Jobs Available: Driving/Riding Speed Boats in the Carribean

Guilty until proven innocent.

Do you think that standards for evidence are the same in war?

is this the next generation of boiling oats runner

I guess you really are that uninformed.

Vic, I think we all wish we could live in a world where adults don't have to make difficult life and death decisions. I wish the world was as simple and as binary as you see it, but it's not, unfortunately. It's pretty easy to sit back on your moral high horse, and judge the difficult decisions of others in complex geopolitical warfare. There's nothing at risk for you. There's no major consequences to your opinions. However, there are for world leaders. Most of them are far from perfect, but some, and I know this will come as a total shock to you, but I believe they try and do their best and aren't all bad. They are, like most of us, trying to do the best they can w/ the hand they've been dealt.

I wish the world was filled of enlightened people, who knew how to share resources, and looked after one another. I wonder when you'll grow up and realize it's not, and likely never will be, no matter how much we wish it was true.

Share resources? That's why the Obama blew up hospitals weddings and funerals all over the ME? Bc they weren't sharing with the USA enough?

To be in the mind of Vic to try and comprehend why this is the response to my post.... things that make you go... uhhh

Vic, there's an out of control train heading down the tracks. You're standing at a railway switch lever that on one side of the switch has one person tied to the tracks, and on the other side five people are tied to the tracks. What do you do?

Freak daddy, you probably have to tell Vic which people are Americans for him to answer.

😃

Would it be fair to say that while certain very bad deeds (that often kill) done on purpose, should not be punished with death after the fact. but if you can PREVENT WITH CERTAINTY those very bad deeds by killing the upcoming practitioner, your committing murder is, while illegal, not immoral if there is no alternatives to stop it?

“prevent with certainty” and “no alternatives to stop it” are doing a lot of work in your hypothetical. what exactly was the need to double tap a sunk boat anyway, even if we could say that the other boats being blown up is permissible?

by the way, less fentanyl has actually been seized this year USCBP, which is notable although unlikely to be the complete picture. I tried to look up overdose deaths for this year but we haven’t seen those yet. I do think it’s notable that Biden’s USCBP seized more fentanyl, and actually a lot of the parity in total seizures in drugs come from the higher amount of marijuana seized which is just stupid lol

https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/drug-...

Again that’s not enough to infer that Biden was better at repelling fentanyl than Trump, but it’s certainly notable to the people that claim that Biden was presiding over some kind of fentanyl white genocide on purpose and Trump would come in and fix everything on day 1 by closing the border. And before the intuition pump comes of less fentanyl is being brought over because less of it is being smuggled in, you at least have to wonder why the other drugs are actually being caught at similar or even higher rates. It just seems to be specifically fentanyl that they have been seizing less of. That datum could be explained in multiple ways, but it’s notable.

13.5! What are you nuts?
We still gotta take the **** to Florida mang.
You know what that's like these days?
They got the Navy all over the ****in place.
They got frogmen, they got
EC2s with satellite tracking **** in'em, they got ****in'
Bell 209 assault choppers up the ass, mang.
You know we're losing one out of every nine loads.
That's no duck walk anymore, mang lemme tell you.
Forget about 13.5

Yeah. They'd never ever understand they're being drug mules when being offered hard cash to pilot a speedboat by the local kingpin...

I never said that I think that the news coincides with what I wrote. It just made me think about the general subject. Namely that a murder can be justifiable to prevent a crime that doesn't deserve the death penalty after it happens. I have no idea whether that would apply to the present case.

no

David,

If you changed the bolded to "in a case where it would be bad policy to impose a death sentence after the fact," then the answer to your question might be yes. But as crd pointed out, your hypothetical is too loaded with unlikely or unknowable assumptions to be of any use in guiding policy in the real world.

Cool how the US executes 100 people and we get a bunch of JAQoff posts spitballing wild hypotheticals in which it might be okay for the US to murder people willy-nilly.

What are you talking about? If someone is on his way to seriously injure another and there is little risk of death its not immoral to kill them. If I was a runaway slave who was stopped by an overseer. it would not be immoral to kill him.

And while my post contained hypotheticals that almost forced you to agree, it was only a starting point. You don't need all those assumptions to make the killing moral. If you know that someone is about to break your kneecap because you owe him money shooting him is not wrong if nothing else will stop him. (Even though you know he won't kill you.)

If you want to argue that what I wrote should not be "public policy" that's fine. But then don't use the "immoral" word as part of your argument.

How about a situation where you know someone will groom a young woman and ultimately put them on a path that leads to their suicide? Is it moral in that situation to kill?

You have no idea whether that would apply to the present case? I find that hard to believe that “you have no idea”, if we want to get really technical on your wording.

Seems like some specifics would be needed to answer this one but I think you're somewhat leaning into to David's argument.

What if the guy was sitting in a boat quoting hateful religious text?

The Trump killings can be refuted by bringing up the point that there may be innocent people killed or that there were other ways to stop them. You don 't nee that third, obviously flawed argument.

what’s the third, obviously flawed argument?

That if a bad act that shouldn't be punished by death is never something that is deserving of death if it is the only way to prevent it.

I think David missed this one.