" @habster3: I guess it is, but like someone else said, no one knows what they would do unless they were actually there. And I think circumstances matter also, I was thinking... what if someone close to me were to die if I couldn't get the money together for an operation? Would I decide yes rather than no then? I'm unsure my morals would hold should circumstances to my own be different. "
I definitely see your point; there just might be a lot more to it than life and death, there are loopholes, etc. I'm glad more people say no right now than yes; you have to admit that not too many people would consider all the possibilities regarding this question and would vote with the idea of just killing an innocent person mindlessly, and that is disturbing.
Hell yes i'd do it. Then donate a couple of million to a cancer charity. Therefore by killing that man, I have saved more lives than I ever would have otherwise.
I do not believe that the 50 percent of people who voted yes are considering the long-term emotional and psychological effects of the cold-blooded, calculated murder of another human being. In the short-term, you are rich. However, with time, the crime will eat at you and little by little, you'll go insane. Within a short time, a year or two, you will either have been put in an insane asylum or have committed suicide. The money is useless, pointless to you because it is tainted.
" See, look at it this way, with 1,000,000,000 dollars, you can save countless thousands of lives. You could virtually end hunger for at least a few thousand people for the rest of their lives. "
Still does not justify killing a innocent person. "
@Suicrat: Medical research does need money. Besides, what about taking that money and giving it to aid services in say Africa. How many starving families on the brink of death could you save, how much clean water could you supply, how many people's lives could you save with AIDs medication? Not to mention putting money towards education which could bring a much more lasting effect to an area and a person's life. It can definitely be justified.
No, I wouldn't. I don't think we have the right to kill innocent people, even for cash. I'd kill the guy who asked me to kill the innocent, and take the money.
" See, look at it this way, with 1,000,000,000 dollars, you can save countless thousands of lives. You could virtually end hunger for at least a few thousand people for the rest of their lives. "
Still does not justify killing a innocent person. "
This leaves far too many questions for me to answer, firstly presumably that's a billion USD, because there a lot of different currencies with dollars, which can greatly differ in value (however I can't currently think of one thata billion is not still a fuck of a lot of money, but still); second, define "innocent" do you mean naive and untainted by the evils of the world? Or perhaps they've been found guilty of no crime? Maybe you mean a truly, wholly good person who has done naught but good their entire life? I'm sure there are plenty of people who fit into both descriptions of "bad" and "innocent". Lastly is this billion dollar fee accompanied by immunity to prosecution, or any sort of legal reprimand, or alteration of the killers rights? I think a lot more people would be willing to a of supposedly bad/immoral things if they were legal, and while killing is obviously wrong, I'm sure the logic could stretch to that for at least a few people.
After all my hoohah, I've ultimately selected no, I don't know if this is true, but I'd like to believe it is.
Also to people with this logic @DemonLeo said:
" See, look at it this way, with 1,000,000,000 dollars, you can save countless thousands of lives. You could virtually end hunger for at least a few thousand people for the rest of their lives. "
I don't really think that works, because either you are receiving the money from someone else who could just as easily have invested the money into helping people and saving lives, the fact that you need to do it, and are willing to murder someone else to do it is ultimately just as selfish as someone who does it out of greed. The other option is of course that this money is being created for you and therefore you'd have to be incredibly careful, as a reckless injection of $1,000,000,000 into any economy could result in hugely detrimental effects, do more harm than good, and possibly leave your huge sum of cash being worth next to nothing and leaving you alone with worthless paper and guilt (it's the economy stupid).
" Write a will, shoot myself, have the billion given to my family. BAM! "
Your family would rather have a billion dollars than you? Would you rather a billion dollars or your mom? Dad? Brother? Sister? "
Er.....you can't always get what you want?
If I was put into a position of killing an innocent person (I figure I'd qualify as well as the next guy) for a billion dollars, I'd let the other guy go free and then just do me in. The next person they offer it to might not think the same way as me and just shoot the guy and I probably couldn't live with that.
I'd rather have my family members than a billion dollars, no doubt.
@SPACETURTLE: Logically, surely enough money to save 2 people would mean that killing is the good choice. Saying that, i'd probably give half of it away.
This is all assuming that the person giving me the money was not going to help people with it.
" @SPACETURTLE: Logically, surely enough money to save 2 people would mean that killing is the good choice. Saying that, i'd probably give half of it away. This is all assuming that the person giving me the money was not going to help people with it. "
So you would give half the money to charity and keep the rest for yourself? Yeah, give me a break. Killing a innocent person is not justified by doing that. It would have been more justifiable if you gave all of it away, but still, as long as you are the one to make the decision to end the innocent persons life for «the greater good», it'll be wrong and it'll be selfish. YOU can't decide weather or not a dude dies or not and still call it justifiable.
But if I've figured you out correctly you are all about the greater good? And you would have killed an innocent man so you could give half a billion dollars to charity, right? So I'm guessing if you would have been given the ultimatum to take your own life so charity can receive half a billion dollars, you would do it. Am I correct?
yes i would, its terrible, i wouldn't like myself for doing it, but a billion dollars can do so much, and plenty of innocents are killed everyday for no reason at all.
No, I would be arrested for murder and then what would I do with my money. I woud end up spending it all on trying to get out of prison if it's not confiscated.
" No, I would be arrested for murder and then what would I do with my money. I woud end up spending it all on trying to get out of prison if it's not confiscated. "
Read the OP: "If you were guaranteed to have legal immunity (not go to prison), would you do it?"
Yes and No are tied precisely 50/50 right now -- there's an interesting division.
I'm amazed people can actually say no to something like this. You can do almost anything with a billion dollars; your problems would all just completely fade away. I have difficulty imagining something I wouldn't do for a billion dollars; I'd nuke a huge metropolitan area if need be. I suppose many people are different, but for someone like me, wealth and the things it can buy is all I truly need to be happy.
" No, I would be arrested for murder and then what would I do with my money. I woud end up spending it all on trying to get out of prison if it's not confiscated. "
Read the OP: "If you were guaranteed to have legal immunity (not go to prison), would you do it?" "
Then someone would kill me out of revenge for the person I killed.
@SPACETURTLE: Killing myself so charities can get the money would definately be the right thing to do. But I wouldn't do it. I'm going to cling onto life as hard as I can. But by distancing myself from it, yes, it would be for the greater good. I wouldn't begrudge the killer if I was the innocent because I would have done the same thing. However, i'd sure as hell wouldn't go out without a fight.
And I suppose there is the great hypocrisy. But sometimes we need other people to make the hard decisions.
EDIT: Here's a thought experiment. If we took out the middle man (money) and you were told to kill a person you've never met or a hundred people would die. Would you not do it because no one should make that decision?
@chstupid: And you have a billion dollars with which to defend yourself. He likely only has a hundred thousand or so to hunt you down with, at the very best.
There's no universal system of karmic justice. Someone won't be screwed over by fate just because they do something selfish.
@Muttinus_Rump: You would not have taken your own life for charity, but you WOULD have taken another man's life? Wow, that is solid stuff, mate. Don't really see how you can justify that.
" Probably not. I don't need a billion dollars - I wouldn't be able to use all of it in my entire life so it would mostly go to waste; if anyone knew about it too it would likely cause me a lot of problems. "
fuck you, man... FUCK YOU ;( IM CRYING NOW ;(
no, i wouldnt do it, because the last thing i would ever do is harm someone.. But dude, one billion, thats my dream
" @Suicrat: Medical research does need money. Besides, what about taking that money and giving it to aid services in say Africa. How many starving families on the brink of death could you save, how much clean water could you supply, how many people's lives could you save with AIDs medication? Not to mention putting money towards education which could bring a much more lasting effect to an area and a person's life. It can definitely be justified. "
It's paper, borne of nothing. It will solve no problem on its own. It might induce people into committing additional effort in those areas you've identified as important, temporarily; then what. You still have the problem of people with craploads of legal tender being able to kill whoever they want by the very virtue of their legal tender.
While it would be wonderful to envision a world where no one dies of AIDS or starvation, I find it far more wonderful to envision a world where no one dies at the hands of another.
" See, look at it this way, with 1,000,000,000 dollars, you can save countless thousands of lives. You could virtually end hunger for at least a few thousand people for the rest of their lives. "
Damn, you have a point, but I would argue that that isnt your job.
Log in to comment