Hypothetical Ethical Question

Status
Not open for further replies.

LadySmith

Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2004
Messages
254
This is a purely fictional scenario:
Let's say you're a member of a nationally known RKBA organization. You become fast friends with the guy in charge. In public, he's an icon. Articulate & attractive, he also has a talent for gently educating antis and swaying fence sitters. The media turn to him for accurate firearms-related information, and the talk show circuit welcomes him as a calm, informed source. With him as spokesman, your group has won several important victories and is on the verge of winning even more. He's even being groomed for politics. However, you notice that he's completely different in his private life. He gets drunk or abuses drugs and plays Russian roulette, pointing his gun at himself, his family members, and people passing by in front of his house while pulling the trigger. He's not above selling, loaning or trading the occasional unwanted gun to people who shouldn't have them for drugs or extra cash. You see him disintegrating, and he refuses all private offers of help. He sees any type of counseling as an attempt to take his guns away, and he'd rather see himself and his family dead before that happens. His wife and kids are scared into silence. It's only a matter of time before he becomes part of a tragedy.
Do you try to intervene knowing it would destroy the greater good of the organization once news of his behavior becomes known? Would you sacrifice the group to try to save your friend?
Do you keep silent hoping that he'll eventually hit bottom and change his ways while seeing that he's steadily getting worse?
Do you abandon him and your friendship, waiting for the day when the hammer falls on a live round during his games of Russian roulette?
What would you do and why?
 
Do you try to intervene knowing it would destroy the greater good of the organization once news of his behavior becomes known? Would you sacrifice the group to try to save your friend?

I think by not doing anything, you're sacrificing the integrity of the group, which is far more important than any public relations fallout.

You help your friend. You protect the innocent. You possibly save a life. Politics and PR have no place in that decision.
 
Do you try to intervene knowing it would destroy the greater good of the organization once news of his behavior becomes known? Would you sacrifice the group to try to save your friend?

The "Greater Good" has caused a lot of evil. Besides his behavior will become known ilregardless of what you do.

-Bill
 
Ever heard of the "ends justify the means"? Lots of bad things have been done under that excuse.

Help your friend, no ifs, ands, or buts.
 
If he is putting his wife, kids, and innocent bystanders at risk then the answer is clear. The public image of an organization is nothing compaired to peoples lives.
 
Waiting makes the inevitable worse.
If his public persona is growing through the success of the organization then the pressures that are ruining his private life will only increase. Ultimately the facade breaks. When it does, you will be second guessing yourself: "If only I had acted sooner, the damage wouldn't have been so bad..."
 
Do you try to intervene knowing it would destroy the greater good of the organization once news of his behavior becomes known? Would you sacrifice the group to try to save your friend?

Intervene. Do you think it will never become public? It's not a matter of if, but when it becomes known. I don't undersand how people think these things will remain secret. Either the organization takes action, and the public finds out, or the public finds out and the organization is forced to react. The consequence is the same, but the good of the organization is best served by mitigating the damage. It's never the scandal but the attempt to cover up the scandal that destroys the organization or individual. Ask Martha Stewart or the Arthur Anderson firm.


Do you keep silent hoping that he'll eventually hit bottom and change his ways while seeing that he's steadily getting worse?


If you do something he may not like you. If you do nothing he may die, or kill others. Where's the question.

If you know of a potentially dangerous/fatal condition and do nothing about it, you share responsibility for the disaster and tragedy that will occur. It is a sin of omission. IMHO you have two duties here. You have a duty to your friend and a duty to everyone at risk due to his behavior. I would rather risk someone not liking me before I risked his life. People do need to hit bottom before they are receptive of help. Sometimes the best help is a hard shove over the edge. I judge my friends by their willingness to tell me when I'm being a bonehead. That takes courage.



Do you abandon him and your friendship, waiting for the day when the hammer falls on a live round during his games of Russian roulette?
What would you do and why?

Again, IMO if you have a question here, your not a friend.

These questions can be summed up as, do you act and take a risk, or do you sit on the sidelines and watch the carnage? I think it's human nature to try to avoid conflict. It is our humanity that makes us act.
 
If you're that close to the top, I would assume that you're also close to the Board of directors, Call a secret meeting with them and have them come out and along with you intervene. By doing this you can save some face of the organization. If the other leadership of the organization denounces his behavior and want's him to get help, it shouldn't smear the org as bad...
 
A substance abuser who plays with guns? I'd stay far away from that guy.

I can't save the world. I will do what I can to protect myself and my family.
 
Interesting scenario, but the funny part is that 90% isn't relevant to anything. It does not matter that the guy is a spokesperson for RKBA or being groomed for politics. The concern for potentially compromising the RKBA group is stupid. I have no idea why you would even ask about sacrificing the group to save the friend. The group isn't being sacrificed and if there is any political fallout, it will be superficial and short term. The problems with your friend, however, may result in his own self sacrifice and the fallout will be permanent.

Besides, don't you think that if the guy commits suicide that his behavior will have a negative impact anyway?

This all seems to be a no brainer to me.
 
Not that it is even comparable to the greater issue, but let's take a look at the potential damage to the RKBA group.

1) Spokesman goes into treatment/counseling. Media hound him and RKBA group for a week, 2 tops. Then a celebrity's life goes into a tailspin. Media vultures flock away to go feast on fresh carrion.

2) Spokesman for a RKBA group is found dead from a self inflicted gunshot wound. Post mortem toxicology reports find high levels of drugs and alcohol in his system. Details of his behavior come out after the fact. Media circus ensues. RKBA group take a black eye to its credibility for years.

3) Spokesman for a RKBA group murders his family and goes on a spree killing in his neighborhood. Police respond, media responds. SWAT teams have to take out the heavily armed man with a sniper shot. Media captures 5 minutes of useable dramatic footage. Week 1, one minute of dramatic footage airs, including pixellated image of former spokesman taking a headshot. Week 2, another minute of footage, etc. Week 8, a special report on guns in America airs on some news station. They report how autopsy results showed high levels of alcohol and illegal drugs in former spokesman's bloodstream. RKBA group loses all credibility. Anti-gunners introduce new round of anti-gun legislation claiming they are doing it "for the children".

Feh.

You have the opportunity to avert tragedy and disaster. At the very least you can contain the damage. Never even mind what a friend should do for their friend. Assess, decide, act. Organize this guy's other friends. Hire an intervention specialist. Get his wife and grown children on board. Get his kids out of harms way and have plenty of manpower there when you intervene. Give him the choice of signing himself into treatment or getting a 72 hour involuntary committment. He knows the gun laws and knows what that means for him owning guns from then on.

Be ready in case he decides to go John Wayne instead of going peacefully.

I've worked in mental health and I've seen it go both ways. It is never easy. Taking the "easy" way always winds up in tragedy. The only question is how big is the tragedy going to be.
 
The answer to this one is so obvious that I wonder why it was even asked. The FIRST time he points a gun at his family members ought to be the last...
 
I don't know who that is, but I can say that a couple of people on our side have scared me to various degrees. I decided to stay well away from them...and that was just on a hunch, not anything as bad as what you describe.
 
The guy is BAD news...no question on what to do . if you sleep with dogs, you wake up with fleas.
 
What's the purpose of this thread?

:scrutiny:

For the time being, I'm going to assume benign intent. Other possibilities will remain unexplored for now.

-If it IS purely a hypothetical, without any connection to any real scenario going on in your life, then it's either an undergrad bull session, or an attempt to gauge this community's Piagetian level of moral development via adapting a key element of the assessment.

Either way, it's probably OT, and possibly out of bounds.

-Unless you're trying to warn the RKBA community that such a problem as you describe exists, posing the ethical dilemna in the "hypothetical" terms you describe is extremely unwise and imprudent, as suspiscions will be unnecessarilly aroused, and this is how rumors get started.

-If you're trying to sort out the all too human and sadly common problem of hidden shambling human horror shows, then it's another thing, in which case you have our sympathies. The answer is straightforward, hard as it is to accept.
 
"Either way, it's probably OT, and possibly out of bounds."

Evidently not, since the forum owner has posted on the thread. Anyway, I think that the story is hypothetical to the point of being too farfetched. Sure it's possible, but how many openly articulate and effective people, national-level gun advocates and lobbyists, are, in reality, slobbering, drunken, drug-using Russian roulette players?

Tim
 
The media turn to him for accurate firearms-related information, and the talk show circuit welcomes him as a calm, informed source.

Obviously this entire story is fictional and hypothetical as there is nobody in the RKBA movement that is welcome on talk shows or that the media turns to for "accurate firearms-related information" (as there is almost no "accurate firearms-related information" in mainstream media reports on gun issues).


If I didn't know better I'd say this entire scenario was dreamed up and the question asked to get some RKBA supporter to publicly say "Yeah, I'd take this SOB out back, put a bullet in his head and bury him. The 3 S's...shoot, shovel and shut up!"

:scrutiny:
 
Greater good?

You need to figure out for yourself what is the greater good?
Also, realize that this may end your friendship for ever.
Having said that, how much do you personally want to help your friend? If he is that bad in his debauchery, then he doesn't feel that he has hit rock bottom yet and is not ready for help.
If you feel that you have to intervene, then does your cell phone have digital photo and movie capabilities.
Start by showing him the pictures, then depending on his reaction, decide how you can best use the pictures to help your friend help himself.
 
Thinking back on prominent people caught doing bad things - doesn't the attempted coverup usually bring worse consequences than the scandal itself?

And with lives at stake, I vote for early intervention.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top