because even if you were in a large open field, where the smoke and fire wouldn't bother anyone... you would have to burn trees or wood or something.. which obviously would have some kind of impact on nature/global warming and aesthetics?!
Tough question that, I guess if you could burn something that would have no impact on nature, that didn't belong to anyone, that did leave any kind of remnants then maybe.
For now though. I suggest, burning candles and embark on a career in pyrotechnics! Controlled safe pyromaniac fun. yeah.
2006-10-13 16:57:29 · answer #2 · answered by Erin G 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, it is very addictive behavior.
And it is always dangerous, even in a container--part of the buzz is the danger and when you get no buzz, you'll have to up the danger.
\Why not do something useful with your time?
Try out being a FIREMAN if you like fires so much! They have to set fires sometimes to practice, and to back-fire.
2006-10-13 17:03:16 · answer #3 · answered by Lottie W 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, it isn't healthy to have a fascination with fire. Plus, how do YOU know nobody will be harmed? What if the fire gets away from you?
2006-10-13 16:55:21 · answer #4 · answered by Jim P 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I suppose so, but remember you are harming others if you set their possessions on fire or if you even make them fear damage.
There's really not a lot left that you could burn on that condition
2006-10-13 16:55:24 · answer #5 · answered by SteveT 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You can contain your fire to some degree but to say you have absolute control over your fire is kinda unrealistic using conventional materials.
2006-10-13 16:54:53 · answer #6 · answered by leikevy 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, if the potential to harm someone still exists. You're playing with fire. You cannot guarantee the results.
2006-10-13 16:54:13 · answer #7 · answered by Cary Grant 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
no, because you dont know what could happen. It is illegal and fireman have better thing to do than putting out fires started on purpose as they may have serious incidents to attend to!
2006-10-13 16:54:44 · answer #8 · answered by Sara P 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Whoa "sylentreverie" that sounds a little mental.
You should take some kinda pryo tect class.
2006-10-14 04:50:07 · answer #9 · answered by lilith 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'd start by setting fire to your spelling of controversial.
2006-10-13 18:57:14 · answer #10 · answered by Albert Hall 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No dipstick. If you start a fire, the local fire brigade will have to come and extinguish it. Sometimes firemen die doing this.
2006-10-13 16:56:09 · answer #11 · answered by guernsey_donkey2 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋