You live in a poor suburb, and there is a very old woman, which will soon die anyway, and she is a pawnbroker. She is rich, unlike everyone else in the area. And she got rich by putting up insane interest rates, so high that most people couldn't repay, so she would sell their pawns. Anyway, she accumulated all that wealth, and she is hated in the neighborhood because of being a really bad person.

a) If someone was to kill her and take her money, and distribute it to the poor in the area (which would result in many lives being improved a lot), would you consider him a good or bad person? Also take in account that she is very old and is about to die anyway.

b) Would you do it yourself?

PS: Some people might recognize this, but I'm not going to say where this is from, because I want to see if anyone will recognize it.

-------
I don't agree with my username...  -.-

b) No I would report her ass to the district attorney.

-------
Slus-plck lp qbn xof akor msld.
-Wkoadq
p = f

---

I don't recognise the question - but no, whoever killed her wouldn't be in the right, and I wouldn't kill her myself either.

---

---

Quote: from Nikki at 11:54 am on Sep. 24, 2008

---

I don't recognise the question - but no, whoever killed her wouldn't be in the right, and I wouldn't kill her myself either.

---

Agreed. Why have a Judiciary system of government if we all were allowed to arbitrarily decide both intention and necessity of murder solely for the purpose of distribution to the Common Wealth? Also, being a Capitalistic society promoting greed at the expense of moral behavior honestly shouldn't be the sole reason as to merit a death sentence regardless of intentions.

---

What I meant to say which is what I was saying in the beginning which is what the MOTHER FUCKING QUESTION ASKS is that the person who did this could still be considered a good person if they did it for the right reasons even though yes, it would also be illegal and it would be murder.

Dear God I am too tired for this shit

Post edited at 11:47 am on Sep. 24, 2008 by cum

-------
Slus-plck lp qbn xof akor msld.
-Wkoadq
p = f

---

Quote: from fenrir at 10:03 am on Sep. 24, 2008

---

Quote: from Nikki at 11:54 am on Sep. 24, 2008

---

I don't recognise the question - but no, whoever killed her wouldn't be in the right, and I wouldn't kill her myself either.

---

Agreed.  Why have a Judiciary system of government if we all were allowed to arbitrarily decide both intention and necessity of murder solely for the purpose of distribution to the Common Wealth?  Also, being a Capitalistic society promoting greed at the expense of moral behavior honestly shouldn't be the sole reason as to merit a death sentence regardless of intentions.

---

What's legal isn't necessarily what's right, we're talking about what's right here.

---

Murder isn't right, either. You can't argue that killing her off to get her money is moral.

-------
oh, baby it's a wild word, and it's hard to get by just upon a smile
be the change you wish to see in the world

---

Quote: from Its Bearsy Bitch at 6:14 pm on Sep. 24, 2008

---

Quote: from fenrir at 10:03 am on Sep. 24, 2008

---

Quote: from Nikki at 11:54 am on Sep. 24, 2008

---

I don't recognise the question - but no, whoever killed her wouldn't be in the right, and I wouldn't kill her myself either.

---

Agreed. Why have a Judiciary system of government if we all were allowed to arbitrarily decide both intention and necessity of murder solely for the purpose of distribution to the Common Wealth? Also, being a Capitalistic society promoting greed at the expense of moral behavior honestly shouldn't be the sole reason as to merit a death sentence regardless of intentions.

---

What's legal isn't necessarily what's right, we're talking about what's right here.

---

Murder isn't right, either. You can't argue that killing her off to get her money is moral.

---

Unfortunately, what your proposing is not justice, but vigilantism.  We live in a day where simply being rich should not be a justification for cold blooded murder.

Beware a slippery slope whenever arbitrarily designating whomever is Evil.

-------
"How incitful of you, dwarf. Though I can't speak for fenrir,
I beleive that he too has a certain degree of sarcasm
and humor in his posts." - Prince o palities

---

Or even worse, is simply having money considered a crime against humanity if we still have a double digits percentage who routinely live below the poverty line?  Or if one choses not to give to a particular charity, should that be grounds for immediate execution, as well?  

Unfortunately, what your proposing is not justice, but vigilantism.  We live in a day where simply being rich should not be a justification for cold blooded murder.  

Beware a slippery slope whenever arbitrarily designating whomever is Evil.

---

And she wasn't just rich, she committed corporate crimes against all these poor people. It's THEIR MONEY that she stole it.

Whoever did this could absolutely be considered good because it sounds like he was trying to save these people who were poor cos this money had been stolen by this rich hag who somehow escaped the law through tricks o' the trade

Post edited at 11:48 am on Sep. 24, 2008 by cum

-------
Slus-plck lp qbn xof akor msld.
-Wkoadq
p = f

She rightfully earned the money, and rightfully deserves to keep it. Moral, in this case, is insignificant.

-------
all the days were a sun-drenched haze
while the salt spray crusted on the windowpanes...