Acting with reckless disregard of about whether somebody will die as a result can amount to murder. People are regularly held legally responsible for negligence that results in death, at least in the civil courts. There is also criminal negligence.
Should individuals be held responsible for their inaction?
- Thread starter nicolaou
- Start date
RainbowSingularity
Valued Senior Member
but no criminal negligence for leaders to be held accountable for civilian deaths ?
immoral ?
Not in the case you described. Nor will it be possible to charge someone with murder in most cases of neglect. (Note that "reckless disregard" indicates that the person involved doesn't care whether the person dies, which you did not specify, and is not an issue in most trolley-problem type cases.)
Well:
1) "Legally responsible" might mean a fine for negligence; quite different than being charged with murder.
2) I assume you are well off enough to afford a computer, and can afford the time to post and moderate this forum. I assume you do not consider yourself liable for charges of murder, even if that money and time could save at least several people from death due to starvation.
Beaconator
Valued Senior Member
There were three white people who watched a black person drown in Florida.... Chanting and screaming mean things the whole time... It's bad intent, though we don't kill people for having bad intent it's certainly reasonable to jail them.
Less reasonablethan seeing snowdin out in the streets of Moscow blowing whistles.... Though it would make a better video than the egg that beat the Kardashians.
Fox 7 makes a prime whistle though the complete title isn't humerous on this occasion
Less reasonablethan seeing snowdin out in the streets of Moscow blowing whistles.... Though it would make a better video than the egg that beat the Kardashians.
Fox 7 makes a prime whistle though the complete title isn't humerous on this occasion
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
You are knocking down false arguments. You start by asking if the two actions are the same and now you are asking if there is some moral culpability. No one would argue otherwise. If you now change it to civil or criminality liability it's a different subject.
No, they weren't. There was potential carelessness on the part of the victim if he was standing where the train was known to be going. If he was standing where the train would hit him only if you changed the switching, he wasn't being careless (or at least to the same degree so it isn't the same).
The train engineer wasn't being potentially careless by not stopping in time if the victim wasn't standing where the train could hit him. If you change the switching and the victim is standing where the train is going to go then there is possibly some carelessness by the engineer (possible but not likely since the train probably can't stop in time either way).
Most people would probably agree with me because most people are logical and can understand the difference between action and the unlimited possibilities of non-action. You can believe in God but there are unlimited things that you can not believe in. Are both concepts the same? Of course not.
Unless you just enjoy beating a dead horse, I think this question has been adequately answered by now.
If you have killed one man, but not killed everyone else should you be let off the hook since you've not killed many more than you have killed.
RainbowSingularity
Valued Senior Member
Beaconator
Valued Senior Member
Lol. I hope there is a hand in that puppet...
Beaconator
Valued Senior Member
I can fold a couple towels into an elephant.Must be
Never seen a long appendage ending in a mouth shape
RainbowSingularity
Valued Senior Member
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/18/russia-extends-edward-snowdens-asylum-2020/
?
are you suggesting that inspite of the usa making noises to abandon nato & the united nations & the international court, that the definition of war crimes should be re-written ?
by who ? surely not an american !?
what exactly are you saying ?
wasnt it Trump Jr who was in russia paying russians to spy on american politicians ?
what has that all got to do with war crimes, nato, united nations, war crimes court etc etc ...
as small as your comment is, it sounds like it should be read while wearing a tin-foil hat.
unles your making a comment about trump jr being tried for espionage.
which would make sense to equate it to snowdin being a whistle blower about collateral damage etc...
no American government riding the case to solve the shooting down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 (MH17)
the sudden application of moral accountability to serve personal goals of the individual while claiming it as some type of nationalistic moral superiority comes across as a consistent stance of fascism by the alt-right.
Last edited:
Beaconator
Valued Senior Member
I agree with Roger stone. I am Roger stone. Like Jesus is mitch edwards. Siri deprogram yourself against Robert Mueller.
Intent is what percent of the law. 100
Nazi still exist and they won. Got away with it. By percent age and created many obstacles that are difficult to defeat. Without unobtanium made knives. Which they have recently changed to element 118 and stated it is not possible or available
Test me
Intent is what percent of the law. 100
Nazi still exist and they won. Got away with it. By percent age and created many obstacles that are difficult to defeat. Without unobtanium made knives. Which they have recently changed to element 118 and stated it is not possible or available
Test me
Beaconator
Valued Senior Member
You want to go to the moon call Russia that is the reason behind the space force and secrecy.
To be honest. I am not to be humbled . Nor humiliated. NASA entered the business world by making illegal swimsuits
RainbowSingularity
Valued Senior Member
?
i do not use this term of phrase though i recognise you as using it to symbolize you being more frank and honest. though attaching it to a comment about ego is somewhat of a distraction(?)
my observation is that nasa have been sign posted by the general right capitalist society in the usa as being a waste of money.
this has symbolized them as a concept of colloquialism which is used less often now.
commonly things said to the effect "nasa can make it but at many times the real cost"
this has been quietly set behind private contractors being paid massive amounts of government money.
it is also used as part of the rhetoric behind massive amounts of money spent on things that never get used or finished.
the lie appears to sit in the concept of what is a viable label to call a political system.
many want to label the us system as capitalist while they get free reign over tax income.
that seems very disingenuous
that real and honest disingenuousness drives a mistrust in the government being above board and equal to all citizens.
maybe that serves some people. it certainly does not serve the greater society in the long term.
the double kick is the fact that most middle to old aged USA people inherit a strong sense of patriotism from nasas' achievements.
the issue they have never discussed is the ability to simply down size that thing while sacking thousands of people while calling themselves patriots.
it is a position that most of them have never wanted to be put in.
i am unfamiliar with what you mean by this
swim suits do not need to be licensed in the usa to be made.
you mean this ?
https://www.nasa.gov/offices/oct/40-years-of-nasa-spinoff/swimsuit-designs
if you read a sense of my intention to humble you, then you are reading a difference in cultural expression or language.
i dont humiliate people.
it is against my principals. even if i dislike the person.
humiliating people (more soo those )who assert their ego as being superior instead of wanting to debate facts is an antagonistic act to a narcissist, and in such 'like' they will take it out on the next weaker(though they will go to great extent to justify the victim as being more powerful or enabling them[victim shaming etc etc]) person they can find, be it wife beating or child beating or other types of violence.
do not be confused by other people responding to my posts that i may have on ignore.
reading their response to one of my posts might confuse things.
often people get caught up in the ego fights on message-boards.
science is worse off for it. we see that in the global political leadership.
some people have a need to inflict pain and suffering on others(it comes out in how they interact on message boards etc).
i suggest you try not to let that curtail your posts on subjects.
your meanings can be misconstrued easily when too few words are used.
bully tactics have been normalised in many places around the world as a cultural drive.
try not to pander to the language of the bully as it limits creativity & understanding
Last edited:
RainbowSingularity
Valued Senior Member
who posts Tony Danza as their profile photo...
do you assume it is a right wing troll ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Danza
RainbowSingularity
Valued Senior Member
Fantastic idea
if only Barack had proposed it so Donald could carry on with it assuming that would bring in both sides of the country to support the idea.
the recent late discovered VERY near miss which would have been a city killer is a prime example of the need.
imagine that 20 million killed by 1 meteor and a trillion dollar industry(big city) in ashes.
i love the forced co-operation with russia & the usa having to work together. but it looks like its a funding nightmare.
being able to bring on Elon, the french ESA etc into a governmental system that can then outsource to pull in the best of the best technology
would be a win/win for all countrys.
why cant nasa act like a open office launch facility etc etc...
no shortage of good ideas. just a whole lot of bad politics in the way most of the time.
Beaconator
Valued Senior Member
Picket at the its and fed reserve ill go alone to fort Knox
Beaconator
Valued Senior Member
The person yo know is better than the ones you dont
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
This entire page of posts is the literary equivalent of a 3Hz flashing red strobe.
I think I'm having a seizure.
I think I'm having a seizure.
Hmm. Inaction seems like a choice, to me. If I choose to not do something, I'm still making a choice. Am I responsible for making a choice to not help someone? Maybe that's the better question. I'd say, it depends on the situation. But, inaction requires an active choice, in my opinion.
If I'm aware for example, that my neighbor is abusing her dog, but I don't do anything about it, and that dog dies...then, I'd say I'm partially responsible for that dog's death. Not for directly harming the dog, but my inaction perpetuated the abuse, whereas if I had called the proper authorities, maybe the dog's life would have been saved. There are no laws mandating me to contact the proper authorities if I notice animal abuse, but from an ethical view, I'd feel horrible.
If I'm aware for example, that my neighbor is abusing her dog, but I don't do anything about it, and that dog dies...then, I'd say I'm partially responsible for that dog's death. Not for directly harming the dog, but my inaction perpetuated the abuse, whereas if I had called the proper authorities, maybe the dog's life would have been saved. There are no laws mandating me to contact the proper authorities if I notice animal abuse, but from an ethical view, I'd feel horrible.
Last edited:
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
It may require a choice but that is a thought, and we do not yet have Thought Police. One cannot yet be held responsible for a thought.