[Jack_Spade]

I like to quote Heinlein in regard to such moral questions:
"Morals — all correct moral laws — derive from the instinct to survive. Moral behavior is survival behavior above the individual level."

Hunting and neutralizing infected is moral since they are a serious threat to the individual and the human society as a whole. They are predators threatening normal sapients - not by choice but by design. This is what ironically differentiates them from the psychotic mage. They literally can't survive without harming others - their will to survive conflicts with normal humans will to survive. It's not evil but a necessity for both sides to neutralize the other.

[Senko]

I am more of a treat it on a case by case basis, remember infected rights does not equal infected can kill freely. If they have rights they also have responsibilities and protections, that is the vampire who feeds on willing victims (fatal disease patient take the vampire assisted suicide option) sense has the same rights and protections as you, the vampire who kills for the pleasure as much as the feed has the same right to arrest and a fair trial before sentencing. Heck look at augmentation. Any cyberware or bioware permanently lowers your essence as well if your willing the vampire sucks up 1 essence and then you get those shiny new cybereyes/arm/sleep regulator implanted. With or without the vampire you lose the essence permanently for your new augments its just by feeding the vampire for a month you get the hole first AND say a 10-15% discount on purchase price.

Not all infected are the same there are (those who have gone feral) are a danger to themselves and others who may need to be contained, those who have retained their senses but embraces a "I am greater than you" mindset eating and killing because they believe the laws no longer apply to them and find it fun who should be punished UNDER the legal system of their area, those who have retained their senses and try their best to avoid giving into their new needs who may well need protection from those trying to kill them because they are infected. Which is partly why there is a strong infected rights movement in the first place. Its very easy to apply a monster + fire = yay mindset in a black and white them and us world view. Its not so easy when your son has had his life saved by a young girl you always liked (in the she'd make a good daughter in law sense) who has been infected and changed because she deliberately sacrificed herself to save him and who is determined to fight her own disease and only feed on the willing and never enough to kill or even deliberately walked into the sunlight and commited suicide because she was afraid of what she  might become. If only there'd been a cure, other option developed.

Then of course there's going to be those who are only fighting it in case they get infected, those who buy into the "vampire sparkly hunky guy" view of things and want to become one, those who have ethical and moral concerns about the slippery slope of if you start slaughtering people because of this where do you go from there? Serial killers, criminally insane, those who have anger management issues and lack the self control to not kill someone in anger at a bar fight?

I'd also like to point something interesting about your argument Jack . . .

Hunting and neutralizing infected is moral since they are a serious threat to the individual and the human society as a whole. They are predators threatening normal sapients - not by choice but by design. This is what ironically differentiates them from the psychotic mage. They literally can't survive without harming others - their will to survive conflicts with normal humans will to survive. It's not evil but a necessity for both sides to neutralize the other.

An infected, any infected is forced to feed by changes in their mind and body by the disease its not a choice its a need. Many shadowrunners (pink mohawks especially) are also a serious threat to the individual and human society as a whole they are predators threatening normal sapients, they also can't survive without harming others (its how they make money) and their will to survive conflicts with normal metahumans in a lot of cases. Which seems worse? Someone who has to feed on essence because their infected but chooses to only take it from willing donors who are dying from incurable diseases and just want the pain to stop, one last enjoyable release from pain and suffering or someone who is not infected but enjoy's killing everyone at their run sight, who in fact takes pride on killing every single guard, employee, dog or just random passer by for the thrill?

Also on a purely personal level as someone who likes playing a fox shifter or elven mage this whole kill them because they're mosnters hits a little close to home as a lot of "humanis" clubs have the same view about me and want to kill me as a monster, or cut me up to see how I work.

[Jack_Spade]

Yeah, that's why I wrote "ironical". It's not a question of fault or sin, but of need. The infected are an invasive species. They need to be quarantined or killed (which is why I wrote neutralized not exterminated).

The comparison with the runner lifestyle falls short: Runners are criminals, but they aren't infectious. That's why they aren't a threat to society as a whole. Letting infected run free is a recipe for disaster. Relying on the individuals commitment not to spread it or to violate other sapients is not a broadly applicable policy.

Quarantine zones won't let people out who claim they aren't infected with Ebola - no matter if it's true. From the individual perspective it might seem cruel, but for the survival of the society it is crucial.

[Senko]

Given some of the fiction I've seen the running lifestyle is very contagious . My point though was more along the lines of which is worse someone with a need to kill/eat people that tries to fight it and only take what's given genuinely freely or someone who kills/eats out of choice to do so? The vampire who eats the essence that would be lost to cyber/bioware anyway or the normal human who murders people in the backwoods and roasts their ribs up to enjoy a nice rack of sam?

Also on a side note I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that infected can eat any meat/blood/etc diseases, toxcity and the like don't affect them at all.

On a slightly off topic note how did the whole disease originate anyway? I know its a magic virus that appeared with awakening but does anyone know the original patient zero for it?

On a scary thought given its getting worse perhaps its like the metahuman variants in that there is a HMHVV pure strain for a peak mana period and all we've seen so far is the early symptoms as the natural environement slowly becomes saturated enough to sustain it. Just like as first you got orks then as mana got high enough you got the Oni. First you get the vampires, then you get the nosferatu, then you get the wamphyri (elven variant) and when the magic is high enough even the weakest HMHVV sufferer is a nigh unstoppable monster and you don't want to meet the sufferers of strain IV.

[MijRai]

I will point out the only Strain that has to kill people is Strain I- all of the others can feed on dead flesh/bone without ever harming a single hair on someone's head. 

Only Strain I Infected have Essence Drain.  They are also the rarest of Infected, because their method of spreading the disease is rather hit-or-miss, all in all.  I think they're about one in a million, with Bruckner-Langer strain being even rarer (about seven hundred and fifty total in Shadowrun currently, which is one in ten million people or so)

There is no known Patient Zero, because the disease was lurking in the shadows for years before it was identified.  It was even active before the Awakening as most people know it (the Mayan Calendar one). 

I also sort of doubt there will be more Strain Ia showing up, because it's so rare.  It'd be practically unique expressions for the very few, very unlucky victims.  And Banshee is the elven variant of HMHVV Strain I.  Strain II is Harvesters. 

[Senko]

Really I could have sworn there was a mention somewhere of nosferatu and muquata being the only two known variants of some strain with rumours of a hideously powerful elven one? That was what I refering to anyone as nosferatu is to the vampire so too is wamphyiri to the banshee.

[Dwagonzhan]

I remember a little spiel I had an NPC deliver back in 3rd edition on the subject of "Ghoul's Rights" (or those of HMHVV infected at large).
He was an MIT&T Biologist (specializing in Awakened/Para-biology) speaking before the UCAS Congress.
I've had to paraphrase it, as the original document with my notes has been lost to the wiles of time (and a broken thumb drive).


HMHVV by its nature is self-terminating in the long run.
If it spreads too fast (and given how overtly virulent it is, that is entirely possible) it will kills off its food source through two self-compounding vectors (consumption OR conversion).

Ignoring issues of ethics and morality for a moment, for both infected AND non-infected "food"...
Yes, intelligent non-feral Infected can "cattle ranch" meta-humans to sustain themselves (Asamondo does this).
However, the rate or HMHVV producing non-feral (sapient and sane) Infected is INCREDIBLY low; creating far more mindless monsters than productive ones.

Extrapolated to a large scale (space and time) cattle ranching people, even our "undesirables", is simply not a viable solution by sheer population vectors.
Fact is, the Infected don't age and are effectively immune to all other natural illness and disease. In practical terms, the only time Infected suffer population loss is death by starvation or trauma.
Since humane treatment of Infected obviously prohibits both, this means over time the Infected population can only grow. A food supply crisis is an ever-growing problem by default.

What this means, is that an uncontained HMHVV epidemic will occur, either by chance exposure (every additional infected poses an increased risk to all non-infected) or as an outbreak as the Infected's demand for food grows beyond supply's capacity. This disaster is inevitable occur regardless of whether it's on metahumanity's terms, or that of the sapient-infected.
Empirically speaking, culling must occur to keep the infected population down to sustainable; again, I remind that there exists no way to accomplish this in a "humanitarian" manner (or one that violates their "rights").

In any case, the outcome for such a scenario remains clear: Metahumanity dies, and then the Infected die shortly thereafter from starvation.

(This revelation raises an interesting and poetic irony: The Asamondo Infected State only came into being because metahumanity killed off enough Feral Infected to allow significant numbers of non-Ferals to congregate and organize. Otherwise, there would simply be too much competition for food between ferals and non-ferals)

Returning to the realm of morality and ethics now, I hope it's clear now that any sort of advocacy for granting and preserving the rights of Infected (even the intelligent ones) requires a powerful supplemental justification.
Noble intent is a start but clearly insufficient on its own, in light of what we know about HMHVV. (How does it go? "The road to hell is paved with noble intentions")

So now I ask: What do we really get out of giving Infected "fair treatment"? The benefits of their unique culture? Culture is a fine thing, but rather useless to a dead (or dying) species.
Barring a cure or other new control mechanism, mutual annihilation is inevitable given enough time. So all this would accomplish is threatening the rest of meta-humanity with a ticking bomb for no good reason.

As terrible as it sounds on the surface, the truth is that the most moral and ultimately humane decision is to cull the Infected rather than letting the problem grow greater with time.
I urge the people here to remember that few (if any) Infected wanted to be made into flesh eating monsters. We owe it to them and the memory of their humanity why we must carry such out such a grim task.

We do not make the victims by culling them, the Infected were victims of something far more insidious and malignant before we ever began.
And I say this because every victim of HMHVV going forward, be they feral, sapient-infected, or mere "food", is one more who could have been saved if action had been taken before.

[LordGrizzle]

It's a nice write-up and stuff. But I can't say that those rules would be for me. I like the complexity and diversity of the different infected.

Now my 2 cents on the whole HMHVV ethics thing. In my personal opinion, HMHVV is a condition that the victim has no control over. And no matter how dangerous the infected is for his surroundings he deserves to live. If HMHVV was more dangerous than it is, I would shoot for containing all the infected in quarantine camps, but under no circumstance for killing them. But honestly, HMHVV is just another aspect of the Sixth World that could kill you, so I don't even find it that threatening to warrant even that. Just let the infected keep to themselves and put them down when they actually committed a crime. As for Asmando... well. I might not be making myself a lot of friends but... that's the culture of that country, I couldn't care less. A metahuman life in Shadowrun has a price tag, after all. Everybody is expendable.

No matter what your opinion on Infected Rights is, though. I am against treating them as NPCs. I personally LOVE characters who fight with their inner demons on a daily basis and being infected is an amazing way for exactly that roleplaying opportunity. I mean, I also use Daemonpacts in Dark Heresy, see them slowly fall into the madness they set out on in best will and intentions but ultimately... and the same fate could go for an infected character. Maybe at some point he'll do the noble thing and take his own life. Maybe he gets himself killed by the police when the hunger takes over and he just attacks somebody out in the open. Who knows. But it's definitely something I would like to explore more in the game than I get the chance to. Oh, and by the way. I don't see anything wrong with playing characters who have an expiration date. In the gritty realism of my games, runners aren't supposed to have high life expectancy.

[RowanTheFox]

I remember a little spiel I had an NPC deliver back in 3rd edition on the subject of "Ghoul's Rights" (or those of HMHVV infected at large).
He was an MIT&T Biologist (specializing in Awakened/Para-biology) speaking before the UCAS Congress.
I've had to paraphrase it, as the original document with my notes has been lost to the wiles of time (and a broken thumb drive).


HMHVV by its nature is self-terminating in the long run.
If it spreads too fast (and given how overtly virulent it is, that is entirely possible) it will kills off its food source through two self-compounding vectors (consumption OR conversion).

Ignoring issues of ethics and morality for a moment, for both infected AND non-infected "food"...
Yes, intelligent non-feral Infected can "cattle ranch" meta-humans to sustain themselves (Asamondo does this).
However, the rate or HMHVV producing non-feral (sapient and sane) Infected is INCREDIBLY low; creating far more mindless monsters than productive ones.

Extrapolated to a large scale (space and time) cattle ranching people, even our "undesirables", is simply not a viable solution by sheer population vectors.
Fact is, the Infected don't age and are effectively immune to all other natural illness and disease. In practical terms, the only time Infected suffer population loss is death by starvation or trauma.
Since humane treatment of Infected obviously prohibits both, this means over time the Infected population can only grow. A food supply crisis is an ever-growing problem by default.

What this means, is that an uncontained HMHVV epidemic will occur, either by chance exposure (every additional infected poses an increased risk to all non-infected) or as an outbreak as the Infected's demand for food grows beyond supply's capacity. This disaster is inevitable occur regardless of whether it's on metahumanity's terms, or that of the sapient-infected.
Empirically speaking, culling must occur to keep the infected population down to sustainable; again, I remind that there exists no way to accomplish this in a "humanitarian" manner (or one that violates their "rights").

In any case, the outcome for such a scenario remains clear: Metahumanity dies, and then the Infected die shortly thereafter from starvation.

(This revelation raises an interesting and poetic irony: The Asamondo Infected State only came into being because metahumanity killed off enough Feral Infected to allow significant numbers of non-Ferals to congregate and organize. Otherwise, there would simply be too much competition for food between ferals and non-ferals)

Returning to the realm of morality and ethics now, I hope it's clear now that any sort of advocacy for granting and preserving the rights of Infected (even the intelligent ones) requires a powerful supplemental justification.
Noble intent is a start but clearly insufficient on its own, in light of what we know about HMHVV. (How does it go? "The road to hell is paved with noble intentions")

So now I ask: What do we really get out of giving Infected "fair treatment"? The benefits of their unique culture? Culture is a fine thing, but rather useless to a dead (or dying) species.
Barring a cure or other new control mechanism, mutual annihilation is inevitable given enough time. So all this would accomplish is threatening the rest of meta-humanity with a ticking bomb for no good reason.

As terrible as it sounds on the surface, the truth is that the most moral and ultimately humane decision is to cull the Infected rather than letting the problem grow greater with time.
I urge the people here to remember that few (if any) Infected wanted to be made into flesh eating monsters. We owe it to them and the memory of their humanity why we must carry such out such a grim task.

We do not make the victims by culling them, the Infected were victims of something far more insidious and malignant before we ever began.
And I say this because every victim of HMHVV going forward, be they feral, sapient-infected, or mere "food", is one more who could have been saved if action had been taken before.

This brought up an interesting thought. IRL, almost every virulent disease has asymptomatic carriers. People who contracted the virus, but through the grace of God, evolution, dumb luck, or whatever possess an immune system capable of allowing the victim to carry the disease without ever showing symptoms themselves. Technically speaking, HMHVV could very well have asymptomatic carriers whose blood could be used to create a vaccine, possibly even a cure.

Now finding those carriers, on the other hand...that's the tricky part.

[LordGrizzle]

I remember a little spiel I had an NPC deliver back in 3rd edition on the subject of "Ghoul's Rights" (or those of HMHVV infected at large).
He was an MIT&T Biologist (specializing in Awakened/Para-biology) speaking before the UCAS Congress.
I've had to paraphrase it, as the original document with my notes has been lost to the wiles of time (and a broken thumb drive).


HMHVV by its nature is self-terminating in the long run.
If it spreads too fast (and given how overtly virulent it is, that is entirely possible) it will kills off its food source through two self-compounding vectors (consumption OR conversion).

Ignoring issues of ethics and morality for a moment, for both infected AND non-infected "food"...
Yes, intelligent non-feral Infected can "cattle ranch" meta-humans to sustain themselves (Asamondo does this).
However, the rate or HMHVV producing non-feral (sapient and sane) Infected is INCREDIBLY low; creating far more mindless monsters than productive ones.

Extrapolated to a large scale (space and time) cattle ranching people, even our "undesirables", is simply not a viable solution by sheer population vectors.
Fact is, the Infected don't age and are effectively immune to all other natural illness and disease. In practical terms, the only time Infected suffer population loss is death by starvation or trauma.
Since humane treatment of Infected obviously prohibits both, this means over time the Infected population can only grow. A food supply crisis is an ever-growing problem by default.

What this means, is that an uncontained HMHVV epidemic will occur, either by chance exposure (every additional infected poses an increased risk to all non-infected) or as an outbreak as the Infected's demand for food grows beyond supply's capacity. This disaster is inevitable occur regardless of whether it's on metahumanity's terms, or that of the sapient-infected.
Empirically speaking, culling must occur to keep the infected population down to sustainable; again, I remind that there exists no way to accomplish this in a "humanitarian" manner (or one that violates their "rights").

In any case, the outcome for such a scenario remains clear: Metahumanity dies, and then the Infected die shortly thereafter from starvation.

(This revelation raises an interesting and poetic irony: The Asamondo Infected State only came into being because metahumanity killed off enough Feral Infected to allow significant numbers of non-Ferals to congregate and organize. Otherwise, there would simply be too much competition for food between ferals and non-ferals)

Returning to the realm of morality and ethics now, I hope it's clear now that any sort of advocacy for granting and preserving the rights of Infected (even the intelligent ones) requires a powerful supplemental justification.
Noble intent is a start but clearly insufficient on its own, in light of what we know about HMHVV. (How does it go? "The road to hell is paved with noble intentions")

So now I ask: What do we really get out of giving Infected "fair treatment"? The benefits of their unique culture? Culture is a fine thing, but rather useless to a dead (or dying) species.
Barring a cure or other new control mechanism, mutual annihilation is inevitable given enough time. So all this would accomplish is threatening the rest of meta-humanity with a ticking bomb for no good reason.

As terrible as it sounds on the surface, the truth is that the most moral and ultimately humane decision is to cull the Infected rather than letting the problem grow greater with time.
I urge the people here to remember that few (if any) Infected wanted to be made into flesh eating monsters. We owe it to them and the memory of their humanity why we must carry such out such a grim task.

We do not make the victims by culling them, the Infected were victims of something far more insidious and malignant before we ever began.
And I say this because every victim of HMHVV going forward, be they feral, sapient-infected, or mere "food", is one more who could have been saved if action had been taken before.

This brought up an interesting thought. IRL, almost every virulent disease has asymptomatic carriers. People who contracted the virus, but through the grace of God, evolution, dumb luck, or whatever possess an immune system capable of allowing the victim to carry the disease without ever showing symptoms themselves. Technically speaking, HMHVV could very well have asymptomatic carriers whose blood could be used to create a vaccine, possibly even a cure.

Now finding those carriers, on the other hand...that's the tricky part.

If memory serves, aren't shapechangers and dracomorphs carriers, cuz they are immune to HMHVV? But I guess you couldn't use that blood for a cure since their immunity is a magical innate ability of their very self.

[MijRai]

That was chat about the later-revealed Harvester, Senko.

I'm going to have to disagree with Dwagon's NPC assessment for a few reasons.

There's no precise, overall numbers on feral to non-feral Infected, but the numbers are not 'incredibly low.'  There's an entire nation of Infected in Asamando, which has a population of 500,000 (99% ghoul, 1% other Infected, Shapeshifters, Spirits, etc.).  A nation of that size couldn't function if the majority were feral.  The best numbers we can currently get (for ghouls) are out of Storm Front; in Chicago, it is 40% feral due to the poor conditions and FAB III.  In the CAS and UCAS overall, it is 11%  Asamando claims around 5.5% are feral, but most believe it is probably around the CAS/UCAS numbers ever since they sicced the ferals they keep in prisons for everyone's safety on folks during the food riots.  Most Strain I Infected are also more likely to be sapient, while Strain II is more likely to be feral (with the situation reversed for the Dwarf versions).  I'm not going to make any claims as to sanity, just the ability to comprehend and function in society.  Given there hasn't been wave after wave of ghouls sweeping the world, turning it into a flesh-rending zombie apocalypse, it is pretty certain that estimate of humanity's extinction is rather...  Unlikely.  That definitely isn't the disease's goal (nor is it most diseases' goal); killing the host kills them.

Most Infected are not immortal.  Only Strain I & Ia Infected are immune to aging (the rarest kind).  All of them can still be infected with other diseases (except Banshees, Nosferatu, Vampires and Wendigo who develop the Immunity to Pathogens power).  There's also their Allergies to contend with, other weaknesses and only some of them can develop Immunity to Toxins.  They ain't invulnerable. 

And Eira, Carriers do exist for Strains II and III.  They're even known of by society (being a Carrier is an automatic +1 Notoriety if people find out, and a -2 Dice Pool to all social rolls with people who know).  There are Qualities to represent it, in fact.  There's no cure or vaccine, however.  The doctors of the setting have been attempting it for decades with no luck whatsoever.  It's an Awakened Retrovirus that is actively evolving and mutating en masse inside the bodies of people already infected, much less new victims. 

Shapeshifters and Drakes are immune (the former by way of not being human, the latter by way of being incompatible (if I remember right, a latent Drake who gets Infected can't undergo dracomorphosis as of last edition).

[Jack_Spade]

There are, at least for Strain II and III (RF p.141 has it as a negative quality)

Dwagonzhan has brought it to a very clear point: The infected are doomed to starve.

If you look at the infection rules you see that avoiding being infected by Strain II is very unlikely unless you are super augmented to deal with pathogens. Coupled with the high prevalence of feral infected it's just madness to think society can let that threat go unchecked.

Strain I lose constantly essence - the older they get the more powers they have and the faster they lose essence. Combined with the unlimited lifespan they are guaranteed to one day take their feeding to far - especially when there sanity erodes as they lose their connection to humanity.
Vampires aren't the people they were before they were infected. That person literally died. What comes back is the virus with the memories of the person. Again, madness to let them go unchecked.


Saying Asmando is a cultural thing... Well, my cultural thing is to annihilate such cultures because they are a threat to my culture. 
Live by the sword, die by the sword.

Campaigning for infected rights is campaigning for killing your own species.

Once you are infected you are allowed to see this differently - you want to survive after all. But so does your prey and this conflict always has to end with one of the two parties dying.

@MijRai
Storm Front gives precise numbers: It's 1 to 8 Feral to Functional

[RowanTheFox]

And Eira, Carriers do exist for Strains II and III.  They're even known of by society (being a Carrier is an automatic +1 Notoriety if people find out, and a -2 Dice Pool to all social rolls with people who know).  There are Qualities to represent it, in fact.  There's no cure or vaccine, however.  The doctors of the setting have been attempting it for decades with no luck whatsoever.  It's an Awakened Retrovirus that is actively evolving and mutating en masse inside the bodies of people already infected, much less new victims. 

Shapeshifters and Drakes are immune (the former by way of not being human, the latter by way of being incompatible (if I remember right, a latent Drake who gets Infected can't undergo dracomorphosis as of last edition).

Does the Cure Disease spell work on HMHVV? I can't find anything that gives a definitive yes or no.

[MijRai]

It would not cure them, but it would give them the extra dice to attempt to resist the disease. 

And I utterly disagree with Dwagonzhan and you, Jack.  The Infected are not doomed to starve.  The whole 'high prevalence' of Feral Infected thing isn't that high to begin with, especially compared to how big the world's population is.  They aren't going to be able to infect that large of a chunk of the world.  Even if they could, a wholesale attempt would see the kind of purge people argue for.  Hell, were it organized the current rate of deaths in the Sixth World would likely be able to feed all Strain II and III Infected with plenty to spare. 

Strain I and Ia Infected do lose Essence, which can only be regained by Draining others, yes.  Your assertion that the more powers and age they have increases their Essence loss is incorrect, though; the only thing that speeds up Essence Loss on Infected is by using active Powers/Abilities from their Infection; Mist Form for vampires or Compulsion for Nosferatu, for instance.  Your argument that the people don't come back, just some kind of sentient virus takes over?  That's freaking ludicrous, and an immense stretch.  Plus, they don't actually die unless they successfully resist the disease.  If they are properly Infected, they go into a coma for a bit over a day, and that's only Strain I.  Strains II & III don't even have a coma, just an approximately 2 week metamorphosis. 

However, I do agree with you that it is madness to let them go unchecked.  Checks are good.  Setting them up in places where they don't have to kill is great.  Hire them at the morgues where they can get food regularly without harming anyone. 

I'm not arguing Asamando is a cultural thing, nor am I saying I even agree with those practices (given they buy megacorporate 'prisoners' to go to their larders).  I've already spelled out the way I'd incorporate Infected into society, and the one character I made who lived in the region around Asamando hated ghouls with a great passion. 

Campaigning for Infected Rights is campaigning for the rights of sentient beings who really got the shit-end of the stick.  And just because they deserve rights doesn't mean their rights should infringe on anyone elses'.  If a vampire goes around killing people regularly, that's murder.  I'm all for lighting them up outside of extenuating circumstances.  If a vampire draws from the local blood-bank and has a bunch of groupies who want their Essence Drained while the vampire is very careful not to kill them...  Well, those people might be stupid, but it is their body/soul and their choice.  Just like it is their choice to go slot BTLs or snort novacoke.

[Senko]

I agree with MijRai infected rights doesn't equal vampire can kill and eat anyone it wants too, it can mean feeding on willing volunteers or eating hte essence that would be lost to aguments anyway. If a vampire kills and eats little kids because it chooses too then it should be arrested/killed like any other serial killer who embraces that, if they fight the virus's urges and only feed on people who are willing then they should be protected against being killed like any other sentient being.

Speaking as a shifter when you've been chased by one mob of humans wanting to kill the monster under the urging of another human who wants to skin you and sell it for a profit you get a lot less tolerant to the purge it with fire viewpoint.