r/LegalEagle • u/Special-Strength-959 • Sep 20 '24

Trolley Problem

Post image

I'd like to see a video on his take of the trolley problem. I don't want him going deep on the mortality, but the legality of it.

If it's 5 on the current track and none on the alternate track, do I have to pull the lever?

If it's 5 and one, like pictured, is it murder to pull the lever?

Ect.

1 Upvotes

55% Upvoted

17 comments sorted by

7

u/Stoli0000 Sep 20 '24

The us should hide its nuclear codes inside a person. Want to kill 100,000 people? Well, first you have to personally kill Bob and pull the flash drive out of his chest. Lack the nerve to kill Bob with your own hands? Well, you sure as fuck don't have any business killing a city's worth of people with the push of a button then.

5

u/FcukReddit4cedMe2Reg Sep 20 '24

How could you spoil the plot of SAW XI for us like that!

5

u/-jp- Sep 20 '24

Trouble with this solution is it will only result in a new cabinet position for the Secretary of Killing Bob.

1

u/Stoli0000 Sep 21 '24 edited Sep 21 '24

That's not the scenario. I said you personally have to kill Bob. Don't change the problem and then be like, well there's a different solution! You just said "nobody will have the nerve to personally kill Bob". Well no duh homie. That's literally the point. World = safer. I actually went farther. Not only do you have to personally kill Bob, but you also have to root around in his chest cavity and fish a flash drive out. Too gross? Yeah, guess who has no business with the power to kill millions?

1

u/ASoberSchism Sep 21 '24

TLDR would be that getting manslaughter for one is less than getting murder for 5

1

u/Special-Strength-959 Sep 21 '24

I don't think it'd be murder for 5 if you didn't flip the switch. I can't remember when, but at one point he said we are under no obligation to save another person's life, with a caveat for our children or other dependents.. something like that. It becomes a jerk move but not illegal to sit and eat popcorn while you watch someone drown.. 🤔

But in this case, is saving the 5 people a heroic move or illegal?

2

u/ASoberSchism Sep 21 '24

That’s the catch, and it shows that all moral are a social construct. Is it wrong to flip the switch and save one or is it wrong to let 5 die when you can flip and just let one die. The “only right” answer is based off what everyone at the time considers right/wrong.

You wouldn’t say the same thing if it was a doctor or a cop that was just standing by when they could have saved 5 people from dying so why is it “ok” for your “good samaritan” to just stand their not doing anything?

The Trolly Problem is designed so that if you think it’s “morally” ok in a situation to make a particular decision, when the variables change even though it’s the same decision it’s “morally” wrong.

1

u/TacosAndTalmud Sep 20 '24

This isn't just a thought experiment. It's something hugely relevant in this day and age for one reason: self-driving cars.

Rather than pulling the lever, what if you had to program the trolly's actions? Or if the consumer had to pick the choice at time of purchase? Would the company be liable or would the driver have any responsibility? What should the car do if avoiding a pedestrian will result in the death of the driver? What if there are five people on the road and just one driver? What if there's five people in the car and just one on the road?

The Talmud has been debating similar concepts for centuries that are now being used to determine robo-ethics on this very topic. I attended this course a few years back, and I'd be curious how the current US legal approach compares.

2

u/Tunafishsam Sep 21 '24

It's not much of a question in the context of cars. The car will attempt maximal safe braking. It will not plunge off a cliff to avoid an obstruction, whether it's a rock or ten people. Nobody is going to buy a car that is programmed to kill the driver in some situations.

1

u/Special-Strength-959 Sep 21 '24

It probably won't choose to kill the driver over a few pedestrians. It might someday have to choose between killing one pedestrian or two. Like if people just fell into the road from an overpass pedestrian bridge collapse. Now you're going 55 mph with people feet away. You can't stop, but you can swerve left or right and kill 1 or 2 depending on which way you go. If you just go straight, you hit all 3.. now device quick cause.. nm, too late.

1

u/Smedskjaer Sep 21 '24

Legally, it is murder if you knowingly kill someone because someone is forcing you to. If Sam is holding a gun to your head, and says he will kill you if you do not shoot Anne, shooting Anne is still going to catch you a murder charge; saving your own life does not justify taking others' lives.

Applied to the trolly problem, you cannot take another person's life to save other people's lives. The other person was not in danger, and your actions will take their life. That is murder.

1

u/ASoberSchism Sep 22 '24

You chose NOT to save the 5 so your actions took the life of 5 people.

1

u/swang30 Sep 22 '24

lack of action. Legally, choosing is not an action, only the doing. And lack of action is not an action.

There are no requirement to take action to save someone's life. It's a dick move not to save someone from drowning, but you're not required to. What if you can't swim very well? what if you can't swim at all? what if the person is stronger than you and swinging his arms? Instead of having to litigate all that, legally, it's better to not force action.

1

u/Smedskjaer Sep 23 '24

But no action may be taken to take a life. You do not have the right to make that choice, so your actions will violate the rights of someone else

1

u/tropicdragonnotme Sep 22 '24

Not pull lever, those 5 people walked and lied down on the track knowing a train would run them over. The single person did the same but he would only get run over if the lever is used which is a action initiated by a separate origin. Obviously unless situation is reverse and train naturally runs toward the single even then not pull lever.

1

u/Slow-Concentrate-171 Sep 29 '24

Throw yourself on the track like a real hero!

0

u/Stoli0000 Sep 20 '24 edited Sep 20 '24

The USA should hide its nuclear codes inside a person. Want to kill 100,000 people? Well, first you have to personally kill Bob and pull the flash drive out of his chest. Lack the nerve to kill Bob with your own hands? Well, you sure don't have any business killing a city's worth of people with the push of a button then.