Originally posted by CivilDiscourse
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Ethics question
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
So, it's about Trump.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post
The theme I see in answers (and also what I believe) is that the truth of my words are irrelevant to my culpability. Instead my culpability revolves around A. My Action, B. Whether I should have reasonably expected a violent reaction, and C. My motive in taking the action
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
It would be argued that malice was a factor. Possibly even "acting in concert" or conspiring.
Absent malice.
I think it goes more to the notion that you KNEW the words were true or false. We can tell somebody something that we believe to be true, that is, in reality, false.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View PostHere's a hypothetical for you.
Fred is the significant other of Alice, and is known to be jealous. Alice is eating lunch with Charlie, a coworker. I have Fred meet me across the street from where they are eating lunch. I tell Fred that Alice is cheating on him with Charlie. Fred in a fit of rage, kills both Alice and Charlie.
Am I responsible for Alice and Charlie's death?
Does that responsibility change in any way if I knew Alice and Charlie were not having an affair?
Does that responsibility change if I said "There's been talk that Charlie and Alice are having an affair, which is true, regardless of whether they are actually having an affair?
In other words, if crime happens as a direct result of my statement, is my culpability reliant on whether the words I spoke true or false?
On the other hand, if you knew that Fred was the type who could be provoked into a murderous rage, and it was your intent to antagonize him, then you would be at least partially culpable even if what you told him was true.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Faber View PostAlice had every right in the world to have lunch with Charlie. She was not married to Fred.
And Fred was 100% responsible for his own actions. Unless he were a Democrat, in which case whatever weapon he used was 100% responsible. Then again, if Alice and Charlie were black or Hispanic, and Fred were white, then Fred would be 100% responsible, regardless of what the weapon was.
However, if Alice and Charlie were white and Fred were black or Hispanic, then it would have been Alice's and Charlie's fault for inciting a riot.
Your only culpability was in telling Fred. Unless you worked for the New York Times of Washington Post, in which case it was your right (and actual responsibility) to make this known to Fred, regardless of what the consequences or outcome would be.
Leave a comment:
-
Alice had every right in the world to have lunch with Charlie. She was not married to Fred.
And Fred was 100% responsible for his own actions. Unless he were a Democrat, in which case whatever weapon he used was 100% responsible. Then again, if Alice and Charlie were black or Hispanic, and Fred were white, then Fred would be 100% responsible, regardless of what the weapon was.
However, if Alice and Charlie were white and Fred were black or Hispanic, then it would have been Alice's and Charlie's fault for inciting a riot.
Your only culpability was in telling Fred. Unless you worked for the New York Times of Washington Post, in which case it was your right (and actual responsibility) to make this known to Fred, regardless of what the consequences or outcome would be.
- 3 likes
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View PostDoes that responsibility change in any way if I knew Alice and Charlie were not having an affair?
Does that responsibility change if I said "There's been talk that Charlie and Alice are having an affair, which is true, regardless of whether they are actually having an affair?
In other words, if crime happens as a direct result of my statement, is my culpability reliant on whether the words I spoke true or false?
Leave a comment:
-
Good question. I think if it can be proven that you were purposefully manipulating him into committing murder like actually talking him into it, or "brainwashing" him, inciting him, then you could be held responsible, kinda like Charles Manson. Merely lying to him that his wife was having an affair, I don't think you would be legally responsible for his actions. He could have just divorced her, right?
Incitement of violence is a thing.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View PostHere's a hypothetical for you.
Fred is the significant other of Alice, and is known to be jealous. Alice is eating lunch with Charlie, a coworker. I have Fred meet me across the street from where they are eating lunch. I tell Fred that Alice is cheating on him with Charlie. Fred in a fit of rage, kills both Alice and Charlie.
Am I responsible for Alice and Charlie's death?
Does that responsibility change in any way if I knew Alice and Charlie were not having an affair?
Does that responsibility change if I said "There's been talk that Charlie and Alice are having an affair, which is true, regardless of whether they are actually having an affair?
In other words, if crime happens as a direct result of my statement, is my culpability reliant on whether the words I spoke true or false?
Leave a comment:
-
I think it comes down to the notion of "knowingly" creating a situation in which violence could reasonably be a result.
However - individual responsibility is a principle that Fred committed the crime - murder - which is his own burden to bear.
Were you complicit? That would come down to whether it can be shown that you knew that murder might be a likely outcome of your statement.
Another concept -- did Fred go immediately murder them (a crime of passion) or plan revenge (premeditated murder).
- 1 like
Leave a comment:
-
Ethics question
Here's a hypothetical for you.
Fred is the significant other of Alice, and is known to be jealous. Alice is eating lunch with Charlie, a coworker. I have Fred meet me across the street from where they are eating lunch. I tell Fred that Alice is cheating on him with Charlie. Fred in a fit of rage, kills both Alice and Charlie.
Am I responsible for Alice and Charlie's death?
Does that responsibility change in any way if I knew Alice and Charlie were not having an affair?
Does that responsibility change if I said "There's been talk that Charlie and Alice are having an affair, which is true, regardless of whether they are actually having an affair?
In other words, if crime happens as a direct result of my statement, is my culpability reliant on whether the words I spoke true or false?Tags: None
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
|
16 responses
75 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Mountain Man
Today, 10:23 AM
|
||
Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
|
52 responses
262 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Mountain Man
Today, 09:58 AM
|
||
Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
|
25 responses
108 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Today, 08:36 AM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
|
33 responses
195 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Roy
Today, 07:43 AM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
|
83 responses
348 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Sparko
Today, 10:19 AM
|
Leave a comment: