Re: A terroristic problem
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Assume your goal is to save the most lives.
[/ QUOTE ]
The assumption must be that the role of the govt/police is to help the rest of us live in a free and open society. The simplest way to make sure that there is no terrorist bomb in the UK or US or whereever, is to nuke it first all by ourselves. I can 100 percent guarantee that there will be no more deaths at the hands of the terrorist. That's right 100 percent guarantee.
Your question is flawed and designed to produce an answer. The flaw is the assumption you proffer.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree that the assumption is seriously debatable, but your counterexample is way off point. You don't save more lives by killing everyone. He didn't differentiate between terrorist deaths and other deaths, he just asserted that we should try to minimize overall deaths.
Now, what you should be arguing, and what I might agree with, is that it's much worse for a person to be killed by his government than by a terrorist. But that's a whole different kettle of worms. There's a clearly correct answer to the question as posed.
|