Moral Dilemma - What Would You Do In This Scenario?

What would you do if you were presented with this dilemma?
Leave a comment and let us know your views.
@TeefOnline

[@MrCraiggyc1]

"Right thats it. The whole class has detention." ...

[@Ezumaforce]

Justice isn't justice if an innocent man has to lose his freedom.

[@TheChocolateMars]

All free. You just can't send an innocent person to jail.

[@DW71000]

But you can't risks more lives on the line either.

[@peacefulbeast8386]

​@@DW71000says who? Of what value are those lives of they are dead?

[@shogunreborn333]

Send them both down, Then the innocent man can appeal at a later time and prove his case, then he sues for wrongful imprisonment and get a lil paper in his pocket. DONE!!!

[@HEARTS-OF-SPACE]

If only it were that easy. There's a reason innocent people spend YEARS in prison before being exonerated...and some never are. I think that is one of the greatest injustices you can possibly subject a person to.

[@trinidadhuerta3895]

I just gave you a thumbs up for your bluntness. I really liked that!! OFF with their heads. jijiji

[@peacefulbeast8386]

Your day will come​@@trinidadhuerta3895

[@Tishable4]

Abraham drew near, and said, "Will you consume the righteous with the wicked? What if there are fifty righteous within the city? Will you consume and not spare the place for the fifty righteous who are in it? ... What if ten are found there?" He [The Lord] said, "I will not destroy it for the ten's sake." (Genesis 18:23-32)

[@trinidadhuerta3895]

I have always loved this story and have always seen the fact that the Bible tells that in verse 32, "And He said(the Lord) I will not destroy it for ten's sake." verse 33, reads, "And the Lord went His way, as soon as He had left communing with Abraham; and Abraham returned unto his place. My question, why did God leave at this point. Before going to Bible School, I wondered why did Abraham stop at ten?Then I figured, oh, because God left. Now as a student I ask, Why did God leave? Did God decide that He would not save all, so I better leave before Abraham convinces me of letting all the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah live? Had God already decided that these two cities were to burn anyway? But I am not questioning God's rationale, I am just wondering out loud and felt compelled to have this discussion with you. I think its awesome how we are being exposed to a whole new level of thinking. What a Dilemma. Should they all die, or should they all live? Personally, I believe God's choice was that they die. Abraham was just bold enough to make an effort. Just the same, neither I nor Abraham questioned God's choice. After all, He is the Sovereign God. My choice, they die.

[@virginiahall4030]

Amen

[@Choose1Life]

Vengeance is mine sayeth the Lord. God is the only just and fair judge. We only do what is right in our own minds.

[@laylaa7315]

1) both free (as long as I live far away from the murderer) 2) all free 3) all down (sorry innocent guy)

[@kangoru55]

All free in all 3 cases...The rights of the few to be free out weigh the obligation of the many to be reformed. The value of freedom is more important than your very own life to those who are oppressed!

[@elijahrelucio3427]

Bro..

[@stevenclark5173]

Since you don't know if the murderers will kill again, I would just let them all go. Even from my utilitarian perspective the damage has already been done and people are dead. Knowingly putting the innocent in jail completely undermines justice and adds another negative to the scenario whereas releasing the murderers is ultimately neutral. There are three reasons for punishment or incarceration in my ideal justice system: 1. Containment (to stop dangerous people from doing further harm) 2. Rehabilitation 3. Deterrence Retribution has no place in my justice system. Since we can't fully justify containment, the second two are irrelevant. Release them all and try to keep tabs on the possible re-offenders best you can to minimize further casualties. There is no greater good in this scenario, only a lesser evil. On the other hand if you know for a fact that the murderer will kill again and you have no way of preventing it other than to lock them up right there, then you would have to lock up the innocent guy.

[@Ezumaforce]

Its a better fo a thousand guilty men to go free than to rob one innocent man of his freedom.

[@james_johnson-357]

If the murders and the trials are separate what connects them so that only one verdict is equally applicable? The real dilemma is how this question is structured, the decision to either sentence them or free them collectively renders the process of having a trial pointless. what if the trials yield different outcome. but only the choice to sentence them all or free them all. That presents a new moral dilemma inwhich there is no partiality or integrity.

[@jong101]

Am I the only one that watched this thinking "yup, jail them both... Yup, jail all three... Yup, jail them all- where is the dilemma here.."

[@runeknight8037]

Dexterous & Deft honestly i agree with you 100% you don't have the right to risk more lives. If you knew that the killer would never kill again, then it would always be let them go, but in this case it's always to jail.

[@dabossman5650]

I thought the opposite so ig it is a dilemna different ppl have different answers

[@truehath]

Out of curiosity, do you still hold this same opinion 9 years later?

[@user-gg2cc5rz6v]

I believe after the trial has been had, keep point must be a trial to at least draw a conclusion,the wrong one could be put to death,if the innocent one is found guilty he can exhaust all the appeals he is allowed.

[@PBoxEnt]

No matter what... Let them all go. The guilty ones will continue and the innocent won't. Thst's when you catch them.

[@Bmorekicks410]

Let them go free...karma will take care of the guilty

[@insider_english1594]

Karma itself is the creation of the guilty. Just pray that the innocent guy doesn't squeal.

[@adamdaly4455]

1. send all down 2. send all down 3. send all down

[@ripmyname3533]

adam daly thats fucked

[@Choose1Life]

Reminds me of that song: What would you do if your son was at home, Cryin' all alone on the bedroom floor Cos he's hungry, And the only way to feed him is to Sleep with a man for a little bit of money And his daddy's gone, Somewhere smokin' rock now, In and out of lock down, I ain't got a job now.... Except I guess in this situation there are definitely different choices available.

[@halleluyahdejesus918]

WhTs the name of this song ?

[@SashaLynd]

@@halleluyahdejesus918 What Would You Do by City High

[@chrishydahl4580]

All three: Send them to prison. Why? Because the amount of murderers in this world is smaller than the amount of innocent people. Following that logic, you could clear every street of criminals and don't risk sacrificing even more lives.

[@Choose1Life]

Good point!

[@aquietdarkness]

If it was a sentence to death I would have to reconsider, but I would send them all to jail. I would rather an innocent sent to jail and a potential future victim live than the alternative.

[@alvarmoreno230]

Both Down All Down All Hundred

[@calebbenton367]

Be sad because a lot of people died

[@lilianalyke7087]

SEND THEM ALL !

[@DubATizzle]

Even if you didn't commit the murders you can still be Guilty by association.

[@dabossman5650]

Hes not tho

[@RazielGir]

In the first two scenarios, I would let them all free and possibly get more info and take further action on the guilty parties. In the last one, I would send them all down. Afterward, I would hopefully be able to help the innocent party, but there is no way I could investigate and punish 99 guilty people if necessary. Also, if there are 2 or less guilty, perhaps they won't kill again. 99 pretty much ensures that at least 1 of them will.

[@jenniferray4390]

Set them all free

[@Choose1Life]

Sending the guys to prison wouldn't be "justifying the wicked". Making excuses for the wicked and letting them go would be justifying them.

[@e.t6529]

1: Both down. 2: All 3 down. 3: All 100 down.

[@Choose1Life]

"For all have sinned and comeshort of the glory of God." Technically everyone is guilty of SOMEthing, and in the end the punishment will be the same for everyone regardless of their crime. So, in this scenario, maybe let everyone go, knowing everyone will be judged in the end. OR Send them all down but give the innocent one 3 months in an open prison with day release, and put him in the wing with the TVs and internet, and the others in solitary confinement!

[@user-fg5ke4ym8s]

Why can't we free the innocent and jail the guilty??

[@kritikle]

In the first two scenarios, I would set them free. In the last scenario, I would send them all down.

[@BrooklynN8TiVe]

Moral Dilemma not at all. Morally because of than one innocent man...the rest of the suckers will go free.

[@bobjo579]

All free, thankfully if someone is proven innocent then they will be free to go without problems. Those who say just send em all in don't understand and fail to understand isolation for no reason is.

[@hakeempalmer4766]

I would have held both for a three day period. After they were free I would have had some local business franchise meeting to be aware of crime in that area.

[@evelynlily3413]

Here's an awful one..... An alien has offered to create peace on Earth and make it amazing for the people living there. But, he has requested one small child to preform experiments on. This child will be inflicted with UNIMAGINABLE amounts of pain. He has given the choice to you. Would you agree? Let's change up the story then. Here are some twists. 1. He requests a group of children 2. He requests a child every ten years 3. He requests YOUR child 4. The child will live and have these experiments preformed on them for an unnaturally long amount of time 5. The child will return after ten years and know you said yes to the agreement 6. It is an adult 7. It is someone who is in prison 8. You are the child 9. You must/get to choose the child 10. He requests a sick child that is going to die very soon anyway What would you do if these other twists were part of the agreement? Comment your answers to each with yes, no, or unsure for the original, and each of the "twists". You can also comment why. I read this moral dilemma from somewhere, but made up the "twists." I will not judge you for any of your answers, just curious.

[@dabossman5650]

for the first,If allowed I would like to toss a coin 1. No 2. No 3. No 4. No 5. Toss 6. Yes 7. toss 8. Yea 9. toss 10. Toss Idk if its a copout thats how Id do it i think tho

[@evelynlily3413]

Yeah, it’s a really hard choice on some.

[@joewalker4413]

What kind of tiny ornaments are they playing with in the Jump Off office?

[@goosey1183]

1. Send them both down 2.send them both down

[@Ac17516]

For the greater good...

[@shadeosu]

for every situation send all of them but put the innocents sentence as 1 day or something like that

[@domino_bombs]

This sounds like the same scenario for sacrificing one to save many. I guess without context, you would have to condemn them all, and if he is definitely innocent then he can appeal and get out.

[@byronperers7151]

Why bring down a innocent man for a guilty one. Most people in these comments dont even know they Sadist. I understand the 2-1 or 99-1 but this the reason the system broke now. NEW SCENARIO: your the innocent man and im the guilty man? What do you do?

[@NuadaRP]

I wonder how rare this scenario is, that two people on trial for two different murders will be in one court room and will be given one sentence. There's no issues with this scenario at all. I call out the VERY LOW possibility of this scenario ever happening. I do believe if there's more than one person at trial, you can hand out different verdicts. What am I going to do, offend the Murder by letting the Innocent go free?

[@elijahrelucio3427]

I’d let the two men go and watch both the “criminal” very closely and since one of them is a criminal he will more likely break the law again and I’ll just arrest him once he makes a mistakes.

[@trinidadhuerta3895]

Technically, according to the scenario, you'd still be arresting two. Back to square one.

[@elijahrelucio3427]

@@trinidadhuerta3895 how would I still be arresting two when I’d have let both of them go already? What are you on about.

[@trinidadhuerta3895]

If the criminal commits a crime, again, what guarantees you arresting just one. Why didn't you just arrest one the first time?

[@elijahrelucio3427]

@@trinidadhuerta3895 wdym why didn’t I just arrest one in the first time? The scenario was you had to arrest both or let both go there is no arresting only one the first time.. did you even watch the fucking video?

[@OGSauceDaddy]

Both free All free All imprisoned

[@lFrenzied]

Yes, that's a good point. However, in the case of justice it seems that the scripture from Genesis would serve the situation better. By sending the guys to prison, you aren't justifying the wicked but you're showing them mercy.

[@dondami1]

Deep man

[@lFrenzied]

I agree with you, but then it depends on the circumstances of the murders. I'm not tryna show murder in a positive light but for example, if it were due to defending family and it wasn't due to a deathwish or a violent murder, you could say it's not as likely that they would commit murders repeatedly. This is a tough one.

[@As_129sl]

In society there is always going to be a miscarriage of justice

[@iMannydotcom]

In all cases I send all down. There is a greater chance of more people being harmed if I let any of the guilty go free than if I send just 1 innocent go down for nothing.

[@RapidRichu]

all down on 1, 2 and 3

[@kakompo]

For 100 send them all to prison. But for 3 murders let them go.

[@CaddaTheP]

First scenario definitely let them free, becomes more difficult with more guilty people. Might be better the send the 100 to jail just for the safety of the public.

[@danoddball1648]

let them all go, if any of them re/offend then they'll be going down. but i do understand its unfair for whoever is harmed when the guilty guys are released but atleast you give them a chance not to offend again and you let the innocent man to be free

[@Chloe-ok1xm]

Tell the police to do there job, not me haha

[@benvolio1500]

I would send them all down in 3, but in 1 and 2 surely you need more information. Is the murderer likely to kill more people? Does the innocent person have a family or anything?

[@trueimage.6720]

Innocent until PROVEN guilty 😔

[@SauceDon32]

Free, free, prison

[@Magnezium7]

*LET IT GO*

[@Ashantiwarriorkaos]

99 murderers can cause more damage than 1 or 2 so for the case of 99 guilty send all of them

[@Rougefairee]

All free

[@sportsid1]

You send all of them down. The argument that you are robbing a man of his freedom is irrational. This is because if you let a murderer go then surely there is a chance of him commuting the same crime. The likelihood of the man reoffending is multiplied by 99 in this scenario and therefore there is likely to be more than one man robbed of his freedom if you let him go as the victims are robbed of their lives and essentially their freedom. Bossed

[@DJBlodgett]

What Canaria does this even apply to ?

[@milkboccle]

Greater good

[@armstrongbe]

That's what trials are for...

[@ComputaSezNo]

lock them all up

[@moman3r33]

all free

[@user-gg2cc5rz6v]

Who proved there guilt?

[@isaacriggs4656]

To me it's always worth it to condemn all/both of the suspects in order to guarantee the murderer is arrested.

[@kajal091s]

!,2,3 All down

[@moman3r33]

both free

[@insider_english1594]

the solution is to change the whole Legal System IF there were only those two options. lol

[@asankagurusinghe6128]

Both free

[@itsthatsmartbrotha]

Send all down, tell the innocent one to watch the shawshank redemption

[@consuelanewhams9486]

Everybody goes to jail.

[@15heartz]

first two free, third jail time...

[@lFrenzied]

Excuse me, I meant *By not sending the.... it's a catch-22 really.

[@marci7957]

I say send them all to prison. The innocent wi have a chance to appeal but one innocent person in prison to keep however many murderers in prison instead of on the streets is better if you ask me. This is coming from someone who has been incarcerated while innocent. 2 times as a matter of fact.

[@EX39badmanz]

this hard thing ever u just don't know i would put prison

[@xqueenbeequeenvx1650]

all free all free all down i'm sorry :(

[@Daft_Sage]

That is not actually true, we like to believe this is the case, but we also have to be practical, there is no way to be sure sometimes, but we still try the suspect.

[@Jahhaj6]

Take them all down

[@elizanikolaou3792]

This is not a dilemma! If at least one is a killer if he is free he can do it again! So all in jail!!!

[@KViolin99]

down down down

[@n0rthchi]

Send all of them down

[@sandrabarnett5311]

In this scenario, I think of Abraham, and when God went to Sodom and Gamora Abraham pleaded with the Angeles if there were 50 innocent would not save them, and the Angeles said yes we would not send them down I begged you again if there be 40 we would not send them all down do not be upset but 30 innocent would you kill them all not we would save the 30 well as you know he got them down to 10 and Not went to his 3 sons in law's and begged them to leave they would not even though innocent but Lot his wife and 3 daughters and himself were saved 5 out of millions were saved from certain death so justice was overly served but lot wife was turned into a pillar of salt because this was a sign on her part of her indecision not to leave so she was killed all else was destroyed as lot and his three daughters ran to safety so in the ending, I would send all the accused down and somehow God would intervene to free the innocent.

[@EX39badmanz]

all

[@juuzousuzuya7768]

Let them all free cause if they kill again they'll go to jail again, longer.

[@racheleachus8308]

Arrest Arrest Arrest It's not worth it for one person... (Sorry) 😶

[@xi7232]

Find Sherlock.

[@chloetuin9946]

I would sent them al free but I wil sent a view cops a person to watch them so they don't kill other people again

[@eleanawoods4510]

It would kill me, but I would send all of them down in every scenario. Letting them all go free would risk the lives of many more potential victims. At least when you send them all to prison, no one is dying. This is a tough decision regardless, though. :P

[@JstEvon]

This isn't a realistic scenario

[@xxmistymewxx7709]

all down all times i wouldnt want a murderer on the looose

[@crystalxo4159]

But what if you were convicted & you were the one innocent one

[@TemporaryIsTheDunya]

Hmm would've made more sense if the black figure was guilty. lol jk