What is the cash value of a single human life?

[jcow79]

I think life is worth the same as freedom. A buck'O'five.

[jcow79]

Seriously though, I don't think any personal property is really worth taking someone's life. Having been the victim of thieves and vandals myself I know at the time you wish you "had only caught them in the act" or whatever fantasies spring to mind when your emotions are raw about situation. However, aside from chasing someone away from my car with a weapon I doubt I would really try to harm them unless they attacked me.
Now someone invading my home is a different story. I'm no longer concerned with my property at this point and I will kill or maim anyone who I think is in my home intending me harm.

[Castor Troy]

In light of the clear ideological differences between my fellow europeans and a great many americans on the board I'm prompted to pose this question.

For those of you who support the use of deadly force to protect property, what exactly is the minimum value of property that needs to be involved to justify ending a human life?

What is the cash value of a living person?

How many wide screen televisions is a child worth exactly?

A single human shouldn't have a cash value. Supposedly.

I think a human is worth something like $30 million, mostly because of the organs. It was in a PopSci article, I ought to go and find it.

[Middleclass]

Economists have estimated the cash value of a human life at around $7.8 million. This is based on what a person is willing to spend, on average, to prevent their own death. Safety equipment, medical expenditures, and such. I believe the average value of life insurance policies is taken into account. In my opinion this is the best system for evaluating the value of a human life that I have heard of. It's far from perfect, but it seems fair to me.
The argument for lethal force, however, is that a person breaking into your home has willfully diminished the value of their own lives. In any case, a full cost/benefit analysis is next to impossible, you would have to account for future crimes that will now not be committed as well as emotional trauma to the criminal's family, as well as negating the possibility of reform.
But hey, I bet it's really cool to destroy 8 million dollars worth of stuff with one bullet.

[Boyish-Tigerlilly]

I guess maybe you could look to see the value of humans by taking teh basic cost of the component materials in quantity and then adding value to the value of the sum of the constitutent parts that would be tradable on the medical market, if that were possible. Supply and demand for organs and body parts that could serve some utility?

[Boyish-Tigerlilly]

Edit: Maybe you can make a formula or something otu of it.



X | X > or = (Y +Z)

Human value, such that Human value is equal to or greater than the sum of the stolen and damaged property, then deadly force acceptable.

Or perhaps:

X | X < (Sum of stolen/damaged property)

Human value, such that the Human value is less than the damaged/stolen property, no deadly force.

So, if X = 8 million dollars (medical market for organs and body costs, then I don't ever see someone stealing a normal person's property and ever actually reaching that level of value. SO it would never be valid to kill someone to defend property that's worth less than your own life). They can simply just pay a fine or something.

[Boyish-Tigerlilly]

Goddamnit! Im retarded. I actually found a website saying the value


Two places, two different perspectives

http://home.nycap.rr.com/useless/sell_y ... index.html
http://www.soundmedicine.iu.edu/archive ... Worth.html

[Admiral Valdemar]

As with most things, it's not the raw materials, but how they are arranged. A few handfuls of silicon amount to nothing. That silicon in the form of the first microprocessor is priceless. Carbon, nitrogen, hydrogen, phosphorus and oxygen are useless raw. As a human being, they are far more useful.

[Castor Troy]

Yeah. IIRC it was only $3.75 for the raw materials (something like that), but it cost $30 million for all of the organs and fluids, of a human body.

[Uraniun235]

Everybody knows that breaking and entering into a person's home is one of the most traumatizing things emotionally you can do to them. Everybody understands concepts of personal space and privacy. I hold little sympathy for those that wilfully disregard such matters. I wouldn't shoot a guy in the back that I found trying to get into the house as I pulled into the driveway, but I'd be damn tempted to, because I'd bet money that fucker's going to do it again somewhere else.

Home invasion otherwise translated out of idiot speak into "burglary when someone is home"...now, burglary is a crime against property...

How far are you willing to take this?

Let's say I forget to lock my door, and someone walks in and starts grabbing my shit. Should I be forbidden the use of force to stop him? Suppose he says he'll gladly fight for my stuff? Suppose I live in an area where police response time is five minutes at best?

Around here, chances are extremely high that someone breaking into a house is doing it to feed a meth habit. Also, just a few blocks from where I live, a home invasion and burglary became a double murder because the intruder was a sick fuck. I don't have a gun, but if I found myself facing an intruder, I'd sure as hell want one just then. Hopefully, this is never put to the test.

The very act of breaking into someone's home is a very threatening act. It is my contention that all people deserve a place in which they can feel safe and in control; burglary is a complete violation of that.

I think a more productive question than "what dollar value would you place on someone's life" would be "Do you believe that people can forfeit certain rights through their actions, and if so, to what extent?" I think that would be a more fruitful exploration of the differences between the Europeans and Americans on this board.

[McC]

Wow, you guys are lenient. If someone invades my home in any way, they're at least getting shot in the leg so they can't escape for the proper authorities. If they're armed, they get shot in the head/chest.

I value human life insofar as that life does not demonstrate worthlessness. Assaulting another human being without grievance (jealousy is not grievance) or attempting to appropriate another human being's possessions negates the worth of the transgressor's life. They have chosen to give it up in that instance, as far as I'm concerned.

[Stark]

That's hilarious. McC believes stealing deserves get the death penalty.

Quoted - "...attempting to appropriate another human being's possessions negates the worth of the transgressor's life. They have chosen to give it up in that instance, as far as I'm concerned."

I mean, that says it all, right there.

[McC]

Eh, I have to take that back, honestly. That specifically refers to an instance of home invasion theft, rather than general theft.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Wow, you guys are lenient. If someone invades my home in any way, they're at least getting shot in the leg so they can't escape for the proper authorities. If they're armed, they get shot in the head/chest.

Shoot to kill. Dead men don't talk. You're placing yourself in risk of being sued.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Everybody knows that breaking and entering into a person's home is one of the most traumatizing things emotionally you can do to them. Everybody understands concepts of personal space and privacy. I hold little sympathy for those that wilfully disregard such matters. I wouldn't shoot a guy in the back that I found trying to get into the house as I pulled into the driveway, but I'd be damn tempted to, because I'd bet money that fucker's going to do it again somewhere else.

That's an interesting question. If you had children in the house and someone was breaking into your home, I wonder if you could shoot them in the back at that point. I bet you could, because you would have a reasonable fear that your children might be harmed.

[Pick]

The value of a "human life" isn't something I think carries an easy answer. Some people are worth more than others, or at least that's commonly accepted. Otherwise we wouldn't spend (what is it... 2 bil?) such incredible amounts to protect, for instance, the US President.

That's not because "he's human, period" but he has ties in this world that supposedly carry that kind of value, however, they're interconnected enough to count. Think of how much the Catholic Church would spend to save the Pope's life (well... JP2's life we'll say) too. Ah, value's a curious thing (and a very human thing, in some ways.)

And on the other end of the spectrum, well...

[wolveraptor]

What's ironic is that in Texas, you can carry your gun out in the open. So there you are walking down someone's driveway with your gun in your holster, and you get snuffed. A bullet through the brain because 1) they saw your weapon and assumed you were going to kill them and 2) you were walking down their driveway, with the presumed intent of murder. Doesn't matter if you're only trying to take a shortcut, you can still get killed. Lovely.

[Alyrium Denryle]

A human life? Well a human life is priceless. A criminal's life on the other hand... well I adhere to the scumbag principle, and anyone who is willing to steal something considerable from me(like my car), or damage my home which I have worked my life to afford, I dnt consider a human being, and they are hence worth nothing. WHile I wouldnt kill someone immediatly, for say, getting a baseball out of my yard theat they hit into it, if someone started climbing my walls and getting on my roof, well they are commiting a feloney and thus are responsible for their own deaths.

Basically they give up their rights when they violate mine.

[McC]

Basically they give up their rights when they violate mine.

What he said.

[Kamakazie Sith]

What's ironic is that in Texas, you can carry your gun out in the open. So there you are walking down someone's driveway with your gun in your holster, and you get snuffed. A bullet through the brain because 1) they saw your weapon and assumed you were going to kill them and 2) you were walking down their driveway, with the presumed intent of murder. Doesn't matter if you're only trying to take a shortcut, you can still get killed. Lovely.

Ummm no. You'd be charged with murder. You'd need to be able to show that there was an immediate threat when you're outside your home, even if it is on your property. The only place where an immediate threat is persumed to exist is inside the home.

[Alyrium Denryle]

What's ironic is that in Texas, you can carry your gun out in the open. So there you are walking down someone's driveway with your gun in your holster, and you get snuffed. A bullet through the brain because 1) they saw your weapon and assumed you were going to kill them and 2) you were walking down their driveway, with the presumed intent of murder. Doesn't matter if you're only trying to take a shortcut, you can still get killed. Lovely.

Ummm no. You'd be charged with murder. You'd need to be able to show that there was an immediate threat when you're outside your home, even if it is on your property. The only place where an immediate threat is persumed to exist is inside the home.

Unless you have a no-tresspassing, violators will be shot" sign IIRC

[Kamakazie Sith]

Unless you have a no-tresspassing, violators will be shot" sign IIRC

I've never heard of that, but I'm not familiar with Texan law. I seriously doubt you can shoot someone just because you have a sign up saying "Violators will be shot"

Though it is Texas.

[EmperorChrostas the Cruel]

There is still something to be said of a person who would willingly trespass after being confronted by a fence and warning sign.

Oddly enough in California , people are taking down the "Beware of dog" sign, because trespassers getting bitten can sue you for negligence, because you knew the dog would bite, as evidenced by your sign.
I'm not sure about Texas, but here in California, to be trespassing you must have crossed:
A fence, a clearly marked set of "No Trespassing" signs, or "obvious signs of constructed improvement."

Walking through a door or gate without clear invitation, (Like an "OPEN" for buisness sign) is trespassing.)
The idea is that every square foot of the USA is owned by someone. If you are not invited in, you are forbidden to be there.
If it is wilderness, it MAY be public land, so you can be there until told to leave. Sometimes public land butts up to private land, and there are paths to cross from public to private called "easments." This happens a lot to property owners on the beach who sometimes MUST let the public cross a part of their property to get from a public street to the beach. Note that you can only travel on a very narrow "path," that is fenced on both sides. You are on private property, but you have the right to be there without the owners knowledge or consent.

That's why the rule of fence, sign, or obvious improvment.
If you put up a shed or building, it automaticly becomes trespassing unless a sign is posted saying something to the effect of "come on in," wheather or not there is a door, much less a locked one.
If you walk into my garage, even if the overhead door is open, you are trespassing. You must be INVITED INSIDE, by written, spoken, or statutory word.

[Bob the Gunslinger]

Home invasion otherwise translated out of idiot speak into "burglary when someone is home"...now, burglary is a crime against property...

Actually, in the bay area home invasion can be translated into "raping the wife and daughter and then killing the whole family". That's what happened when I was living there. If you think that I'm not going to wound or kill any home invader to defend myself and my family after that, you are the idiot.

You can never know why they broke into your home (until the situation calms down), so you have to assume the worst and act to protect your family.

[Gil Hamilton]

These threads always amaze me because they always end up with people who think that human lives are worth less than domestic electronics.