Is this immoral, and is it or should it be a crime?

What if a hostage-taker, at gun-point, forces one hostage to kill another hostage? Should the hostage who killed the other hostage be charged with murder or some other form of homicide? Does whether they enjoyed killing the other hostage affect whether they should be charged? Is what that hostage did immoral? For those who are religious, what do you think of this?

It is immoral and illegal.

It is immoral and illegal.

jim_shorts

[QUOTE="jim_shorts"]

It is immoral and illegal.

BluRayHiDef

This is already covered under laws. It was done under duress, so no, it wont be illegal and arguably not immoral.

This is already covered under laws. It was done under duress, so no, it wont be illegal and arguably not immoral.

XaosII

• What if the hostage enjoys the killing?
• What if the hostage that is killed is a baby?

[QUOTE="XaosII"]

This is already covered under laws. It was done under duress, so no, it wont be illegal and arguably not immoral.

BluRayHiDef

• What if the hostage enjoys the killing?
• What if the hostage that is killed is a baby?

No, the hostage was forced to kill the other person, so the hostage who did the killing shouldn't be blamed.ghoklebutter

[QUOTE="XaosII"]

This is already covered under laws. It was done under duress, so no, it wont be illegal and arguably not immoral.

BluRayHiDef

• What if the hostage enjoys the killing?
• What if the hostage that is killed is a baby?

If a threat forced coercion on someone who would not normally perform such an act, then it was under duress. It doesn't particularly matter if the person enjoyed the killing or if a baby was killed.

If the person A) enjoys killing but B) does not normally go around killing, then it was still under duress.

If the person A) enjoys killing but B) goes around killing, then it was not under duress. But a seperate case would have to be made account that person for all the murders.

LETS PLAY A GAME.MudoSkills

[QUOTE="BluRayHiDef"]

[QUOTE="XaosII"]

This is already covered under laws. It was done under duress, so no, it wont be illegal and arguably not immoral.

ghoklebutter

• What if the hostage enjoys the killing?
• What if the hostage that is killed is a baby?

Wouldn't that fall under self defense?

[QUOTE="BluRayHiDef"]

[QUOTE="XaosII"]

This is already covered under laws. It was done under duress, so no, it wont be illegal and arguably not immoral.

XaosII

• What if the hostage enjoys the killing?
• What if the hostage that is killed is a baby?

If a threat forced coercion on someone who would not normally perform such an act, then it was under duress. It doesn't particularly matter if the person enjoyed the killing or if a baby was killed.

If the person A) enjoys killing but B) does not normally go around killing, then it was still under duress.

If the person A) enjoys killing but B) goes around killing, then it was not under duress. But a seperate case would have to be made account that person for all the murders.

[QUOTE="XaosII"]

This is already covered under laws. It was done under duress, so no, it wont be illegal and arguably not immoral.

BluRayHiDef

• What if the hostage enjoys the killing?
• What if the hostage that is killed is a baby?

legally- self defense is an objective mechanism (usually focused around the concept of reasonability) which is developed in a preliminary portion of the judicial process, and before examining the existence of mens rea. the focus of examination is, as always in the criminal world, the perpetrator and not the victim.

so, yea, even then.

Most of you are focusing only on the legal aspect. Focus on the moral aspect as well.

[QUOTE="MudoSkills"]LETS PLAY A GAME.brucewayne69

What if the hostage taker asks the hostage to kill another hostage, but the hostage says NO LOL and kills himself instead in defiance, should the hostage taker be charge with murder or should it be settled as suicide?

[QUOTE="ghoklebutter"][QUOTE="BluRayHiDef"]

• What if the hostage enjoys the killing?
• What if the hostage that is killed is a baby?

BluRayHiDef

Most of you are focusing only on the legal aspect. Focus on the moral aspect as well.

BluRayHiDef

[QUOTE="BluRayHiDef"]

Most of you are focusing only on the legal aspect. Focus on the moral aspect as well.

pie-junior

[QUOTE="pie-junior"][QUOTE="BluRayHiDef"]

Most of you are focusing only on the legal aspect. Focus on the moral aspect as well.

PannicAtack

[QUOTE="BluRayHiDef"]

Most of you are focusing only on the legal aspect. Focus on the moral aspect as well.

pie-junior

I'd argue that it immoral to take someone else's life in order to preserve your own.jim_shorts

[QUOTE="XaosII"]

This is already covered under laws. It was done under duress, so no, it wont be illegal and arguably not immoral.

BluRayHiDef

• What if the hostage enjoys the killing?
• What if the hostage that is killed is a baby?

Enjoying doing cocaine doesn't make the sentence worse.

[QUOTE="pie-junior"][QUOTE="BluRayHiDef"]

Most of you are focusing only on the legal aspect. Focus on the moral aspect as well.

jim_shorts

[QUOTE="jim_shorts"] I'd argue that it immoral to take someone else's life in order to preserve your own.pie-junior

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="jim_shorts"]I'd argue that it immoral to take someone else's life in order to preserve your own.PannicAtack

[QUOTE="pie-junior"][QUOTE="jim_shorts"] I'd argue that it immoral to take someone else's life in order to preserve your own.jim_shorts

What justifies taking a life IYO? The other hostage is not threatening you. And if you are given the means to kill the innocent hostage....why not turn the tables and try to take out the threat? That would be more justified than killing someone that isn't a threat. Should society condone selfishness?LJS9502_basic

That assumes you are given a weapon to kill the other innocent hostage. If the scenario is that the other person has a rope around their neck and is on top of a chair and you are forced at gun-point to push the chair, are you suggesting that its better to take the chair and attempt to fight off the kidnapper with a gun? I doubt it.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] What justifies taking a life IYO? The other hostage is not threatening you. And if you are given the means to kill the innocent hostage....why not turn the tables and try to take out the threat? That would be more justified than killing someone that isn't a threat. Should society condone selfishness?XaosII

That assumes you are given a weapon to kill the other innocent hostage. If the scenario is that the other person has a rope around their neck and is on top of a chair and you are forced at gun-point to push the chair, are you suggesting that its better to take the chair and attempt to fight off the kidnapper with a gun? I doubt it.

[QUOTE="XaosII"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] What justifies taking a life IYO? The other hostage is not threatening you. And if you are given the means to kill the innocent hostage....why not turn the tables and try to take out the threat? That would be more justified than killing someone that isn't a threat. Should society condone selfishness?LJS9502_basic

That assumes you are given a weapon to kill the other innocent hostage. If the scenario is that the other person has a rope around their neck and is on top of a chair and you are forced at gun-point to push the chair, are you suggesting that its better to take the chair and attempt to fight off the kidnapper with a gun? I doubt it.

I am. But does your opinion change if you are clearly not on equal power to the kidnapper?

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="XaosII"]

That assumes you are given a weapon to kill the other innocent hostage. If the scenario is that the other person has a rope around their neck and is on top of a chair and you are forced at gun-point to push the chair, are you suggesting that its better to take the chair and attempt to fight off the kidnapper with a gun? I doubt it.

XaosII

I am. But does your opinion change if you are clearly not on equal power to the kidnapper?

in canadian law you would get charged with murder but so would the guy forcing them too

[QUOTE="pie-junior"][QUOTE="BluRayHiDef"]

Most of you are focusing only on the legal aspect. Focus on the moral aspect as well.

PannicAtack

in canadian law you would get charged with murder but so would the guy forcing them too

akdiuuuryttt

in canadian law you would get charged with murder but so would the guy forcing them too

akdiuuuryttt

in canadian law you would get charged with murder but so would the guy forcing them too

akdiuuuryttt