2006-10-02 01:58:56 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Entertainment & Music ➔ Polls & Surveys
i don't have a clue what you just said little man...but you touched me...
2006-10-02 14:35:31 · answer #1 · answered by Cap'n Donna 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It really depends on the circumstance. Where the threat to life is imminent, yes defensive measures, even ones that are considered close to murderous, might justifiably be employed. However, in most cases the ends, where the preservation of life is not involved, never justify the utilization of immoral methods.
2006-10-02 09:01:58 · answer #2 · answered by Lawrence Louis 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Not necessarily so , when considering a police officers aggressive behavior after someone has totally surrendered. When a communities total trust is placed in a crooked politicians hands , I'd also say "No". When attempting to answer a vague question with no reference point...."sure".
2006-10-02 09:07:42 · answer #3 · answered by Attaboyslim 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Most of the times,no!
2006-10-02 09:01:15 · answer #4 · answered by firefly 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
most of the time
2006-10-02 09:48:48 · answer #5 · answered by shaygirl_rose 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This all depends on what is the "ends" and what are the "means".
2006-10-02 09:06:11 · answer #6 · answered by loufedalis 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't know - sometimes maybe - depends on what the means are.
2006-10-02 09:06:46 · answer #7 · answered by Rachel 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's the thought that counts i.e. the means are everything!
2006-10-02 09:01:05 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
You know, I always forget what that particular expression means.....it's too early for me anyway!
2006-10-02 09:12:53 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sometimes.
2006-10-02 09:06:00 · answer #10 · answered by Apollo 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
yep, it's called Machiavellianism.
ok, not really, but the theory is still worth a look.
2006-10-02 09:03:58 · answer #11 · answered by pugsbaby 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋