4 ms·

"pull the lever" is surely the wrong answer because you end up in jail for killing someone.

323 4y ago
There's the Good Samaritan defense, but you are right, why risk it.
ummonk 4y ago
Assuming it’s the classic trolley problem, what would be the crime? There doesn’t seem to be specific intent for murder (the death is a regrettable side effect), and diverting the train to save lives is certainly not reckless disregard for human life so manslaughter seems to be out. By the way do you think someone would go to jail for swerving a car away from a crowd and hitting just one person as a result?
- stolenmerch 4y ago
  It would need to be tried, but yes, involuntary manslaughter is a real possibility in that scenario. Intent is not needed for going to jail.
  - mattkrause 4y ago
    Don’t you need some kind of intentional “bad behavior” for involuntary manslaughter? I thought it required committing another unlawful act or being so reckless/negligent that it essentially meets that standard. Some classic examples are petty thefts where the victim has a heart attack, or a medical practitioner acts outside their legal authority (e.g., while unlicensed) or egregiously failing to act despite having a duty of care.
    - stolenmerch 4y ago
      Good point. Reckless behavior may not mean "swerving to save someone else" which is what pulling a lever would be. I struggle with with the Trolley Problem because the pulling of the lever is always intentional.
    - Eisenstein 4y ago
      I don't know if practicing medicine without a license is a felony, but robbery is. In case of a death that occurred as a result of robbery you would probably be charged with felony murder, which does not take into account intent to commit murder, just intent to commit a felony.
      - mattkrause 4y ago
        Right, but that’s still “bad behavior.” In some places felony + someone dies = felony murder :: misdemeanour + someone dies = involuntary manslaughter. I think the minimal pair is something like losing control of a car and fatally swerving into another car because: - you were driving like a maniac and hit ice==> culpable - you were driving prudently for the overall conditions, but hit oil spilled on a dark road (or something else unforseeable) ==> not.
    - dragonwriter 4y ago
      > Don’t you need some kind of intentional “bad behavior” for involuntary manslaughter? You have act with recklessness or criminal negligence (or, where a misdemeanor manslaughter rule exists, commit a misdemameanor that resulted in the death.) None of these, except some misdemeanors, require intentional wrongdoing.
      - mattkrause 4y ago
        I thought the reckless act (not the ensuring harm) still had to be deliberate: you knew (or should have known) something was overly risky and yet you did it anyway. Speeding as part of a drag race is reckless; speeding because the accelerator was stuck open is, I think, not. In the trolley problem, you certainly can't be negligent (unless you own the trolley line or something). I'm not sure you could be called reckless either if your decision was meant to do the most good.
    - barbariangrunge 4y ago
      Intentional bad behaviour like not hitting the breaks fast enough when a kid runs in front of your car?
jasamer 4y ago
It’s a question about ethics, I think it’s implied that legal consequences are not part of the consideration. But even when including possible jail time in your consideration: if you think that saving two lives at the cost of another is worth it, surely a life saved is worth more than a jail sentence?

323 4y ago

There's the Good Samaritan defense, but you are right, why risk it.

Assuming it’s the classic trolley problem, what would be the crime? There doesn’t seem to be specific intent for murder (the death is a regrettable side effect), and diverting the train to save lives is certainly not reckless disregard for human life so manslaughter seems to be out. By the way do you think someone would go to jail for swerving a car away from a crowd and hitting just one person as a result?

stolenmerch 4y ago
It would need to be tried, but yes, involuntary manslaughter is a real possibility in that scenario. Intent is not needed for going to jail.
- mattkrause 4y ago
  Don’t you need some kind of intentional “bad behavior” for involuntary manslaughter? I thought it required committing another unlawful act or being so reckless/negligent that it essentially meets that standard. Some classic examples are petty thefts where the victim has a heart attack, or a medical practitioner acts outside their legal authority (e.g., while unlicensed) or egregiously failing to act despite having a duty of care.
  - stolenmerch 4y ago
    Good point. Reckless behavior may not mean "swerving to save someone else" which is what pulling a lever would be. I struggle with with the Trolley Problem because the pulling of the lever is always intentional.
  - Eisenstein 4y ago
    I don't know if practicing medicine without a license is a felony, but robbery is. In case of a death that occurred as a result of robbery you would probably be charged with felony murder, which does not take into account intent to commit murder, just intent to commit a felony.
    - mattkrause 4y ago
      Right, but that’s still “bad behavior.” In some places felony + someone dies = felony murder :: misdemeanour + someone dies = involuntary manslaughter. I think the minimal pair is something like losing control of a car and fatally swerving into another car because: - you were driving like a maniac and hit ice==> culpable - you were driving prudently for the overall conditions, but hit oil spilled on a dark road (or something else unforseeable) ==> not.
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    > Don’t you need some kind of intentional “bad behavior” for involuntary manslaughter? You have act with recklessness or criminal negligence (or, where a misdemeanor manslaughter rule exists, commit a misdemameanor that resulted in the death.) None of these, except some misdemeanors, require intentional wrongdoing.
    - mattkrause 4y ago
      I thought the reckless act (not the ensuring harm) still had to be deliberate: you knew (or should have known) something was overly risky and yet you did it anyway. Speeding as part of a drag race is reckless; speeding because the accelerator was stuck open is, I think, not. In the trolley problem, you certainly can't be negligent (unless you own the trolley line or something). I'm not sure you could be called reckless either if your decision was meant to do the most good.
  - barbariangrunge 4y ago
    Intentional bad behaviour like not hitting the breaks fast enough when a kid runs in front of your car?

jasamer 4y ago

It’s a question about ethics, I think it’s implied that legal consequences are not part of the consideration. But even when including possible jail time in your consideration: if you think that saving two lives at the cost of another is worth it, surely a life saved is worth more than a jail sentence?