Logic Questions. I want opinions?

Question: Logic Questions!. I want opinions!?

Is it morally permissible to kill one person to save the lives of many others!?Www@QuestionHome@Com

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker:

May I rephrase the question into the following!? :

Should it be permissible to kill one guilty person to save the lives of innocent people!?

If - and only if - the death of the guilty person saves the innocent, then yes!. It is permissible!.

But not if the guy is not guilty - not permissible to kill him then!.

Because if you are killing an innocent person, under any circumstance, you are violating a right: he did not do anything wrong - you are taking his right!.

Even if killing an innocent person saves more innocent lives, it does not matter - it should not be permissible to kill them!.

Why!? I understand it to be because the question is: "Why do we want to save innocent lives!?"

The answer I understand is: "Because life is a right and innocence means retaining that right!."

So in fact, the only important thing is this: "A right should not be violated!. Any violation of another person's right will be prosecuted!."

So - if someone is a threat to people's basic right (ie!. life) and will violate it as long as he lives - then yes, he should be killed - why!? in my understanding because you are saving more rights from being violated at the cost of one "guilty life"!.

But if you kill an innocent person to save other innocent people, you are violating the basic right to save the basic right - in principle, you are committing injustice in the name of justice!.

However, one may object: if the one innocent life is not killed for the sake of the others, then more innocent life would be dead!.

Then, one should seek out who is threatening the many innocent lives, and take that threat out!. If it is a person, then take them out!. If it is a natural disaster, then try to stop it, saving as many as you can!.

One may give the following example: what if a man hijacked a plane and said, "I will only give you the hostages if you let me kill this innocent man!. If you won't let me, I will kill us all!"

What then!? I understand it that the "rescue squad" should not save the innocent by compromising with injustice!. Rather, by confronting and annihilating injustice by taking out the guilty one!. Because the basis is - we should not commit injustice!. We should not violate the basic right of another: life!. For any cost!.

So - it is not permissible to save the lives of many innocent people by killing another innocent person - because killing one person is murder - killing more is still murder - the act is indecent and immoral!.

The task should be to defend all innocent persons from guilty persons by removing the guilty one - not by removing the innocent one!.
By taking basic rights off the guilty - not taking off basic rights from the innocent!.
And if the hijacking scenario occurs, one should not sacrifice an innocent pawn for the victory of justice - why!? - because that sacrifice is a paradoxical justice - it's injustice - it's hypocrisy - it's immoral!.

So what should one do!? Remove the guilty!. And if one cannot!? Compromise with the guilty - give him some bonuses to save the innocent lives!. One may say that that also is injustice!. But it is not - you are protecting the innocent and that is your job - as long as every innocent person retains his right, the job of justice is done!.

The above was my understanding - and I know I have not done justice to the question by shooting through it!. But I believe it is a difficult question when one needs to apply in practice!. Please point out any mistakes in my reasoning - I would be very glad to know

: )

Many ThanksWww@QuestionHome@Com

It is morally permissible to keep people from infringing on an others right to live, sometimes this results in the guilty party's loss of his own right!.

It should be realized that once you make the decision to take someones life, your own life is forfeit!. Of course, there are exceptions to every rule!. The exception here is if you're taking that life to protect your own!. It is also entirely based on the situation at hand!.

Is it wrong to murder!? In today's society!.!.!.yes, because it is not necessary!.

Is it wrong to kill someone who is trying to take your life (or life of another)!? No, if someone is trying to take your life, it IS necessary to disable them!. Sometimes the quickest way to do that is to strike a fatal blow!.

Morals aren't something that is objective though, they change!. And it would be ridiculous to assume that they can't change based on the situation!. Killing innocents is wrong, protecting them is the "right" thing to do!. But, the world is not black and white, and neither are morals!. If they were, these types of questions would not be necessary!. "Right" and "Wrong" are entirely conditional!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

God himself has killed!. Ask yourself,why would God kill anyone!? If you do not value life, God will take it from you!. Killing Hitler for instance would have spared many Jews, why didn't God stop Hitler from destroying so many live's!?!.!.!.!. God had a plan to unite people of all nations!. God can do anything, but what is the human race as a whole capable of when identifying evil!? There is a healthy relationship between good & evil, the line between right & wrong is transparent!. There is no grey area,"you are a killer and must be killed",said a man to another in the street one day as I walked by!. An argument made by state's supporting the death sentence,(premise)!. Did Hitler plan on growing up to kill millions of Jews!?The truth is, no!, murder as a means is punishable by death though, but to murder a killer is considered justice!. Justice is served however by ending a murdering spree!. Hitler's death would have certainly been justice for all!,too bad he got to kill himself!!!!!!!!! I would have spent some quality time talking to him, (strapped to a chair)to find out if I could have helped him at all with his superiority issues!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

I believe that killing someone can never be the sole solution for any problem or issue!.!.!.!. there are always other alternatives available and we must develop the skill and ability to find the other alternative to killing someone every single time it is necessary!.!.!.!.!. killing is immoral and no majority opinion or State Law can change that!!Www@QuestionHome@Com

is there are no other option than to kill a single person , how about of put him/her in jail for life!. Or , was it's hard for to capture that's single person alive , that's , if to capture , is to kill him/her , therefore as for to capture!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

I would kill Robert Mugabe with my bare hands given the opportunity!.

If you know you're going to save many lives and you don't kill the person then you are guilty of neglect!.

Ultimately this is a numbers Q!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Morally!? No!. Killing is still killing whether the ends is good or not!.

Justifiable!? Yes!. If the ends is to save the lives of many!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

I think so, most especially if the life of the majority are at risk and will create a lot of chaotic result!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Absolutely, and encouraged!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

we should not kill any person !.by killing you are not going to gain !.but punish him!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

No!. I would just stay away from human aberrations like killing and murder!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Just curious!. What does the question have to do with logic!?Www@QuestionHome@Com