Poll: Kill one, save millions: A Question of Morals.

Recommended Videos

Instant K4rma

StormFella
Aug 29, 2008
2,208
0
0
Here is the scenario: There is a man in front of you. You do not know him at all. You are given a gun and told that if you kill him, millions of lives will be saved. This man has done nothing to you in any shape or form. He has never spoken to you, never been in contact with you in any way. With this in mind, he has also never done anything to wrong you or offend you. All you know is that killing him will save millions of people.

My question to you is this: If you were in this scenario, could you kill the man? Could you bring yourself to kill someone you don't know? Someone who has never done anything to wrong or offend you in the first place?

I think, knowing the stakes, that I could bring myself to pull the trigger. Although it may scar me immensely, knowing that I saved millions would comfort me enough to live with it.

EDIT: You all make a good point. Let's look at it from a different perspective as well. How would your decision change if the person you had to kill was a close friend or member of your family? Would you still be able to bring yourself to kill that one person to save millions?

EDIT (Again): I guess my scenario offset a good number of people. This question really boils down to: "Would you kill someone to save millions?", knowing for a fact that killing the man would save millions. I tried to implement a scenario to try to give the question some perspective, but it looks like that just blurred the real intention of my question. Sorry about the confusion.
 

Icecoldcynic

New member
Oct 5, 2009
1,268
0
0
Well to me it depends what he looks like. In this situation, first impressions are all important. I mean sure, if he LOOKS shifty, i'll kill him.
 

El Poncho

Techno Hippy will eat your soul!
May 21, 2009
5,890
0
0
Am I allowed to ask him questions? If not i'll still shoot the foo'
 
May 28, 2009
3,698
0
0
Icecoldcynic said:
Well to me it depends what he looks like. In this situation, first impressions are all important. I mean sure, if he LOOKS shifty, i'll kill him.
And if he's in some sort of uniform. Uniforms signify that he has some sort of power. Perhaps the power of nuclear warfare.

If he's a tramp, then I'd have trouble believing him to be of much threat.
 

AVATAR_RAGE

New member
May 28, 2009
1,120
0
0
I would do it, but I aint shooting him, he should die with honour seeing as I have no beef with him
 

maddawg IAJI

I prefer the term "Zomguard"
Feb 12, 2009
7,840
0
0
You'd have no real choice.

If you don't kill him, then millions and possibly someone close to you will die. If it was someone that was closer to me that I had to kill, then ya, it would be a diffcult choice.

The needs of the many outweight the needs of the few.
 

Samuel Cook

and Greg Puciato.
Jan 2, 2009
340
0
0
I would, no doubt about it. On the other hand, if I did know the guy, if he was a friend or something, then probably not. The life of one friend is more important then the lives of a million strangers.
 
Jul 11, 2008
543
0
0
i could if there was a reasonable amount of proof. that said if it was someone i actually cared about (which is quite a rare thing) i could easily commit to killing millions just to save that one person (lets face it theres no shortage of people).
 

Thunderhorse31

New member
Apr 22, 2009
1,818
0
0
This doesn't seem like that hard of a question to answer. You should make the scenario more difficult, like if you were in an F-16 watching a plane head straight for the World Trade Center - do you shoot it down, killing 250 innocent people in addition to the terrorists (who, by the way, did nothing to offend you personally), or let them kill 3,000+?

I'd shoot it down any day of the week, so I guess the answer to your poll question is an easy "yes."
 

firedfns13

New member
Jun 4, 2009
1,177
0
0
Well I'd need a dossier of information explaining why he's responsible for millions of deaths.
If it was someone like hitler, stalin, bin laden. Absolutely. And I wouldn't bat an eye to it. Theres more people that need killin' than horses need stealin'...

Edit:
If it was commanded by the President of the United States, yeah, I'd do it. Regardless of if I voted for them or not, they are CINC.
 

Zombie_Fish

Opiner of Mottos
Mar 20, 2009
4,584
0
0
I'm sorry, but how do we know that killing him will save millions? We have simply had someone tell us that killing him will save millions, which is an unsupported prediction by someone who may not even be an expert in this field; why should we trust him if it means killing a complete stranger? Why don't we know anything about him; why can't we do some research and find out exactly what evidence there is to show that millions will die? How exactly will not killing him result in the deaths of millions, and how relevant would the actual deaths be to me choosing not to kill him? What are the chances that the millions will die anyway of irrelevent causes? Is it a scenario like Watchmen, where this man killing millions would in turn save billions?

There are too many unanswered questions to make an instinctive descision as controversial as this one.

EDIT: Yes, I love being skeptical.
 

8-Bit Grin

New member
Apr 20, 2010
847
0
0
I would say...

No.

Who the hell am I to kill somebody because a stranger told me to?

Most of us seem willing to shoot without a second thought.

But that second though might make you take a moment and think,
"Who the hell is he to know when millions are going to die? Maybe he's the one who'll do it, so why not shoot the stranger?"

I dunno. That's my two cents.

**Slightly Ninja'd above, but...meh**
 

firedfns13

New member
Jun 4, 2009
1,177
0
0
Thunderhorse31 said:
This doesn't seem like that hard of a question to answer. You should make the scenario more difficult, like if you were in an F-16 watching a plane head straight for the World Trade Center - do you shoot it down, killing 250 innocent people in addition to the terrorists (who, by the way, did nothing to offend you personally), or let them kill 3,000+?

I'd shoot it down any day of the week, so I guess the answer to your poll question is an easy "yes."
Don't forget the people in the city the debris would fall on.
I'd still shoot it down, unless ordered not to with reason why crash is better than debris.
 

mad825

New member
Mar 28, 2010
3,379
0
0
If there are no authoritarian consequences (no getting arrested so forth) I would happyly shoot him, in fact I would endure the opptunity and do it slowly by using a AP round to the limps and then when I'm bored of him I would end it all by putting a bullet in his head.

again seeing as there are no authoritarian consequences, I would put him on a roast and find out what human meat tastes like
 

Kajt

New member
Feb 20, 2009
4,067
0
0
Knowing that his death would save millions, yes, I'd shoot him. I would, however, tell him that by killing him I'll save millions of lives before shooting him.
 

RicoADF

Welcome back Commander
Jun 2, 2009
3,147
0
0
Fingerlicking said:
*SNIP*
But that second though might make you take a moment and think,
"Who the hell is he to know when millions are going to die? Maybe he's the one who'll do it, so why not shoot the stranger?"

I dunno. That's my two cents.
Thats what I was thinking, how do we know that the information is correct and this stranger really is a threat.
Having said that, assuming we do know for sure that the said stranger is going to kill millions, then yes I would do so, but I'd have to know it was true.