Current Events

TOPICS:

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32

 ... 487

Next

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

Next

malkav11

malkav11

Saint Paul, MN
July 2003

FEB 14, 2010 01:13 PM

Three of the five people were in fact adults.

motorfirebox

motorfirebox

Pittsburgh, PA
March 2004

FEB 14, 2010 01:22 PM

Adroitbeing said:
If they were clearly armed, all bets are off. I'm not unnecessarily risking my life; but that's just me.


it's somewhat shocking to see you say this, since it's the reason others have stated as to why they would choose to not intervene. for you, the presence of weapons ameliorates the moral imperative to jump in. i don't see why that's any more valid than DevilsReject, for whom the need to protect his own daughter overrides the moral imperative; or than other posters, for whom the presence of violence at all overrides the moral imperative.

Waldo_Jeffers

Waldo_Jeffers

United Kingdom
OLD SKOOL

FEB 14, 2010 02:41 PM

Adroitbeing said:
Let's stop the mindless fucking "PC" babble here. The security guards are adults, who "should" possess both a natural and moral responsibility to intervene. Have we all become so narcissistic and morally corrupt to believe anything different should happen; especially if we were the person being beaten?

There is no excuse for those committing the crime or for those who turn their backs and walk away because it means less to them than tenuous employment.

It's frightening to see how people dignify a corrupt sense of what is "right" through comments on these boards.



Are you familiar with The Milgram Experiment?

It helps explain the actions (or inaction) of those security guards.

Judging by Stanley Milgram's findings, most people would probably have behaved the way those guards did if they were in that situation.

Adroitbeing

Adroitbeing

I'm lost
September 2003

FEB 15, 2010 09:02 AM

motorfirebox said:

Adroitbeing said:
If they were clearly armed, all bets are off. I'm not unnecessarily risking my life; but that's just me.


it's somewhat shocking to see you say this, since it's the reason others have stated as to why they would choose to not intervene. for you, the presence of weapons ameliorates the moral imperative to jump in. i don't see why that's any more valid than DevilsReject, for whom the need to protect his own daughter overrides the moral imperative; or than other posters, for whom the presence of violence at all overrides the moral imperative.



I might offer that it's a pity you fail to recognize the difference, but such an overture would be wholly insincere at this juncture.

When you find time to step away from your computer and herald your graduate degree in psychology, I will gladly and swiftly credit your observations regarding human behavior and motivation. Until then, your posts are little more than unqualified prattle from what might be another website developer with too much time on their hands.

motorfirebox

motorfirebox

Pittsburgh, PA
March 2004

FEB 15, 2010 09:24 AM

yeah, okay, that's twice in a row now that you've chosen derision over meaningful response. ta-ta.

Adroitbeing

Adroitbeing

I'm lost
September 2003

FEB 15, 2010 12:39 PM

motorfirebox said:
yeah, okay, that's twice in a row now that you've chosen derision over meaningful response. ta-ta.



M.F.B.A.W.; I would find it much easier to express patience and support for your "insights," if yours suggested any inkling of reciprocity. My sense is that your output codec volume is turned to 11 and you failed to understand what your mother meant when she said 'put your listening ears on."

I trust that's not too cryptic for you.

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

Next