Cold blood or brutality

I am on the fence with this one. I believe both are severe, but am unable to determine which is worse. I hope to find enlightenment on this topic here.

I would have to say for sure, cold blooded "premeditated". As the premeditation alone makes it all the more horrific; And the prepetrator responsible.

Definately premeditated. That means that the person who commited the crime has thought about it and calculated every possible move that they are going to make. The fact that they took time to think and go over the crime just makes it eerie, in my opinion.

Also, this means that the person knows they are doing something wrong. That seperates them from being insane.

Cold blood, premeditated violence is without the doubt worse - after having time to contemplate your actions and still deciding it is what you should do then you're clearly not right in the head. Where as if you comit a crime on the spur of the moment out of intense emotion, crime of passion etc then I think it is understandable (although still completely wrong!), humans are capable of irrational thoughts but mostly common sense prevails before anything drastic occurs...some occassions it doesn't. Emotions are powerful and have huge influence on how we react.

Predmediated- the crime has been meticulously planned out so they are fully aware of what they are going to do before they do it. This is what is most likely to excite them the most, knowing what thye are about to do- much like we plan meeting a friend and if we are going somewhere nice we look forward to it. Same principle but with very different outcoems at the end of the event obviously.

Such things as a crime of passion may well be violent but if it something that was not planne dand took place on the spur of the moment, while no less acceptable or less harmful /devestating, it to me i marginally worse than the act being premeditated.

Or that they may get away with it; according to the planning.

Hands Down...Premeditated

People always "think" about wanting to kill someone like a boss or sibling etc but the people that plan it and follow through are sicker in the head than the ones that act based on a spur of the moment emotional outburst.

yes actuaklly, thats a very good point

Whats to be on the fence about? Planning the crime is always going to be worse then if you just acted on impulse. It shows a degree of intellect and control that is chilling in comparison.

One of the definitions of brutality (or brutal) is cruel and cold-blooded. Others, accurate & incisive.

Sooo, you're on the fence about how to define something properly?

Because I do not deny that spontaneous acts can be cruel, harsh, etc., but seems like not all are necessary "brutal" by definition, strictly speaking.

I would mostly agree with everyone above, premeditated.

On the other hand it really depends how far you want to go into this.

There is quite a bit of difference between brutality in the primal sense and brutality for the sake of being malicious.

One can be a simple fight or flight response.

The other can be cold blooded violence which may or may not lead us in a round about way to something "premeditated". The one is pretty much answered in the above posts. The second one opens a whole warehouse full of monkeys.

I have to ask are you asking a general question based purely on the definitions of the phrases in question or going more for an analysis of the two based on the human psyche?

I agree with the majority, particularly because in my spam folder, I have so many examples of how conscious adultery is worse than the spontaneous variety. There are whole websites dedicated to cheating wives, in other words women who deliberately seek partners to have affairs with. This is done with the full knowledge that they are fooling around with others and to my mind this is criminal and worse than somebody doing it in the spur of the moment.

So, who said that cold-blooded, and premeditated was fast, painless, and clean?

If I may express myself on this topic. I agree with the majority when I look at the two acts from a point of view of ethics.
But from the point of view of say psychotherapy or personal psychological well-being, I'd say that the "hot-blooded" variant is worse.
I believe that true for both the therapy, which needs the client to affect unconscious motions to be able to avert impulsive behavior in the future, and also the well-being of the person, as he/she has to live and deal with a multitude of consequences that he/she is not prepared for.
Also the momentous trauma at the time of the crime or shortly afterwards I think tends to be greater, hence the name "hot-blooded".