We've been having a week-long debate at work over this very question, and needless to say...it's become a bit testy. Here is the scenario: Your dog (or whatever household pet you keep) is out on the ice. So is a stranger. Both fall through at the same time. You can only save the life of one of them. The question is, who do you save? Your own dog, or a complete stranger? Some notes: - the pet is your own pet. Not some random dog. - the person is a random person. Someone whose name you do not know. - the stranger is an adult, not a child. - no cheating. You can't use the dog to save the person or anything like that.
If this were a real news story, and someone chose to save the dog, I would personally put a bullet in their head to make sure they can't fuck up again. How is this even a dilemma?
The person. I love my pets and while we do not have a dog currently, I have had dogs I loved as much as it is possible to love a dog, but, at the end of the day, they are still just dogs. Human life is more important.
Seriously? The life of a human vs. the life of an animal is a moral dilemma? I think your moral compass has been demagnetized.
It's funny, because every single person at work except one chose to save their dog without hesitation. Myself included. Personally, I've had a dog fall through the ice on me before. I can attest that I jumped in after him without considering anything. It wasn't until a guy on the shore yelled "throw me your ipod and bag!" that I realized I was carrying stuff when I went in. If I saw my dog out there, I can't guarantee I would even realize a person was out there, too. Plus, I love my dogs dearly. A random person is a random person. I owe them no duty of care. There is also the issue of consent. Presumably, my dog was out on the ice because I as an owner was careless and allowed him to roam out there. He has no concept he's in danger and can't be expected to look after himself. The human went out there of his own violation, one would assume knowing the risks. One situation is my fault; the other is the fault of the person in danger.
Wow DCC I can't tell if you're kidding or not. As someone who has fallen through the ice (as a child), if someone rescued their dog instead of me I would haunt them forever as a ghost.
I like animals far more in general than people. However, I save the person, mourn the dog. Not even a close one for me.
I have to agree - this is not a dilemma in my mind. This is cut and dry. Save the person, not the pet.
Hell no, you throw that asshole that a person die over a dog through the ice so they die the same way they let the other person die.
Would you feel the same way if that "random person" were a loved one of yours, but I opted to save my dog instead because, y'know, I love my pet and I don't owe your loved one anything?
Did I miss something here? Is the person Jerry Sandusky? or maybe Hitler? I'm pretty sure in some states you could be charged with manslaughter in the US for pulling this stunt.
As much as I love dogs I have to believe human life is more important. (if it turns out they are some sort of child molester or something I can always throw them back in) I also want to believe that if I were the random person that fell through the ice someone else would be willing to help save my ass.
Someone who knows more about Canadian law, please correct me here. I'm under the impression that you're only required to save people that you have a feduciary duty to. In a different example, a lifeguard is required to do everything in his power to save a person drowning at the beach. Some random person standing on the shore watching is not. I just know what I was like when my big dog fell through the ice, or alternately when my little one got run over right in front of me. Both times I had a reckless disregard for my own safety (ran right out on to the ice and crashed through, ran right into traffic) and didn't think very rationally at all. I don't suppose I'd be much different if it happened again, which means me noticing the person before it was too late would be slim. I guess, also, I consider my dogs true members of my family. In my mind, the question is "Do you save a member of your family, or some random person?" The explaination the fellow at work uses is similar to some people here: human life is more important than any other life. I question that statement, too. That's a different argument, though.
This poll should be public. I'd love to know which members (currently 5) would save their own dog and let someone's parent/brother/sister/friend drown. Obviously DCC is one. Stay off the lakes in Winnipeg this winter.
Maybe this is why some people would save their dog before saving a stranger... I voted to save the random stranger but I may have to rethink that if more posts like these show up. I know my dog would never want to do such a thing as put a bullet in someone's head or drown someone.
I think we're all missing the bigger issue here: how is "dilemma" still spelled incorrectly in the thread title? But anyway, even if you're one of the few who claim that you'd save your dog, it's still bullshit. When faced with somebody pleading for help, for their life, and a dog barking, nobody who has more than three brain cells ignores the human.
It's surprising to me that so many of you don't consider this a moral dilemma at all. Maybe this will be a tougher question: What about people who donate time and money to animal assistance charities to the exclusion of human assistance charities? Are ASPCA donors morally bankrupt in comparison to March of Dimes donors? I underlined certain words to discourage straw man replies.
At common law it is, generally speaking, the rule that you are under no obligation to save someone from a situation such as this. If you attempt it (different rules apply to cops, firemen, lifeguards, etc.) you have to do so in a reasonably competent manner given your experience, circumstances, etc. That's hornbook tort law. So, from a legal standpoint, you can sit on the bank of that lake, point and laugh as the man dies and you are free from any legal repercussions. So, making the decision to save your dog is a perfectly legal one. It makes you a reprehensible and loathsome human, but you may rest easy knowing you have not broken any laws.