The Morality of Accidents

[TheMonotonePuppet]

I'm curious as to what are the limits of your understanding for others. How much can you sympathize with someone who has caused carnage through no fault of their own?

In fiction, there are many stories of unwilling accessories to murder. Apparently, in law in the U.S.A., if you are forced to murder under threat of death, you are still at fault for the crime. The message is that government essentially says "No, James Bond, I expect you to die!" Personally, I feel that's wrong, but others may feel differently, and I can't necessarily say they would be wrong to do so.

In more fantastical situations, where characters get powers, the first time they use it is often... explosive. This can result in injuries and even mass casualty events. These events can scale anywhere from one accidental death to thousands, even tens of thousands. It's not their fault they were handed this power, but they were shoved into it anyway. At what level of collateral damage and death is the limit you can forgive them? At what point do you just say "Nah. They gotta go."

And obviously, it's easy to say when it's not people you know. But what if your entire family was wiped out? Let's say a kid gets an active aura that turns the people within a 30 foot radius into slavering masses of pink flesh and lupine maws, with no reverse button. This kid got this power after being knifed and running away, bleeding out, while being chased by some group (let's say the mob for the heck of it) through a crowded area. Your family was there. Just like that, they become mindless ambulatory starfishes moving by protrusions of long-toothed mouths.

Can you forgive them? Can you assign the blame to the mob or, even as you try hard to forgive them, do you hate them and fear them for the horrific torment they have unwittingly inflicted on your parents, siblings, grandparents, etc?

 

[GlassRose]

Morally, I wouldn't blame them, but I might still decide that they're too dangerous and/or out of control to live.

 

[TheMonotonePuppet]

Morally, I wouldn't blame them, but I might still decide that they're too dangerous and/or out of control to live.

At what point would you decide this? Is there a good hypothetical fantasy situation that would demarcate the dividing ground between not too dangerous and too dangerous?

 

[Deleted member 84247]

Imagine a person who if anyone touches that person dies. It's been done before a lot. Most people will want to seal them somewhere or kill them if they can. I think it's the right choice if you consider the safety of the populace. It's an example of sacrificing one to save many, and if the person is on the good side, they will probably seal themselves. But if that person is someone you love, what do you do?

If a scenario as you described happened, I'd not hate the person. This is a similar thing to Superman. People hate him because they feared his power. If Superman stopped a bad guy, but 1000s died because of his attack, do we also blame Superman? But if someone inherits an inherently malicious power, they will be dealt with promptly.

 

[QuercusMalus]

I'm curious as to what are the limits of your understanding for others. How much can you sympathize with someone who has caused carnage through no fault of their own?

In fiction, there are many stories of unwilling accessories to murder. Apparently, in law in the U.S.A., if you are forced to murder under threat of death, you are still at fault for the crime. The message is that government essentially says "No, James Bond, I expect you to die!" Personally, I feel that's wrong, but others may feel differently, and I can't necessarily say they would be wrong to do so.

This is called 'Murder by Duress'. Some states downgrade the charges from homicide to manslaughter. Some don't, and it will rely heavily on the judge and jury how sentencing goes if convicted.
Like self defense, you have to prove it actually was the case.

Elements of Duress:

• A reasonable fear of imminent death or serious bodily harm
• Through the words or actions of another person
• With no reasonable opportunity to escape the threat
• Through no fault of the defendant- I suspect this one is the kicker. If you go hang out with the Hells Angels, you really can't claim duress if they make you shoot a rival gang member.

In more fantastical situations, where characters get powers, the first time they use it is often... explosive. This can result in injuries and even mass casualty events. These events can scale anywhere from one accidental death to thousands, even tens of thousands. It's not their fault they were handed this power, but they were shoved into it anyway. At what level of collateral damage and death is the limit you can forgive them? At what point do you just say "Nah. They gotta go."

Can they control the power? Will they? How long will it take them to learn to control it? How many are likely to die either by accident before they learn control, or on purpose after? Can they be directed at an enemy?

And obviously, it's easy to say when it's not people you know. But what if your entire family was wiped out? Let's say a kid gets an active aura that turns the people within a 30 foot radius into slavering masses of pink flesh and lupine maws, with no reverse button. This kid got this power after being knifed and running away, bleeding out, while being chased by some group (let's say the mob for the heck of it) through a crowded area. Your family was there. Just like that, they become mindless ambulatory starfishes moving by protrusions of long-toothed mouths.

Can you forgive them? Can you assign the blame to the mob or, even as you try hard to forgive them, do you hate them and fear them for the horrific torment they have unwittingly inflicted on your parents, siblings, grandparents, etc?

Imagine a person who if anyone touches that person dies. It's been done before a lot. Most people will want to seal them somewhere or kill them if they can. I think it's the right choice if you consider the safety of the populace. It's an example of sacrificing one to save many, and if the person is on the good side, they will probably seal themselves. But if that person is someone you love, what do you do?

If a scenario as you described happened, I'd not hate the person. This is a similar thing to Superman. People hate him because they feared his power. If Superman stopped a bad guy, but 1000s died because of his attack, do we also blame Superman? But if someone inherits an inherently malicious power, they will be dealt with promptly.

Depends. If 2000 died because of Superman fighting the villainess, but if Superman had stayed away, only 1000 would have died, can you still argue Superman is 'good'?

 

[laccoff_mawning]

An accident is an accident. The only reason I might choose to hold them accountable is if I felt the accident was caused by some form of negligence on their part.

I think I'd find it pretty easy to just say "sad but oh well" to non-neglectful accidents, even if they did involve people I know.

I'm also strongly against any 'for the greater good' arguments, so the scale of the accident (again, assuming it's a non-neglectful accident) doesn't hold any weight for me.

If we assume the accident did happen due to neglect, then it's murder, and it'd be harder to forgive them.

 

[Deleted member 84247]

Depends. If 2000 died because of Superman fighting the villainess, but if Superman had stayed away, only 1000 would have died, can you still argue Superman is 'good'?

I am not saying Superman is good or bad. It's a fact that he saved people even if other people ended up dying. I don't even think Superman considers himself as good. I believe there were reflections in the past, and he always asked himself if what he was doing is good or right. But usually he faces world ending threats that end up costing other lives. It's also a fact that because Superman was on Earth he attracted bad guys. So one can say if Superman was good, he'd leave the planet entirely.

 

[CharlesEBrown]

In fiction, there are many stories of unwilling accessories to murder. Apparently, in law in the U.S.A., if you are forced to murder under threat of death, you are still at fault for the crime.

Not exactly - the person or people ordering the murder are guilty of the most severe crime, pre-meditated (first degree) murder. The person actually committing the crime, unless they have an inept lawyer, will usually get off on the far less serious crime of manslaughter.

In more fantastical situations, where characters get powers, the first time they use it is often... explosive. This can result in injuries and even mass casualty events. These events can scale anywhere from one accidental death to thousands, even tens of thousands. It's not their fault they were handed this power, but they were shoved into it anyway. At what level of collateral damage and death is the limit you can forgive them? At what point do you just say "Nah. They gotta go."

Were they warned of this potential, or did it just happen? If they knew this might occur, then they are at LEAST guilty of negligent homicide or mass homicide (and if the casualties are more than a dozen or so, it will be considered more severe, just due to the scope - accidentally setting off an atomic bomb is still setting off an atomic bomb, after all...). If they did not know, then there may be mitigating circumstances and ... it gets really complicated, especially if lawyers get involved.

And obviously, it's easy to say when it's not people you know. But what if your entire family was wiped out? Let's say a kid gets an active aura that turns the people within a 30 foot radius into slavering masses of pink flesh and lupine maws, with no reverse button. This kid got this power after being knifed and running away, bleeding out, while being chased by some group (let's say the mob for the heck of it) through a crowded area. Your family was there. Just like that, they become mindless ambulatory starfishes moving by protrusions of long-toothed mouths.

Can you forgive them? Can you assign the blame to the mob or, even as you try hard to forgive them, do you hate them and fear them for the horrific torment they have unwittingly inflicted on your parents, siblings, grandparents, etc?

Fear them absolutely. Hate them? No, that is for whatever forces caused the transformation/awakened the curse/power. But they need to be kept away from anyone they may accidentally do this to until they gain control - or just be put down if there is no chance of them gaining control, because this is just too nasty a curse to be allowed out in the world.

 

[RepresentingWrath]

Worm strikes back, huh?

 

[Deleted member 84247]

Worm strikes back, huh?

Is that what this is? Dammit!

 

[TheMonotonePuppet]

Imagine a person who if anyone touches that person dies. It's been done before a lot. Most people will want to seal them somewhere or kill them if they can. I think it's the right choice if you consider the safety of the populace. It's an example of sacrificing one to save many, and if the person is on the good side, they will probably seal themselves. But if that person is someone you love, what do you do?

I agree they should seal themselves away if they are on the good side if their control over their touch cannot be solved by proper protective clothing, training, and/or turning off their power. Ultimately, while lethal, unless it is transmissable through clothing (some more esoteric powers will view clothing as part of the individual and thus still activate the conditions of the power) it is really only the uniqueness of their powers that sets them apart from a gun, which tends to be more effective too. In most cases, sealing them away for the good of the populace is cruel. There are other methods that can be considered first to separate them from possible points of contact.

If a scenario as you described happened, I'd not hate the person. This is a similar thing to Superman. People hate him because they feared his power. If Superman stopped a bad guy, but 1000s died because of his attack, do we also blame Superman? But if someone inherits an inherently malicious power, they will be dealt with promptly.

Thank you for your answer!

And inherently malicious? I'm interested as to what your definition of inherently malicious.

For me, a power is only inherently malicious if it changes the mindset of the user to a malicious one on an unavoidable, permanent basis or is permanently, unavoidably active, while being autonomous with a malicious/vicious mindset of its own.

For example, an aura of permanent mind control where the user involuntarily assumes control over the people within a certain radius of them does NOT fall under my definition of power that is inherently malicious. The user can isolate themselves and move people out of their radius if accidents ensue. But a glitter-throwing power that gives the user the personality of a serial killer the moment the user has it in their possession is inherently malicious.

 

[RepresentingWrath]

Imagine a person who if anyone touches that person dies. It's been done before a lot. Most people will want to seal them somewhere or kill them if they can. I think it's the right choice if you consider the safety of the populace. It's an example of sacrificing one to save many, and if the person is on the good side, they will probably seal themselves. But if that person is someone you love, what do you do?

I agree they should seal themselves away if they are on the good side if their control over their touch cannot be solved by proper protective clothing, training, and/or turning off their power. Ultimately, while lethal, unless it is transmissable through clothing (some more esoteric powers will view clothing as part of the individual and thus still activate the conditions of the power) it is really only the uniqueness of their powers that sets them apart from a gun, which tends to be more effective too. In most cases, sealing them away for the good of the populace is cruel. There are other methods that can be considered first to separate them from possible points of contact.

Aaah, a staple of every horror and tragedy, isolate a person and let them delve into madness, or be guided into madness by malicious individual.

 

[Deleted member 84247]

I agree they should seal themselves away if they are on the good side if their control over their touch cannot be solved by proper protective clothing, training, and/or turning off their power. Ultimately, while lethal, unless it is transmissable through clothing (some more esoteric powers will view clothing as part of the individual and thus still activate the conditions of the power) it is really only the uniqueness of their powers that sets them apart from a gun, which tends to be more effective too. In most cases, sealing them away for the good of the populace is cruel. There are other methods that can be considered first to separate them from possible points of contact.

Thank you for your answer!

And inherently malicious? I'm interested as to what your definition of inherently malicious.

For me, a power is only inherently malicious if it changes the mindset of the user to a malicious one on an unavoidable, permanent basis or is permanently, unavoidably active, while being autonomous with a malicious/vicious mindset of its own.

For example, an aura of permanent mind control where the user involuntarily assumes control over the people within a certain radius of them does NOT fall under my definition of power that is inherently malicious. The user can isolate themselves and move people out of their radius if accidents ensue. But a glitter-throwing power that gives the user the personality of a serial killer the moment the user has it in their possession is inherently malicious.

Aaah, a staple of every horror and tragedy, isolate a person and let them delve into madness, or be guided into madness by malicious individual.

I don't know. I am just a dumb vampire.

Oh, but I am all for reading a story about isolation and madness. Did you ever read The Premature Burial? That poe story slapped.

 

[RepresentingWrath]

I don't know. I am just a dumb vampire.

Oh, but I am all for reading a story about isolation and madness. Did you ever read The Premature Burial? That poe story slapped.

? ?

 

[Nolff]

I'm curious as to what are the limits of your understanding for others. How much can you sympathize with someone who has caused carnage through no fault of their own?

In fiction, there are many stories of unwilling accessories to murder. Apparently, in law in the U.S.A., if you are forced to murder under threat of death, you are still at fault for the crime. The message is that government essentially says "No, James Bond, I expect you to die!" Personally, I feel that's wrong, but others may feel differently, and I can't necessarily say they would be wrong to do so.

In more fantastical situations, where characters get powers, the first time they use it is often... explosive. This can result in injuries and even mass casualty events. These events can scale anywhere from one accidental death to thousands, even tens of thousands. It's not their fault they were handed this power, but they were shoved into it anyway. At what level of collateral damage and death is the limit you can forgive them? At what point do you just say "Nah. They gotta go."

And obviously, it's easy to say when it's not people you know. But what if your entire family was wiped out? Let's say a kid gets an active aura that turns the people within a 30 foot radius into slavering masses of pink flesh and lupine maws, with no reverse button. This kid got this power after being knifed and running away, bleeding out, while being chased by some group (let's say the mob for the heck of it) through a crowded area. Your family was there. Just like that, they become mindless ambulatory starfishes moving by protrusions of long-toothed mouths.

Can you forgive them? Can you assign the blame to the mob or, even as you try hard to forgive them, do you hate them and fear them for the horrific torment they have unwittingly inflicted on your parents, siblings, grandparents, etc?

The SCP Foundation is now supporting this OP.

 

[Kenjona]

I'm curious as to what are the limits of your understanding for others. How much can you sympathize with someone who has caused carnage through no fault of their own?

Grey area for me. Is it truly not their fault or are the negligent in some way?
If they are a bus driver whose bus brakes blew out on his Bus and plowed into a class of kids walking across a cross walk. I would sympathize with them.
But a bus driver who is driving a bus who knows his brakes are going, I do blame them.

In fiction, there are many stories of unwilling accessories to murder. Apparently, in law in the U.S.A., if you are forced to murder under threat of death, you are still at fault for the crime. The message is that government essentially says "No, James Bond, I expect you to die!" Personally, I feel that's wrong, but others may feel differently, and I can't necessarily say they would be wrong to do so.

Define forced. If someone puts a gun to your head and says, kill XX or you die. Then you do have under duress as a defense, so while you may be found guilty of a crime it may not necessarily a charge of first degree murder, it would be a somewhat lesser charge. But to the legal system in the end YOU did have a choice whether to kill someone or not in that case.
However if someone held a gun to your head and says open that spill way gate to an empty canal and they know that there are kids in there but you do not, you might be able to get out of the charge or a much lesser one.

In more fantastical situations, where characters get powers, the first time they use it is often... explosive. This can result in injuries and even mass casualty events. These events can scale anywhere from one accidental death to thousands, even tens of thousands. It's not their fault they were handed this power, but they were shoved into it anyway. At what level of collateral damage and death is the limit you can forgive them? At what point do you just say "Nah. They gotta go."

Again nuanced, accidental death (Which is a thing) charges would apply, maybe; depending on your legal system.
The they "got to go" is for when the power is uncontrollable or is not mitigatable and is a known danger to others.

And obviously, it's easy to say when it's not people you know. But what if your entire family was wiped out? Let's say a kid gets an active aura that turns the people within a 30 foot radius into slavering masses of pink flesh and lupine maws, with no reverse button. This kid got this power after being knifed and running away, bleeding out, while being chased by some group (let's say the mob for the heck of it) through a crowded area. Your family was there. Just like that, they become mindless ambulatory starfishes moving by protrusions of long-toothed mouths.

I am a Human being, it is synonymous with hypocrite. I might not hate them; but it would be hard to ever face them or want to forgive them. Would I blame them and think they should be charged? Maybe not. A lot would depend on how they acted afterward and if I thought that the incident was controllable by them in some way.

Can you forgive them? Can you assign the blame to the mob or, even as you try hard to forgive them, do you hate them and fear them for the horrific torment they have unwittingly inflicted on your parents, siblings, grandparents, etc?

Why yes, to be human is to be a hypocrite. Love they neighbor until their dog shits on your lawn, then its war boitches.

Oh and just an FYI, there are some crimes in the US that do not have a Mens Rea (Guilty Mind) defense for. Just the Prosecutors might not choose to charge you with a crime due to the circumstances involved.

 

[RepresentingCaution]

Forgiveness isn't for the perpetrator. It's for the victim, so that the victim can be at peace and move on with life. Forgiveness does not mean that the victim should put themselves in a vulnerable position with the perpetrator again. Forgiveness is not redemption. Trust needs time to be rebuilt.

When things went down with my ex-boyfriend in 2014, I told him 3 things he needed to do to earn back my trust, and he didn't do a single one of those things, so there was forgiveness but no trust. Forgiveness helped me to move on with my life and get married in 2018.