- #141
drizzle
Gold Member
- 200
- 57
never mind I’m searching the net
Cyrus said:Im curious as to why so many posting here think killing is wrong. I don't. There are many situations in which I'd want another person dead.
Moridin said:This is a very good point, and there are further complications. For instance "killing", could refer to
killing an innocent by-stander for no apparent reason
killing a spider that has entered your house
killing microorganisms by breathing or scratching your forehead
killing an intruder that has a gun to your face
killing hundreds of thousands of people by dropping a nuclear payload on them
etc.
I would personally want to go as far as to argue that "is killing wrong?" is not even a moral question, since it has been decontextualized to such an extreme. I can suppose that we can say that moral arguments that claim that killing other humans is generally invalid, but that the exceptions would depend on context.
jarednjames said:If someone comes up to me in the street and attempts to use a knife on me/us, and I took defensive actions to protect myself/anyone with me, and ended up killing that person I would not consider that wrong. The person came up to me with the intention of causing harm/death for no justifiable reason (lets put it as a random attack for simplicity).
Whereas if I was that person, and I just went up to someone and killed them for no reason, that would be an unjustified killing.
maze said:Killing is always bad. It's just sometimes the lesser of evils.
If you killed someone, even in self defence or war, it would still haunt you the rest of your life.
maze said:Killing is always bad. It's just sometimes the lesser of evils.
If you killed someone, even in self defence or war, it would still haunt you the rest of your life.
maze said:It depends on the cop, but probably yes it would haunt them. That is why they have counseling set up for police and soldiers who kill in the line of duty.
Maze said:It depends on the cop, but probably yes it would haunt them. That is why they have counseling set up for police and soldiers who kill in the line of duty.
jarednjames said:No, if you use the OP logic alone "everyone who joins these forces wants to kill" then nobody would be traumatised. However this is clearly not the case. But that still doesn't mean most people become traumatised. I think in these situations, the cop would see it as doing their job and therefore, unless they felt they did something wrong (made a bad call) then they wouldn't be affected.
I would say if someone was haunted by guilt because he killed someone, there is reason for it, such as he knows deep down it wasn't "really" self defense, for example. If they believe they did nothing wrong they would feel no guilt.maze said:Killing is always bad. It's just sometimes the lesser of evils.
If you killed someone, even in self defence or war, it would still haunt you the rest of your life.
Al68 said:I would say if someone was haunted by guilt because he killed someone, there is reason for it, such as he knows deep down it wasn't "really" self defense, for example. If they believe they did nothing wrong they would feel no guilt.
Unless by "haunted", you mean by something other than guilt, like any crime victim might be haunted by the memory.
drankin said:We can simplify this:
Murder = bad
Killing = depends on situation/context
Sure, that was really my point. The feelings of guilt are due to at least the possibility that it wasn't justified self defense. They're not due to the person thinking that killing in self defense is immoral. If a police officer thinks self defense is immoral, what's the gun for?TheStatutoryApe said:http://www.calea.org/Online/newsletter/No87/ptsd.htm
Unfortunately this does not give any specific information about incidents of PTSD connected to shootings.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/r5607q4h6p23012m/
This is just an abstract, it does deal specifically with shootings, unfortunately it does not specify officers shooting a suspect only officers involved in shooting incidents in general.
The problem you see is that they second guess themselves. They begin to wonder whether or not they really needed to shoot the person or if there was something else they could have done. This often happens regardless of how by the book they did their job or how many people tell them they did the right thing and had no other choice. You will find this sort of phenomena in just about any field of work that involves life and death decisions. Doctors, EMTs, soldiers, firefighters, ect..
Its certainly debatable but I believe the common theory is that the second guessing stems from shock at having taken a life not necessarily the circumstances.Al68 said:Sure, that was really my point. The feelings of guilt are due to at least the possibility that it wasn't justified self defense.
drizzlekizzle said:do you think any of those troops want to be there? think they enlisted to go kill foreigners? they enlisted to make something of themselves and serve their country, fighting for it if necessary. the taliban and al-qaeda in afghanistan attacked us so its obvious there's going to be troops there fighting them. iraq is a whole different story, they shouldn't even been there in the first place.
You're probably thinking that since the soldier used his gun more that means the regulations must not be as strict. I think you'll find that if you examine the rules of engagement of cops and soldiers, you'll find them to be surprisingly similar.jarednjames said:Well you can't really compare a cop to a soldier. A cop has strict regulations when it comes to pulling and using his gun (a soldier too but no one is there to keep them strict).
And that is different from war how?If a cop shoots someone, it usually has to be because they have pulled a gun and generally won't submit to the cop or even shot at him. They really do need justification to pull that trigger.
I highly doubt that. It would make self defense impossible for a cop because rarely do you have enough time for that.In Britain, the cop needs a direct order from HQ before they can even consider pulling the trigger.
Soldiers too, though it is tough to sue someone from another country.If they shoot someone wrongly they can be sued and go to prison.
Yes, but in a war zone where fifty caliber guns are being fired from multiple angles along sides grenade launchers and rpg's, it can be difficult tracking down who killed who. So shooting a civilian in a war zone isn't going to be as bad as shooting a civilian in a police situation (from a discipline point of view).russ_watters said:You're probably thinking that since the soldier used his gun more that means the regulations must not be as strict. I think you'll find that if you examine the rules of engagement of cops and soldiers, you'll find them to be surprisingly similar.
I'll give you this one, must have had an example in my head when I wrote this but it was a while ago.russ_watters said:And that is different from war how?
UK cops don't carry guns. The most offensive weapon they carry is the night stick and pepper spray. Special units are called to deal with armed response issues and they are giving orders according to the situation at hand.russ_watters said:I highly doubt that. It would make self defense impossible for a cop because rarely do you have enough time for that.
Especially if you don't know who did it.russ_watters said:Soldiers too, though it is tough to sue someone from another country.
Astronuc said:It's not so cut and dry. For the most part, US/UK soldiers do not plant roadside bombs or IED's. They generally do not shoot unless they come under fire. On the other hand, al Qaida and Taliban forces have massacred civilians intentionally, whereas US/UK/allies forces seem to do it unintentionally. However, we know in some cases, a limited number of US and UK troops have intentionally brutalized and killed innocent people.
I'm opposed to war, but that doesn't change that fact that if happens. I hope it ends quickly.
If one feels strongly about, join an NGO or other humanitarian group, and serve in Iraq, Afghanistan or Pakistan.
Ghost803 said:I respect and pray for the troops as much as I do for my Garbage man.
Haha - don't ask that question of anyone http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2009/06/29/toronto-strike.html" .drankin said:Are you saying you don't respect your garbage man? Maybe you should start hauling your own trash to the dump.
DaveC426913 said:Haha - don't ask that question of anyone http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2009/06/29/toronto-strike.html" .
Yes that should be most UK cops don't carry.jarednjames said:...UK cops don't carry guns. The most offensive weapon they carry is the night stick and pepper spray. Special units are called to deal with armed response issues and they are giving orders according to the situation at hand...
mheslep said:Yes that should be most UK cops don't carry.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Police_armed_uk.jpg
'Special' is your word, and simply because a cop undergoes 'special' training does not make him/her not a cop. My statement about "most cops don't carry" is empirically correct. Those Whitehall units are still police, they are not British soldiers. Your original statement that "UK cops don't carry guns" without qualification was simply false.jarednjames said:No it shouldn't. What part of special units didn't you get? They are special armed response units. They undergoe special training not done by normal officers (obviously) and are called armed response officers. Yes, they have grown in numbers since the terrorist attacks (particularly at airports) but they are still considered a unit on their own and it is extremely rare you would see one 'taking a stroll' down your street (never happens in places outside of big cities although there are some which patrol in cars in certain areas that are known for gun/knife crime).
mheslep said:'Special' is your word, and simply because a cop undergoes 'special' training does not make him/her not a cop. My statement about "most cops don't carry" is empirically correct. Those Whitehall units are still police, they are not British soldiers. Your original statement that "UK cops don't carry guns" without qualification was simply false.
drankin said:Are you saying you don't respect your garbage man? Maybe you should start hauling your own trash to the dump.
I respect the people who work hard for a living. Particularly in thankless accupations that are very much required to make are communities liveable.
Such a comment is snooty.
Ghost803 said:Maybe the garbage man should try living without his monthly income, then I'll try hauling my own garbage.