Do you think that is should be legal to kill someone who is draining our resources?

Question

A friend and i have the conversation sometimes....i have decided that if someone were a major drain on the resources of a community and contributes nothing at all to the progress and only depletes those resources...then it should be okay to kill them if they allow it...if you have the ability to do hand to hand combat...and thye lose then they neither lived a life that contributes nor had the strength to defend thier way of life....if they were able to defend thier way of life then of course allow them to do that....survival of the fittest and all....if i personally were a drain on my family and loved ones then i would feel like a burden and have no self respect as a human at all....i am not crazy nor sadistic...just logical....society should be a game of gains and losses...to provide a better future for our posteririty then we have to eliminate the present problems....give me your thoughts please...and examples if you agree.

okay, so far ya'll have given a lot of things to think about....each situation of the said "draining" individual is not left up to one person but to a group of people with various veiwpoints...they decide what to do with these people....the murders, rapist, criminals etc. should be killed because not only are they a drain but a harmful compnent...the elderly should be treated with respect and care....but only be the ones that are willing to share their resources on a personal instead of collective level....each demographic has specific reprecussions based on thier type of drain...and to answer someone's comment...yes if it were deemed that i were a drain then rather than live on the charity and depletion of the ones i loved, i would much rather be killed or done away with....this idea is more for the survival of the ones that can contribute rather than that of hitler (whom some referenced) who chose to this out of hate...i am not twisted this is just a social theory...what do you think

Answer 1

Well firstly, the Christian belief is that nobody is simply a waste of life. There's this idea that "God does not make junk."

They also happen to believe that no one has the right to kill, because fundamentally, all humans are capable of something good, we're all made in the image of God and that if you're dead, you never have a chance to prove your worth or doing anything beneficial towards humanity.

Let's look at it from another viewpoint though, stepping away from religion. What's stopping me from killing every unarmed person I encounter? As long as I don't use a weapon, it's a fair fight, and it's survival of the fittest. Chances are, I'd win. But then our population would take a drastic fall until there's only the strongest of the strong left. The very fittest. What kind of world would that be? It's much better for humans to get along by acceptance and positive influence- nurturing the new generations to be better and more loving than the ones before it.

I guess that's just my viewpoint though. It's kinda narrow. I do agree with you, but there are more productive ways of conserving resources than those who just simply drain it. Maybe we should all stop having hot showers to conserve gas for a few years. Maybe we should all carpool so we burn half the petrol. Maybe we should just encourage (more firmly) energy conservation. There are so many solutions to so large a problem, but in short, I don't believe it's fair, ethical, or in any way justified to kill someone because they're not showing signs of helping society. If you kill them, you can't expect them to change for the better.

Answer 2

If you could kill people for reasons like that, then what would stop some stronger, smarter person to do the same to you?

Are you that useful to society? Hey you know what, I say let's kill all the elders too, I mean once they aren't useful anymore lets get rid of them. Taking care of elders is such a drain on society. Plus they wouldn't be able to defend themselves in hand to hand combat! Meet you at your grandparents, maybe we even get to loot some valuable things.

Yeah, I was sarcastic. Simply put you are a Nazi. And so is the person that proposed to send people far away so they aren't a strain to society either. Sounds pretty much like the morning train for Auschwitz. It's a nice camp for Jews, homosexuals, retards, gypsies and all. It's very nice there. You get to take a shower first then... oh wait nothing after because you're killed.

Maybe it should be legal to kill idiots like you, who are the real danger unlike some harmless cripple or elder that spent his/her life working hard.

Answer 3

Yes that is the law of the Jungle. Then murder for profit is both moral and good so long as you share with your buddies/cohorts. This is how rogue nations and organized crime works. The problem with calling this logic is that it results in a net loss and that is why the rule of law was adopted. Selection is proceeding quite well with economic struggle eliminating the less financially fit by reducing their reproduction rate.
And Aynn Rand was a polygamous bisexual russian refugee who wrote for a profit.

even the neanderthal cavemen were smart enough to look out for and look after each other, the first neanderthal skeleton found was that of a cripple who would not have survived in the wild but died of old age.

Now quit wasting our valuable resources!

Answer 4

Good grief you have given this a lot of thought.
I can't begin to tell you the ways your thought processes are warped.
You don't give disabled children much chance do you?

Needless to say no, I don't think we should have the right to kill people simply because they do not contribute to (your idea of the perfect) society.
Jeez some whole families would be wiped out.

You and Adolf would have made great buds.

I do however, encourage you to continue to think about the world around you.

Answer 5

Killing is kind of harsh, don't you think ? There should be ways to exclude these induviduals from your resources. I have no problem in letting them starve, it might pull the button that makes them contribute at least enough to stay alive.

If a person spoils crucial amounts of vital resources by a criminal act, you may have another discussion.

Answer 6

No.
With your attitude I would not want you to consider if I am a drain to "resources". Maybe what I consider a valuable resource you would not. Should I kill you?
The human race has survived by using resources as they see fit, and the world is still going on.
That is my answer from Washington, D.C.

Answer 7

I agree with you that it should be SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST... but someone who YOU see as unfit and weak, may be seen as STRONG to others...for example, a person who gets paralysed is weak and no longer able to fend for themselves, and should therefore be "theoretically" killed, as they are weak...)

BUT...that person is STRONG in the eyes of his/hers family because he/she has a will to survive and doesnt give up hope!

And if society WERE to decide on killing off the weak, i shudder to think of the responsibility of the people who make the decisions of who is to live and who is to survive!

I mean, today, we as humans still cant weed out KILLERS and RAPISTS etc etc...and someone who RAPES 20 children and is sent to Jail is still entitled to human rights???

Where's the LOGIC in that...what about the rights of the humans that that rapist/killer has taken away from his/her victims!?

It would be a great idea to try and put in place a system such as the one you suggested...but it would never work in practice, because of human error, corruption, greed etc etc that we find in governments in todays worlds!

Answer 8

How about the 5% of the world population that uses 25% of the worlds resources! Lets wipe THEM out.Ooops,that would be all the Americans.I imagine most of the world would feel that way though,which is about the same way your thinkin' Ya freeek!

Answer 9

It depend on situation. let say the resource is money. be realistic.. if those people no wish to contribute. they are burden to community. because they are really draining resource. but for those could really unable to contribute even they wish to. it 's ok.

for example, if those people can work. but they do not work and never try hard to look for job. i really feel that they are burden.

but to answer your question. no one should get killed, even they are burden. life is precious!

Answer 10

there in nothing personal in my answer.
the living is just to stay alive in this world till the permitted time. to kill is the power of GOD and not even to the nations, as some of them do. the killing of even criminals is categorised to that the theme should not be permitted to wander to other people in general community. the draining of sources in ur point may not be correct with others view. so leave the play of life and death to GOD himself and the life of play should fairly be played.