esk@wucs.UUCP (Paul V. Torek) (02/20/85)
Fader, you fog-breathing slime dog! So you're not as stupid as you pretend... From: daf@ccice6.UUCP (David Fader) > > >> Why is the distinction between doing harm and refusing aid > > >> irrelevant? Why do you think the two are the same? [Ken] > > > Because the results are the same, and they're what count. [me] > > Are you saying that you believe that the ends justify the means? [Ken] > Ken, let me explain what Mr. Torek is saying. Assume the > the existence of the following scenarios. > A.) A car goes off the road and overturns in a stream. > The water looks swift an dangerous [!] so you do nothing > and the persom in the car drowns. > B.) You tie cement blocks to a persons feet and throw > them off a dock. The person drowns. > In either case they are dead. The law does not quibble over > semantics. In either case you will be charged with murder. > I acknowledge the fact that it would be first degee murder in > one case and second degree murder in the other case, but that > is not relevent to the point. The fact that the person is dead > is all that matters, not how or why. Neat how you threw that extra danger into case A to spice things up. Too bad it changes the results -- if you try to save the person, you might drown too, whereas there's no such danger in scenario B. Your analogy fails. Try this one on for size: assume scenario B as above, but change A to: A) A car goes off the road and overturns in a stream. The water looks perfectly safe, but, never having liked the guy, you let the driver drown. Now, I claim that your action in this scenario is on a moral par with your action in scenario B. But not a legal par: it is much easier to prove that someone who's done harm (as in B) deserves punishment than someone who refused aid (as in A). After all, the person who refused aid might claim that he simply "froze" in panic. Also, people who do harm are probably more of a danger to society than those who refuse aid -- it seems to be a fact of psychology that it takes a more ruthless person to do harm. "so simple, even a Kreilick could understand it!" Paul V. Torek, ihnp4!wucs!wucec1!pvt1047 Don't hit that 'r' key! Send any mail to this address, not the sender's.