Would you kill a child to save the life of 100 people?

wub · Post by **wub** » Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:57 pm

As per title

Trichome · Post by **Trichome** » Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:59 pm

straight up yes. (that is if i could bring myself to do it, i dont count pussying out as saying no)

Pedro Sánchez · Post by **Pedro Sánchez** » Wed Jan 04, 2012 5:01 pm

how old are the 100 people?

DRTY · Post by **DRTY** » Wed Jan 04, 2012 5:02 pm

No. I couldn't do it, not saying it's right or wrong, I just don't think I could kill a child.

Pretty sure I've read about this situation, maybe Plato, can't remember what those chaps said.

Also, the kid has a future, are you talking about 100 OAPs? (not that I'd happily kill old people

)

magma · Post by **magma** » Wed Jan 04, 2012 5:04 pm

Depends a little on the 100 people, as DRTY said... I'd like to think I'd make the "right" decision, but I seriously doubt I could bring myself to kill a human that wasn't about to kill me.

wub · Post by **wub** » Wed Jan 04, 2012 5:04 pm

Pedro Sánchez wrote:how old are the 100 people?

What age would be acceptable to let them die?

Pedro Sánchez · Post by **Pedro Sánchez** » Wed Jan 04, 2012 5:09 pm

wub wrote:
Pedro Sánchez wrote:how old are the 100 people?

What age would be acceptable to let them die?

Well like said above, if they are closer to a natural time of death (70-90 say), they have had a long life behind them where as the baby has not had that opportunity. Shoe on the other foot and someone was pointing a gun at me or kill a baby, I'd take it and I'm not even middle aged yet.

LACE · Post by **LACE** » Wed Jan 04, 2012 5:13 pm

I'd only kill the child if he/she was an ungrateful whiny little brat. I've got no time for that.

DRTY · Post by **DRTY** » Wed Jan 04, 2012 5:17 pm

LACE wrote:I'd only kill the child if he/she was an ungrateful whiny little brat. I've got no time for that.

hayze99 · Post by **hayze99** » Wed Jan 04, 2012 5:19 pm

Pedro Sánchez wrote:
wub wrote:
Pedro Sánchez wrote:how old are the 100 people?

What age would be acceptable to let them die?
Well like said above, if they are closer to a natural time of death (70-90 say), they have had a long life behind them where as the baby has not had that opportunity. Shoe on the other foot and someone was pointing a gun at me or kill a baby, I'd take it and I'm not even middle aged yet.

You'd give your life for a random baby?

Could be a baby Hitler.

JBoy · Post by **JBoy** » Wed Jan 04, 2012 5:21 pm

Tough question really, i dont agree in killing but that said some people do deserve to die.

apmje · Post by **apmje** » Wed Jan 04, 2012 5:23 pm

Yeah I probably would if push came to shove. At the end of the day, I can imagine one death being on my conscious being 'easier' than a hundred.

Still, I ain't Jack Bauer, so I'll never have to make this choice.

wub · Post by **wub** » Wed Jan 04, 2012 5:25 pm

apmje wrote:Yeah I probably would if push came to shove. At the end of the day, I can imagine one death being on my conscious being 'easier' than a hundred.

Still, I ain't Jack Bauer, so I'll never have to make this choice.

Fairly sure Jack Bauer never killed a child.

Pedro Sánchez · Post by **Pedro Sánchez** » Wed Jan 04, 2012 5:25 pm

hayze99 wrote:
Pedro Sánchez wrote:
wub wrote:
Pedro Sánchez wrote:how old are the 100 people?

What age would be acceptable to let them die?
Well like said above, if they are closer to a natural time of death (70-90 say), they have had a long life behind them where as the baby has not had that opportunity. Shoe on the other foot and someone was pointing a gun at me or kill a baby, I'd take it and I'm not even middle aged yet.
You'd give your life for a random baby?

Could be a baby Hitler.

But it could be the next Da Vinci, Darwin or Einstein I think thats why we don't burn the cot of a new born that has a monobrow.

DRTY · Post by **DRTY** » Wed Jan 04, 2012 5:26 pm

It says, to 'save the life of 100 people'... so that means:

option 1 - kill a child

option 2 - let a child live knowing that decision would mean 100 people die (not by your hands)

jazzamataz · Post by **jazzamataz** » Wed Jan 04, 2012 5:26 pm

Kill them all and get away scott free...

apmje · Post by **apmje** » Wed Jan 04, 2012 5:27 pm

wub wrote:
apmje wrote:Yeah I probably would if push came to shove. At the end of the day, I can imagine one death being on my conscious being 'easier' than a hundred.

Still, I ain't Jack Bauer, so I'll never have to make this choice.

Fairly sure Jack Bauer never killed a child.

If I had to pick anyone, Jack Bauer would most likely get himself in this situation. He'd then shoot up some Heroin and then go cry on David Palmers grave.

DRTY · Post by **DRTY** » Wed Jan 04, 2012 5:30 pm

what happens if you refuse to participate? The tnuc that put you in this situation is the one doing wrong anyhoo. Don't kill anyone

jazzamataz · Post by **jazzamataz** » Wed Jan 04, 2012 5:33 pm

DRTY wrote:what happens if you refuse to participate? The tnuc that put you in this situation is the one doing wrong anyhoo. Don't kill anyone

Actually you would be tried for manslaughter and accessory to murder
and conspiracy to cause harm in a court (I think.)

ketamine · Post by **ketamine** » Wed Jan 04, 2012 5:44 pm

I would not kill the child (or any person) willingly, but I wholeheartedly believe 1 persons life is worth 100 if somebody else was to kill them.

A more stressful question is would you kill yourself to save the life of 100 people?