Actual Problems with AnCap

[myrkul]

The benefit to carrying a grenade launcher is that not only do you blow up the hostage-taker, you also blow up yourself in the explosion (if you modify the M406 round to arm sooner than the default 30 meters - which you'd want to do for typical defensive confrontation range), so the death of the hostage and assigning blame thereof is really a moot point if you've suicided.

Well, there is that, too.

[1714097686]

1714097686

[1714097686]

1714097686

[1714097686]

1714097686

[1714097686]

1714097686

[1714097686]

1714097686

[fornit]

i think one of the reasons this discussion isn't very productive is that you guys talk about different levels of "judgement".

1 - personal: what you feel is right or wrong
2 - society: what a majority in a specific society considers right or wrong
3 - legal: what is (or should be) considered a crime in a specific society
4 - absolute: what is considered wrong or evil by a religion or other institution claiming absolute moral authority

specifically, it's hard to tell, if denying responsibility is only meant on a legal level or if, for example, joel claims that, as soon as somebody does something "evil" he isn't responsible for his actions on any level anymore.
in my opinion, even at the risk of agreeing with myrkul, on a personal level, you are always responsible for everything you do. both regarding any direct consequences and any consequences that you could have foreseen. meaning if you choose to be ignorant about something and in consequence lack the necessary knowledge to make a good decision at some point in the future, thats also your responsibility.
if you take that far enough, it's also clear that responsibility is basically infinite. which in turn means that you have to decide the limits of your responsibility individually. as long as your law and society accepts that, do what you want.

[myrkul]

in my opinion, even at the risk of agreeing with myrkul, on a personal level, you are always responsible for everything you do. both regarding any direct consequences and any consequences that you could have foreseen. meaning if you choose to be ignorant about something and in consequence lack the necessary knowledge to make a good decision at some point in the future, thats also your responsibility.

Well, that's the risk you have to take... Eventually, unless your response to everything is, "More laws! Bigger government!" you're going to agree with a libertarian about something.

I don't think responsibility is infinite, but it definitely goes a lot farther than most people like to accept.

[TheButterZone]

So, let's say you can't see what the switch could possibly be connected to (by wire or with an obvious wireless receiver attached to a bomb). Whether or not it appears to be a negative or positive pressure switch.

Then you just handle it as a typical human shield hostage situation. Never drop your gun, never lower your gun, keep the HT generally in your sights and wait as long as it takes for a clear shot (or one that will be unlikely to kill the hostage if you are confident to shoot through their non-vital areas and hit the vitals of the HT), then take it. Drop or lower the gun, and the HT has all the power. Even if the hostage is wounded (no matter who does it), they will likely drop (or be dropped, as dead weight) to the ground, then you take the totally clear shot, stop the threat, and provide/call for medical aid for the hostage.

If you intend to shoot through the hostage, you better have FMJ and not HP if you want the round to overpenetrate and maintain enough energy to dump into the HT.

[JoelKatz]

Let's say that you can predict multiple futures, and now you want to pick the decision that results in the best possible outcome. How do you know that all the other futures would end up being worse? You can never try them out - it's a paradox.

Nobody expects people to be perfect.