StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Let's say this insane tyrant held 10,000 people hostage. He tells you you are to kill 500 of those hostages or all 10,000 will be killed (those 1,000 included). And you alone have to kill those 500. To makes things more interesting he says you have to slit their throats to make it a more" personal" kill. Men, women and children.. a good mix.

a) Would you be able to do it? WOULD you do it?
b) What will you do afterwads?

If I have to kill 500 in order to save 9 500, I would do it. I'd feel guilty, yes, and that's a whole lot of murder, but spending time afterwards with the people I'd saved would probably go a long way to assuge guilt.

This of course assuems the tyrant is telling the truth. I would need to be absolutely sure of the safety of the 9 500 before killing people.

Trytostaydead wrote:Let's say this insane tyrant held 10,000 people hostage. He tells you you are to kill 500 of those hostages or all 10,000 will be killed (those 1,000 included). And you alone have to kill those 500. To makes things more interesting he says you have to slit their throats to make it a more" personal" kill. Men, women and children.. a good mix.

a) Would you be able to do it? WOULD you do it?
b) What will you do afterwads?

Simple answer: No.

The tyrant's insane. His insanity will not justify any acts of violence on my behalf. I'd simply be another tool for his insanity. The execution of those people would be his crime, not mine. I'd be more concerned about killing him actually. That I wouldn't have much trouble doing.

However, all things being equal, I do hold to the logic "the needs of the many outweight the needs of the few or one". In other words, within a rational scenario and all things being equal, I would always pick the higher number of people to survive, even if the difference is only one.

Does he tell me that I Have to kill 500 people? Or does he give me 500 people to kill?

Assuming there are safeguards set up, if it was the first way the last person I would kill is myself, if it was the second way I'd kill the 500. The needs of the many do outway the needs of the few, sometimes.

Ok, what I would do is, first I use my awesome knowledge of martial arts (assuming I got prep time, like say, 10 years) and kill all the guards, then capture the tyrant, and holding a gun to his head I tell HIM that HE has to chose between killing 500 people or otherwise *I* will kill the other 10,000.

Hah! Who's the bitch now... bitch?

I'd probably never get over killing 500 people like that, unless I was considered a hero for saving the lives of the other 9,500 or something.

And then, there's the possibility of the tyrant killing them even if I kill 500. If I'm sure he won't, and there's no way I can kill him or something, then I guess I'd do what he says and kill the 500 so the rest can survive.

Slartibartfast wrote:Ok, what I would do is, first I use my awesome knowledge of martial arts (assuming I got prep time, like say, 10 years) and kill all the guards, then capture the tyrant, and holding a gun to his head I tell HIM that HE has to chose between killing 500 people or otherwise *I* will kill the other 10,000.

Hah! Who's the bitch now... bitch?

Uhm... if he's a really evil tyrant wouldn't he kill the 10,000 people?

That's what it comes down to for me- what sort of mechanism is in place to ensure the madman doesn't change his mind? If he's insane, no compunctions about him deciding to kill everone anyways.

Although it doesn't really matter- giving them a small chance to live (killing the 500 and hope he doesn't lie) rather than no chance (not killing the 500 and watching all 10 000 die) is prefereable.

Straha wrote:

Slartibartfast wrote:Ok, what I would do is, first I use my awesome knowledge of martial arts (assuming I got prep time, like say, 10 years) and kill all the guards, then capture the tyrant, and holding a gun to his head I tell HIM that HE has to chose between killing 500 people or otherwise *I* will kill the other 10,000.

Hah! Who's the bitch now... bitch?

Uhm... if he's a really evil tyrant wouldn't he kill the 10,000 people?

Ok maybe I didn't really think this thru...

If killing those 500 people save 9500 people then I would do it. However I would never get over the guilt of doing it. I will ask the law to sentence me to death once the 9500 people have been freed.

I would kill myself. I could not bare to do what was ordered.

I couldn't do that, math be damned.

If possible I would give the choice of who would die to the 10000 and show them my dilema. I assume that enough would volunteer to help me out because they would understand just how thoroughly fucked up that tyrant is.
The fact of the matter is that there IS no right or just answer to this question, there is only the correct answer.

Am I close enough to instead throw the dagger at the Tyrant?

i'd look for ways to take out the tyrant myself. however i doubt i'd be able to do the killing of the prisoners, numbers be damned, there's just no way i'd be able to kill anyone if it wasn't a life or death situation. (as in me or them, with them actively trying to kill me.)

::Sighs::

I'd do it, but then I'd go hara kiri on myself.

This is an ends/means thing, and a "sacrifice the few to benefit the many" situation, and I don't like things like that. I'm a poker player by nature. I believe in sacrifice, but not sacrifice without payoff. If I knew the other 9,500 were going to be safe, I'd do it. But I couldn't live with the guilt, personally.

I'd rally the 10,000 against the tyrant and kill him. How could he fend off 10,001 people? The OP says nothing about guards.

What's the tyrant's AC?

I dunno, but most tyrants have the +8 Armour of Evil Insanity, so I'd guess it somewhere around 30... nothing my +12 Katana of Maple Syrup's Wrath can't handle.