Quote:
Originally Posted by PepsiFree
Assume there will be no unintended consequences, assume the only the one house will be destroyed and that the bomber will not turn to throw the bomb at the shooter. Assume the shooter would only kill the bomber, and nobody else would be harmed as a result.
What do you do?
|
I mean morality wise if its a simple questions with no un-intended consequences, no idea of the justification of the bomber, then the only moral answer is
Life > Property. Without question.
I mean otherwise you'd look at the scene in Forrest Gump when Jeeennnny throws rocks at the old house and I think it burned down later and could have said that Forrest would be justified in pulling out a Magnum and putting two through the o ring.