Moral Dilemma

page: 1
3

log in

join

posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 06:04 PM
link   
Your a police officer, a good guy who upholds the law on a daily basis; not only because he believes it to be correct but more importantly that's what his occupation involves.

You have to deal with scum bags on a day to day basis, in this example you have never abused your power and have always "gone by the book"

One day you get a call on your TETRA radio, a little girl has been abducted; she's 3 years old, has blonde hair with blue eyes and a slight scar on her forehead - the result of a minor car crash when she was a newly born.

As your running to your squad car, trying to analyse the facts of the case you realise that the little girl is your own.

You have 6 missed calls from your wife and two unanswered voice mail messages, the little girl who has been kidnapped is, unfortunately your child.

Through an adminstrational error, this detail hasn't been passed onto you although the true scenario has been realised.

Your colleagues advise you via radio that suspected suspect is in a property half a mile from your patrol, you know you can be there before anyone else and you know it's your daughter the person has snatched.

What do you do?



edit on 20/9/10 by Death_Kron because: spelling




posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 06:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Death_Kron
 




What do you do?


Tell the dispatcher I'm en route, go to the house and knock on the door. And since I'm a good guy, I remember that a suspect and a perpetrator are different things.

What's the dilemma?



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 07:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Death_Kron
 
You get there ASAP and if he's sexually abused her you shoot him dead. Thats your little girl. I don't see any dilemma either.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 07:03 PM
link   
LOL!

Dilemma? For who? The dilemma is whether I call in that I found him right after he shot himself in the nuts with my throw away gun and then fell and hit his head until he was dead, or do I wait a little while and really hurt the guy before I call in an anonymous tip that the suspect was being chased into a wooded area by a group of anonymous do-gooders with baseball bats?

It is a dilemma I suppose.

BTW my "service" weapon would never figure into the equation whatsoever. A quick and lethal bullet is what the guy would pray for, but not what he would get!

edit on 20-9-2010 by getreadyalready because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 07:08 PM
link   
Death couldn't come quick enough for him.......shooting him, hitting his head on the floor.....nah, he'd pray for death. There is no way he's leaving alive, and it wouldn't be quick........



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 07:10 PM
link   
Was (I, he, she) on duty, or off duty?


If off duty, I would just goto the scene, pretend I didn't get any of those radio calls, and beat the hell of the suspect. I would punish him. Securing my daughters safety first of course, don't want her seeing this. Then when police arrive, say I witnessed the event from a distant and followed in a cautious pursuit. Didn't you get a 911 call? Didn't they tell you I was chasing them?

If on duty, I would get to the scene as soon as possible, but just try to make visible contact, and set a sort of perimeter, until someone else arrived to witness me uterly beat and abuse the creep. Then just turn my badge and state issued fire arm(?), and say I apologize for what I have done to this Police Office, and I will make an anouncement to the press ASAP, with whatever information you desire(leave room for them to allow cover-up
), and then say, charge me with whatever you want.

In both scenerios, there are many consequences, even if you take the road of doing every thing legit per police officer codes and standards(?).I did what everyone would have done for their daughter if infact they had the training to deal with the situation. In essence, it sort of a movie script, surreal dream, come true. No one wishes harm to anyone they love, but many wish to do some heroic deed. There could be a psych term for all I know.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
LOL!

Dilemma? For who? The dilemma is whether I call in that I found him right after he shot himself in the nuts with my throw away gun and then fell and hit his head until he was dead, or do I wait a little while and really hurt the guy before I call in an anonymous tip that the suspect was being chased into a wooded area by a group of anonymous do-gooders with baseball bats?


edit on 20-9-2010 by getreadyalready because: (no reason given)


\
5's typically have throw away guns? I dont have any. wanna throw one my way?



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 07:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Myendica
 


I'm not even a cop and I have throw away guns!

Same caliber as my registered weapons, so that if I ever have to shoot someone with my throw away, I can drop the gun and comply with all police requests to examine my registered weapons. I shoot every week, so gunpowder residue tests don't prove anything, ballistics won't match, and I'm an upstanding citizen with a stellar reputation. Let someone mess with my kids and I'll give a clinic on how to torture and punish a suspect while playing the crying part of a forgiving victim that just doesn't understand violence.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 07:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Death_Kron
 


Any cop that goes "by the book" all the time is not a good guy. Lots of humanity is lost to one who goes "by the book" all the time - when it comes to man's law.

I believe that the kind of person who does go "by the book" as an officer is the same kind of guy who would skip the "by the book" for his own personal desires - because he cares not about others humanity... therefore, he will not care about the humanity of the idiot that took his daughter.

He will go to that location and he will end that kidnapper's life.

Now... if I was a policeman in a different universe where serving the community was actually my job, I would go to the house, call for back up, attempt to communicate with the kidnapper and do whatever it took to get my daughter back safely.

Retaliation is not nearly as important as getting your daughter back safely. In fact, retaliation is childish.

Of course, the next question will be what if the guy attacks my daughter and/or kills her. Well, he is making more aggressive moves.. it is only right that he suffer the consequences of his actions - especially since those consequences include attempting to save the child's life. If you're having to worry about whether that guy is going to attack you, you're not going to be able to get your daughter somewhere safe fast enough. His life must be ended in that case... poor guy. Led a stupid life. I will feel horrible for his family.



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 02:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Myendica
 


beat the hell of the suspect

reply to post by getreadyalready
 



give a clinic on how to torture and punish a suspect

reply to post by adifferentbreed
 


There is no way he's leaving alive, and it wouldn't be quick
he'd pray for death.

I find it slightly disturbing how many people in here are saying that they would beat/shoot/torture/kill a suspect.



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 02:58 AM
link   
reply to post by LordBucket
 


Ah, true. But in theory the line between suspect and actual perpetrator would be conclusively answered with a simple glance, in this situation.

Open the door and if your daughter is actually there, without your consent...

Well the guy who has her had better have a really, really compelling story and be a very, very fast talker.



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 02:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Death_Kron
 


It's hard to decide. On the one hand if you decide to go in Die Hard style guns blazing you might end up getting your child injured, the kidnapper might snap and hurt her. But on the other hand if you let them play this by the book nice and easy the kidnapper has time to do whatever it is he's doing... So yes, it is a moral dilemma. Unfortunately in this situation the kidnapper has all the power and that's sort of the point of the kidnapping, he knows that the cops can't do anything without possibly endangering the hostage so they have to give in to whatever his demands are. But then again it depends on what kind of kidnapper we're dealing with. Needless to say its a complex situation... The decision really comes down to how much we know about the kidnapper's psychological profile, if he's not likely to actually hurt the child and is actually just looking for attention or money than we can play it more by the book but if he's some pedophile creep I would definitely want to go in and personally lay the law down myself, with excessive force of course.



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 03:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 




the line between suspect and actual perpetrator would be conclusively answered with a simple glance, in this situation.


Quite possibly. But I think you'd be more likely to get an accurate read on that by knocking on the door, looking the guy right in the eyes and telling him why you were there, than by kicking it in and shooting holes in him.



Open the door and if your daughter is actually there, without your consent


But how would you know whether she's there without going inside? Would you smash the door in and tell the guy to get on the ground while you looked? Would you tie him up and start breaking fingers, demanding to know where the basement is?

Or would you knock first, and talk to him?

The general response I'm seeing from people is that they'd shoot first and ask questions later...if he was unlucky enough to still be alive to answer them. I see some people jumping ahead to how much they'll hurt the kidnapper and some speculating on how best to get the daughter back from the kidnapper, but I see very little interest in identifying whether the suspect had anything to do with it.

Why are we presuming guilt?



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 03:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Death_Kron
 


If that is true, I am so sorry for you and your wife and that little girl.

But I suspect this is about writing something, in which case I will not offer anything.



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 03:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by LordBucket

Quite possibly. But I think you'd be more likely to get an accurate read on that by knocking on the door, looking the guy right in the eyes and telling him why you were there, than by kicking it in and shooting holes in him.

But how would you know whether she's there without going inside? Would you smash the door in and tell the guy to get on the ground while you looked? Would you tie him up and start breaking fingers, demanding to know where the basement is?

Or would you knock first, and talk to him?

The general response I'm seeing from people is that they'd shoot first and ask questions later...if he was unlucky enough to still be alive to answer them. I see some people jumping ahead to how much they'll hurt the kidnapper and some speculating on how best to get the daughter back from the kidnapper, but I see very little interest in identifying whether the suspect had anything to do with it.

Why are we presuming guilt?


Given the specifics as stated in the OP I think that I would kick in the door. Legalities allow for such action in the event of reasonable suspicion, which is implied here.

I would not shoot, though I would enter with a weapon brandished and would definitely direct anyone inside into a position of submission (IE the atypical, let me see your hands, turn around, etc) and would then assess everything else.

If it turned out that the report where false, I would either take the time, or direct somebody else to take the time, to explain to the people in this house the reasons for the intrusion and the hyperbolic entry.

If my daughter were in the house... Well... Again, there'd better be an unbelievably sound reason for it. I don't think I would shoot if my child appeared unharmed.

But if she appeared disheveled or harmed... Well then who knows.



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 03:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by catwhoknows
reply to post by Death_Kron
 


If that is true, I am so sorry for you and your wife and that little girl.

But I suspect this is about writing something, in which case I will not offer anything.


No, the situation outlined in my OP is entirely fictitious. I just wanted to post a thought experiment on what people would find acceptable from a personal point of view if ever they found themselves in said situation.

Some interesting replies people, I'll get around to answering them today.



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 06:59 AM
link   
reply to post by LordBucket
 


Even though I am one of the ones quoted, I agree with you, it is disturbing. I disturb myself a little. And I won't pretend that I didn't mean "suspect." I know the difference between a "suspect" and a "perpetrator" but if my child's life were on the line, that subtle difference wouldn't matter. I would torture a "suspects" grandmother if that is what it took to get my child home safely. This is why police don't like vigilantes. We are not bound by the same codes of conduct as police. It would not matter to me who was innocent or who was guilty or what was "interrogation" and what was "torture." Everyone and everything is fair game until my child is safe. Still, it is disturbing how easily it is to shift from civilized to psychotic and back again.





 
3

log in

join


Off The Grid with Jesse Ventura and AboveTopSecret.com Partner Up to Stay Vigilant
read more: Ora.TV's Off The Grid with Jesse Ventura and AboveTopSecret.com Partner Up to Stay Vigilant