As a previous poster stated, humanity will get you killed. I don't think you'll be doing anyone any favours by blindfolding and tying up a potential lunatic for a short period of time during a high stress situation. It's all or nothing. The threat (as he/she has become) needs to be removed as quickly as possible. If that means banishment then make it so. It may mean execution. That's life - for you that is.

In Sit-X I will be out for myself. If I am part of a group, then it's because that group can offer me something. If part of that group compromises me or anything that may assist my survival then I will ensure its' removal by any means required. If the group that offers me something is threatened, then I shall ensure that threat is removed. The method depends completely on the situation and context.

I'm a fairly black and white sort of person when push comes to shove, so I don't mess around with the ethics too much if my safety is at stake.

[edit on 29-9-2007 by PaddyInf]

Well spoken Paddy..well spoken.
I notice a marked tendency with most peoples in that they can be very generous with someone elses breast/breastfeeding....not their own...some to the point of entitlement. They are often where they think this is the everyday status quo of everything. This tends to skew ones thinking into the inability to judge risk since someone else has the responsibility of taking the risk out of life for them. A safety net so to speak. I consider this type of conduct in many peoples to be abuse and capable of only putting excessive risk onto me.
Now if I was with people I could respect and I know they have talents/skills that changes the risk factor. It beomes mutual or shared. It now becomes respect due to this mutual understanding.
This risk factor without the safety net provided by someone else.. was quite a shock to those down in New Orleans a few years back. It was also obvious there that it was someone elses responsibility to many of these people. They were victims. This continues there unto this very day.
I dont have much use for or respect for the "victim dictum."
If one is able, one carrys their load or carries their backside down the road. If one makes a pestilance out of themselves ...it is known how to deal with pestilance.

It is no different in this situation described here by the OP.

One more thing here Paddy....

I'm a fairly black and white sort of person when push comes to shove, so I don't mess around with the ethics too much if my safety is at stake.

You are correct here....My safety is my ethic ..every day. Numero Uno on the daily list.

Gotta shove off now Paddy..ships to build tonight,
Thanks for your view,
Orangetom

[edit on 30-9-2007 by orangetom1999]

Old School: "The Gauntlet"


(I was originally going to post in the "summary justice" thread, but it's on lock-down. So I'll post it here.)

Most cultures before the inventions of feudalism and prisons used "running the gauntlet" as the method of community justice. You can think of it as a trial AND PUNISHMENT by a jury of your peers.

Even comparatively recently, (and sometimes still) it was used by ship's crews, when you couldn't kill a person, and deprive the vessel of a necessary hand in times of action, but you wanted to "have church" on somebody who needed to get a clue.

The nice thing (?) about the guantlet is that, each peer gets to decide how hard and where to hit the convict. Meaning that, if a leader improperly sentenced a crew-member to the gauntlet, the crew could pull their punches and go soft. Alternatively, is someone wanted to outright kill the convict, this was an opportunity to do so (or come very close) without fear of reprisal. Particularly if the accused was blindfolded, as is traditional.

I'd have like to see THAT on a survivor episode. . . .

Good times.

They're called snitches, and you deal with them on a daily basis as is, so why ask how to handle them, when you already do?

Duct tape and lots of it. The last resort would be putting them down.

Wow!! You've given a lot of interesting responses. A surprising number would kill them and let God sort it out. It's surprising because in the original hypothesis I stated that my area of concern is that the loose cannon might be one of my adult children. I have a real reason to fear this and concern for my children (even as adults) trumps concern for myself. But what if a group of others is dependant on me and my resources? I would also have a responsibility to them, up to a point. Where that point is would depend on many factors including abilities and attitudes of others in the group. Killing the offender is not an option. If I've degraded to the point that I can condone, or worse, participate in the killing of one of my own children, regardless of reason, I'd rather not survive.

I like the duct tape idea. The gauntlet is a good one as well and has proven it's value historically. I would be concerned that a participant might be overly sadistic or have his own axe to grind or want the rations to last longer, etc. Maybe now would be the time to consider providing a humane means of restraining and quieting a member of the group long term if necessary. Maybe they could be required to manufacture something needed by the group if they want to eat. OMG,,,I've just introduced slavery. Maybe that's the lesser of the evils anyway as long as it's not abused and treated as such.

I'm beginning to suspect that it's a "You just gotta be there" kind of question. There are no easy answers. I wonder if pondering it too deeply makes a person unfit for leadership or ideal for leadership? Let's throw that question into the mix. Also how would your response differ if you're talking about your child, or a 20 year friend, or a straggler who seems ok otherwise and showed up last week with his wife and kids. Maybe it's a doctor or nurse. It can get really complicated.

Semper Paratus,
If I am reading you correctly ...you would put my life at risk for your child but it I put my life at risk for your child in the every day course of daily actions it is ok..expected...a given. Some are expendable and disposable and some are not.?? Some take risk and some just coast ..good times and bad.
Some of us take risks for our goods and some just play thorugh unaccountable and get the choicest morsels off the table without risk and without work. Im ok..your ok??
Is this leadership?? Or is it slacking ie...politics??

If I m in your group and I detect that you continually condone substandard conduct to the point it becomes a risk to me and mine...I am gone...along with all my supplies and know how. As I stated in my earlier post ...this is not just deciding what to wear out on the town on Friday night. It is not just a semantic exercise.

I dont remember the name of this program on tv..I tried to watch it but it was so stupid and the bimbos were extra super dumb. I just could not countenance this type of program or bimbo/bimbos. Do you remember ...the program where these two women/girls went to a farm to try their hand at doing something other than primping and preening in front of a mirror.
It would be a nightmare to be stuck on a island or out in the wild with people like this. What a burden. I would be figuring out ways to dump them by the wayside so that they could live off each other rather than me in situation X. Not much different here from the risk you describe in your OP.


We have moved three heavy crane loads at work in the last two weeks...in the 45 to 60 ton range. When you do this in a confined space...you better be sure of the character and talents of the people working with you. That everyone involved knows what is going on and is properly briefed....on the same page when things happen. No lightweights need apply. The heaviest crane load with which I have been involved is some 300 tons...that is 600,000 pounds. This is where the rubber meets the road.
Mind you now..this does not in any way make me better than others..only different in how I think and analyze the world around me. I dont stop thinking like this because I put my hard hat away in my locker and come home to sit in my Lazy Boy.

Watch Paddy Inf and his posts in this thread or other boards. It is obvious to me that when he comes home and puts up his uniform ..the thinking does not stop. In or out of uniform the thinking pattern does not cease. The problem solving skills are not dormant.

You are correct in that there are no easy answers. It is not a light thing we are discussing.

Once again...as aptly stated by a earlier poster. Your humanity/ feelings and values can get you or others killed. I dont spend alot of time putting much stock in humanity. No way. I dont like that much punnishment. I learn to do things myself ..pay someone to do it ..or simplydo without.

My main point here is that I am not expendable disposable or adjustable for yours or anyone elses children....especially in the situation X type scenerio.

Leadereship is a very difficult and complex skill to master. No Doubt leadership is also a huge responsibility.

Orangetom

[edit on 5-10-2007 by orangetom1999]

SemperParatus,

Thanks for the clarification. I am not against humanity. I am against dumbness. This line would change drastically in the X scenerio. Especially for those raised on a diet of other peoples risk/goodies. Dumbness under the guise of Humanity is still risk.

YOu are correct in that we live in a Me oriented society or world. So many dont want to listen. Correct. In this type of situation I would not be spending much time repeating myself.

Thanks again for the clarification,
Orangetom

The sitX theme is very much like the situation faced by ships and sailors in the days of the wooden sailing ship. They were stuck in a confined space with limited resources in a inhospitable and even hostile enviroment. So your loose cannon analogy is more apt than you thought.
In the days of wooden ships and iron men, as a loose cannon could destroy they ship or kill the crew, there were only two ways to deal with it. Lash it to the deck or jetison it. One crew, one Captain, and the Captain made the call. If the cannon was salvageable and the damage containable, lash it down and chain it to the deck until it could be dealt with. But if it was causing more trouble than it was worth and injuring/killing crew members, toss it overboard and carry on without it.
It was a hard call for the Captain as cannon were a valuable and highly needed part of the ship. Being one cannon short could spell disaster during an engagement. It also meant rebalancing the ship as a cannon could weigh as much as a ton, and that meant a great deal of work for the crew after they had repaired the damage.
As you can see, there are a great many parallels between the two situations. The answer to the question always falls back to the Captain, the Leader of the group. That is keeping in mind what the crew feels about the situation. Because if the Captain makes too many mistakes, the crew will remove him and elect their own Captain. It's called a mutiny, and often befalls leaders who are indecisive or uneven in their decisions.
You have to remember that no matter who the loose cannon is and who they are related to, the safety and survival of the group is paramount. If you baby this person as they rampage about, you may find that someone or the group may take matters into their own hands and solve the problem for you.