If a armed murderer was running thru a crowded mall, would you throw a grenade at him?

Question

The people who see he is armed and don't stop him are just as guilty?

Because, isn't that what israel is doing by bombing apartment homes to get maybe 3 terrorist?

Answer 1

Is this, perchance, a metaphor for Israel's bombing of Lebanon civilians in order to get their two kidnapped soldiers back?

Answer 2

No, because a grenade thrown at a crowd is worse than an armed murderer shooting up the place. At least when the armed person shoots, other people have a chance to run, get away, or be wounded, while throwing a grenade would kill and wound more civilians instantaneously.

As for being tacitly complicit by not doing anything, I think that's a weak argument since you can't do much against someone who is armed unless you are armed. If it's the case that you are armed as well (other than a grenade), but did nothing, you are in the wrong, ethically, as you let this happen when it could have been prevented. Legally you are not, since there is no act on your part that facilitated the event. If you are not armed, you can hardly be blamed as equally guilty since you are in no position to prevent the situation.

Answer 3

Maybe and no.

As to throwing the grenade, the issue is collateral damage. If you're talking about a grenade that has no physically harmful effects and simply renders the person unconscious, then probably. The temporary inconvenience to anyone else in the blast area is outweighed by the benefits of preventing the further threat.

If the grenade only causes property damage, and no other damage to people, then it would depend on the actual threat imposed by the person. Someone who killed an innocent person with premeditation, and who is likely to kill again, would justify harsher response than someone who killed a burglar in their home out of fear or rage.

But stopping one murdered almost never justifies causing massive harm or death to innocent bystanders.

Nor are the bystanders guilty just because they don't stop him. Under modern laws, there is no affirmative duty to prevent a stranger from committing a crime. So, just refusing to act to stop him does not make those people guilty under the law.

As far as your analogy to Israel, the situations are not the same. First, it's not 3 terrorists. It's thousands. Second, Israel warned the civilians to flee before the bombing started. So, like my second example, there should not have been any collateral loss of life. Third, it's a self defense situation, since Hezbollah was actively attacking Israel, not trying to run away like in your example.

Finally, a civilian law enforcement decision in a mall is utterly different in scope and context from a war zone.

Answer 4

Did you think this highly theoretical situation up all by yourself or did you have help.

One question: When was the last time you strolled through the mall having a hand grenade on you. Kinda rare, right? I have been to numerous malls and guess what... No armed murderer was running amok. Chances of that happening is also pretty small.

Now try to combine those two very slim chances of a murderer running amok and a passer-by having a grenade handy. On the result of that you can directly measure the relevance of your question.

Answer 5

Oh yet obviously! I bear in mind once being in a gathering with an demanding man or woman who did not take observe of every person, and popping out with "Sorry, lets come back once you've grown an interest-span?" yet this is not extremely a similar element as actual communique-guerrilla strategies, and that i'm a lot mellower than i became as an adolescent. there is continuously attainable once you do this that you'll reason actual damange, and also you should gauge your crowd properly. imagine the most suitable time I released a perfect hand-grenade became in a gathering of friends from diverse aspects of my existence. one in each of my friends is a journalist who travels the international plenty and would not desire childrens. So obviously "The Boeing 747 as birth control - talk" became really a grenade, even with the undeniable fact that it were given human beings talking back!

Answer 6

A grenade, in a crowded mall? That's like burning down your house because you saw an ant inside.

Answer 7

In your fantasy...mmm... where are we supposed to get a grenade to throw at your imaginary murderer? Can you take a couple sleeping pills and finish the script?

Answer 8

No,the same risks would be involved. It would likely kill someone else to throw a graneade at him. The same as letting him go free. It would put other people at risk of getting killed. I would find another way of stopping him so it didn't harm other people

Answer 9

I would throw a grenade in a plain ole crowded mall. I hate malls.

Answer 10

I don't know how I would react in such a situation....I hope I would do anything to stop him..and yes perhaps even throw a grenade!!