|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
posted September 28, 2011 11:22 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Yes, of course, and I'd expect anybody else to do the same.
What if the person you hit was parked illegally?
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted September 28, 2011 11:35 PM |
|
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted September 28, 2011 11:40 PM |
|
|
Hey, I did this before 
Or something similar. I was getting out of my new car, which has doors that are wider than I'm accustomed to, and I smacked the car next to me and caused a small nick in it. I said "FUUUU" inside my head and drove off.
That being said, I'm not proud of my immediate reaction. You should obviously leave a note because driving off isn't very nice, and who wants to live in a world where people treat each other like that? Srysly.
There was this other time where I backed up into somebody's mailbox and I left a note that time, except they never called back  I also backed up into one of my friend's mailboxes, but my friend's mom was watching us when it happened.
edit: I'm a good driver when it matters guys. Honestly.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
gnomes2169
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Duke of the Glade
|
|
posted September 28, 2011 11:46 PM |
|
|
I would probably run like hell... but I would leave the note before retreating into the underground bunker.
____________
Yeah in the 18th century, two inventions suggested a method of measurement. One won and the other stayed in America.
-Ghost destroying Fred
|
|
OmegaDestroyer
Hero of Order
Fox or Chicken?
|
|
posted September 28, 2011 11:49 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Yes, of course, and I'd expect anybody else to do the same.
What if the person you hit was parked illegally?
In my state, it does not matter. If you hit anything with a moving car, it's pretty much your fault. I backed into someone who was parked illegally and I was still at fault. I told her I had backed into her car as well. Needless to say, my deductable went up. Killed our friendship too.
____________
The giant has awakened
You drink my blood and drown
Wrath and raving I will not stop
You'll never take me down
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted September 29, 2011 09:06 AM |
|
|
|
considering I don't have a car and don't plan to get one, does it apply to me?
|
|
Tsar-Ivor
Promising
Legendary Hero
Scourge of God
|
|
posted September 29, 2011 09:37 AM |
|
|
I doubt I'd make a msitake like that, but yeh'h my immediate reaction would be to GTFO of there, then feel bad and return with a note, ooooor just drive off park somewhere, return to the guy/gal and inform him/her that some crazy *** dude did it  .
____________
"No laughs were had. There is only shame and sadness." Jenny
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted September 29, 2011 10:11 AM |
|
|
Why do you think a BUMPER is called a BUMPER?
Not that long ago, let's say 30 years, when cars still had real bumpers, a trip to Paris would teach you why. Parking space was ultra-rare, and the first thing you learned was, never, really NEVER leave your car in gear when you park it, so that the car parking behind or in front of you would be able to push you out of the way - and that's no joke. Cars would park, like, 10 centimeters distance to the car in front of you and 5 to the car behind you, lest no space was wasted.
That has left a somewhat lasting impression. Bumping into another car's bumpers with slow speed, I probably wouldn't even bother to look - bumpers today can take bumps of 10 Miles and lower without any problem.
If another car has left me not enough space so that I have to squeeze through the door, and my door touches the other car when I open it - it's the other guy's fault. I don't look either. If he's so concerned about his car paint he should leave the others enough space to get into their cars.
However, if I'd really bump into a car side or something, leaving a dent, it was clearly my fault - momentary blindness or whatever, and I've been educated to stand up for my mistakes, so I'd probably leave a note. For these cases you should have registration number, name and address of someone handy whom you are really pissed about. 
For all else play this song:
How to behave when on the road
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted September 29, 2011 03:43 PM |
|
|
I guess car insurance would cover it.
So I would most likely leave, because cars are too expensive to fix, and I most likely already have expended more than the months budget just on fixing the dent on my own car.
And I guess I am apathic enough to only leave a note if the car was properly parked, and it was entirely my fault that I hit it. If its parked in "snow parking mode", then frankly I could care less.
____________
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted September 29, 2011 04:57 PM |
|
|
Well isn't it rather situational? I certainly would do my best to minimize the burden upon the victim, but what that constitutes is probably very dependent on where in the world we are. I'd personally dislike if someone did something irritating to me, then to take contact if it said contact was unnecessary. In short, since I've no idea how one is supposed to handle these kind of things where I live, I'd probably phone home and ask.
That's with the exception if it was my own car I hit. In that case I'd find it odd if I were to contact myself.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted November 07, 2011 06:02 PM |
|
Edited by Corribus at 18:04, 07 Nov 2011.
|
Lucky number 13:
A woman is near death from a special kind of cancer. There is one drug that the doctors think might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town has recently discovered. The drug is expensive to make, but the druggist is charging ten times what the drug costs him to produce. He pays $200 for the radium and charges $2,000 for a small dose of the drug.
The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about $1,000 which is half of what the costs. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said: "No, I discovered the drug and I'm going to make money from it." So Heinz got desperate and broke into the man's store to steal the drug for his wife.
Should Heinz have broken into the store to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not?
In this dilemma, it is important to clearly state your reasoning. Also, please try to formulate your answer independent of what other people say - that is, think of your answer and respond before reading other responses.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 07, 2011 06:23 PM |
|
|
Morally I see no problem with the man breaking in, "stealing" the drug. He loves his wife, there is a chance that she will survive with the drug, while she will surely die without her. No one would have had a loss, and he could even offer a substantial gain for the owner of the drug, which gives him a moral right to TRY OBTAINING IT as long as no one is hurt (he might even leave the 1000 bucks).
Morally, if it's about life and death you cannot expect people to CLING to the letter of the law. There is nothing wrong with making a buck with life and death, but there is a limit - again, morally spoken - for unnecessary greed in the face of that. Morally, the man should take the 1000 bucks and be satisfied with 400% profit. If he insist on making 900 in the face of certain death he shouldn't be surprised if he's burglared.
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 07, 2011 06:43 PM |
|
|
well, I think life has more value than money. and that's not a very honorable way to make money imo. I can understand that the chemist put much work into his discovery, but I don't think it's right to make profit out of everything. that is to say, out of things that humans need to live.
but if you look at it from another angle, it could be because nowadays money seems to have a higher value than life that the chemist feels forced to act this way. or more simply, eat before you get eaten.
|
|
DagothGares
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
No gods or kings
|
|
posted November 07, 2011 06:57 PM |
|
|
I don't know, seems like the man has his priorities and he wasn't a crook. I think a man should be able to obtain a product, if he's willing to work for it (and if he can earn the value of the product as made by the seller in a reasonable amount of time.)
Of course, there was theft, but such a thing doesn't matter, when time presses a knife on your throat. I think the action was moral and the chemist in this example is cartoonishly evil.
____________
If you have any more questions, go to Dagoth Cares.
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted November 07, 2011 07:01 PM |
|
|
A situation like that is similar to a starving person stealing food. If obeying the law means losing your life, then by default, it is fundamentally impossible for you to give the individual a sound reason not to do it. Any incentive to not breaking the law is gone at that point. Don't do it... why? Because it's not nice? You'll be fined? You'll go to jail? You'll have your hand cut off? You'll get shot? If you don't steal, you're dead anyway. That's especially true in a situation where the circumstances of your plight were pretty much outside of your control. But even if your desperation is a result of really stupid choices on your part, even so, you're still in a life or death situation and I don't think you can expect a person to indirectly commit suicide.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
kodial79
Promising
Supreme Hero
How'd Phi's Lov't
|
|
posted November 07, 2011 07:19 PM |
|
|
Law and Justice are two different things. Laws are there to regulate the way of life within a society and they may not be necessairily just. In such a case, one must go through unlawful ways to fix that.
As to Corribus' example, a society that doesn't provide with free health care it's members, is an unjust society. If people are to make money out of such issues then we're done for as a race. Ofcourse doctors and medics must be rewarded for their efforts but not through their patients right at their moment of need.
So there's no dillema here. Break the law, do everything and anything necessairy to save your life or that of your loved one. For me, it goes without saying.
____________
Signature? I don't need no stinking signature!
|
|
Brukernavn
Hero of Order
|
|
posted November 07, 2011 08:39 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Should Heinz have broken into the store to steal the drug for his wife?
No, because consequentialism does not work. There are many others things he could have done instead;
- Get a loan or a credit card.
- Go to the local or national media and inform about the case. This could lead to several things happening;
- The negative media attention could force the druggist to reduce the price, or even give it for free for positive PR.
- People he doesn't know could donate money so he could afford the drug.
- A rivaling company could afford a similar drug and look like "the nice guy".
- Seek help from one of the many volunteer organisations or funds.
To expand on this; the dilemma is basically "does the ends justify the means?". And the answer is no.
The reason many would answer yes to this question is because they feel the druggist "deserves" to be punished. But what if the druggists wife needed a life saving surgery that cost 2000$, and that's why he wanted that amount of money? What if the drug didn't work? What if the man got arrested, and his wife became worse because of the emotional distress it caused, and eventually died, even if the drug initially made her better?
Consequentialism is fundamentally flawed because no one can predict the consequences of an action. Therefore saying that the ends justify the means is meaningless, because you really don't know what the end will be, and therefore have no real basis to judge the means.
|
|
JoonasTo
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
What if Elvin was female?
|
|
posted November 07, 2011 09:11 PM |
|
|
If looking from Heinz perspective, yup. He was saving his wife's life.
If looking from the drug guy's perspective, nope. He stole from him.
If looking from his wife's perspective, not sure. Depends on how much value the wife puts on Heinz life being in order in exchange for her own.
____________
DON'T BE A NOOB, JOIN A.D.V.E.N.T.U.R.E.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 07, 2011 09:56 PM |
|
|
Quote:
To expand on this; the dilemma is basically "does the ends justify the means?". And the answer is no.
The end may or may not justify the means, but the end is the only thing that can possibly justify the means. The reason people act is for some end - that end is the justification for their action.
You may not always be able to predict the end perfectly, but that's no reason to reject consequentialism. Otherwise, human action would necessarily be meaningless.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 07, 2011 10:03 PM |
|
Edited by Fauch at 22:04, 07 Nov 2011.
|
if you do nothing, are there no consequences?
or actually, you should just steal the drug. for nothing.
|
|
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
