Quote:
Originally Posted by DaemonSeid
ok...let's try something....2 examples and let's see how it can be answered morally speaking:
I'm not trying to put any you on the spot here, I just want to move the conversation forward.
1. An elderly man they still let have a license but who drives only the doctor's office and the grocery store gives a ride to a friend who has a heart attack in the car. He heads for the emergency room, runs a stopsign he doesn't see, and plows into a group of schoolchildren crossing the street, killing two of them. Since it's undeniably killing but is neither self-defense nor state punishment under the law, what is it? Is it wrongful killing, or not?
2. An intruder breaks into your house at night. You have no idea if he's armed and dangerous, if he's so drunk he thought it was his house, if he's come to steal your property or to kill your family. You shoot first and ask questions later. Since there was no clear threat, just a presumed one, and therefore it was not direct self-defense but at most constructive self-defense, were you wrong or right to kill him?
|
hmm. ok. im gonna throw this out there:
Quote:
|
murder (n.): the killing of another human being under conditions specifically covered in law. In the U.S., special statutory definitions include murder committed with malice aforethought, characterized by deliberation or premeditation or occurring during the commission of another serious crime, as robbery or arson (first-degree murder), and murder by intent but without deliberation or premeditation (second-degree murder).
|
the first example, i think could happen to ANY driver. the fact that the driver was an elderly man has no effect on the scenario. that's careless driving - you dont just PLOW into a group of people. i dont care if it was an "emergency" or not. any accident can kill, regardless of the circumstances. and by definition there is clearly no malicious intent or premeditation, or any intent, to kill. i dont consider scenario #1 murder.
as for the second example, i dont believe that someone would instantly pick up a gun and shoot. there is some premeditation even if for a split second of "someone is here to harm me/my family and i need to stop them." now, if in your head, stopping them means ending their life, that's murder.
of course this all gets messy, with semantics and what not, because every scenario is different. i think pushed to the limit, one will kill. for parents, it could be defending their children (say, in the course of a kidnapping or a fight? a court battle?). for loved ones, rape or sexual assault is enough to take someone out. or perhaps there is a cause you feel so strongly about you would kill if it made the situation right, even for a second.
which is why i think people do it. countless stories of people getting shot in the hood over some seemingly senseless drama. in the killer's eye, for at least one second, getting that revenge and getting justice, taking matters in their own hands, means more than the consequence that may follow.
its all about power, isnt it?