Would you save another knowing it may cost you your life
 

Just curious about how many would do this, knowing it would likely cost you your life, to save another person, not necessarily a spouse or a child, but any any person in general.

Poll is anonymous so we won't get 'obligatitory responses', but I can say without a question for anyone in my family a no brainer (including my pets believe it or not) and if it was any child whether I knew them or not it would also be a definite yes. What I am really wrestling with morally is would I feel so strongly about savcrificing for another adult and it kind of bothers me that the choice is not as much of a slam dunk as it is for the other scenarios.

This is definitely an act of selfless love on this woman's part, truly heroic. RIP.

Teresa Marquard dies saving husband from alleged drunk driver Eric Luciano

To be quite frank - I don't know, until I'm in that situation I think its impossible to say.

I will readily admit if I did it'd probably be partially a selfish act as I'd probably be doing it because of the mental pain I'd put myself through if I didn't (as I see myself as a 'good person' and if I didn't attempt to help someone in that situation it'd really cause a huge conflict in that regard).

(still no poll ;) )

Definitely for my family and certain others but I just don't get the "for my pets" part. I know they are great companions but to put them on that sort of level is a little strange to me. How would the lives of your wife and/or kids be affected if husband/dad died saving Rover?

Family is a definite, any child is a definite.

I have thrown myself into harms way a couple of times in other areas. (Stopping a man from beating on a woman, domestic), so I would probably say for anybody.

Honestly, I think the answer to your question from 99.9% of people is no. I'll give a minority of the population a pass that the answer may be yes to save a child or spouse.

But that's not the question that woman faced in the article. It was pure instinct, and I'm sure her instinctive rationale was that this act was the only one to save them both. I don't think she committed the act "knowing" she would die. There was no time for her to rationale make a logical decision.

If the question were, "Would you willing risk your life to save another person's life?" the answer would be vastly different.

Good point and honestly I don't have an answer on why I would consider it. There are stories all the time of poeple who do die saving pets and I think it would be more of an unconcious decisiob for many who love pets. In my case the thought of me getting hury or killed probably wouldn't even pop into my mind, just instinct from being so attached to a pet. So I think a better answer for me is if I knew I would die it might chance that line of thought.

The other thing that brought this up is the number of videos you see now where people get hurt/killed while others stand by and film it instead of trying to help.....That is something that seems strange to me

I agree with Marc. If it is the classic my wife and kid are on a train track and I can change the direction of the train to kill myself than the answer is easy. If a van is hopping a curb who knows what I would do? Is there anything to suggest that the woman in the article could of possibly saved her husband and herself by grabbing him and pulling him with her. I would think I might look for a solution that would save my life and my wifes.

Definitely a better way to phrase it, changed the title and in thinking more you are right, these are usually always instinctive circumstances.

I picked "Other", because I didn't feel any of the answers expressed exactly how I would answer the question.

Like Marc, I feel no one truly knows the answer to this question until they are put in that situation. So this question is almost unanswerable, except for a few rare ones among us (ex-military perhaps).

I like to think I would do anything to save the life of my girlfriend (who will almost certainly be my wife in the next couple years), my brothers, my nieces and my best friends. I am reasonably sure I would do this.

I would also like to think I could be that person who, no matter who was in danger, I could put myself in their place if it would save them. I am reasonably sure I would fail this test.

The interesting question for me would be less immediate family, acquaintances, coworkers, people I am around but who are not critical to my life. I have no idea how I would react to that.

Here's a twist on the original question: Would you kill for your loved ones if you felt that was the only option?

IIRC this - or something along these lines - was the topic of a similar thread quite a few years ago. Maybe even old board worth of years ago. As I recall, I caught a fair bit of hell for saying that I'd be quite willing to risk my life to save my pets.

As for the original question, I think the answer to the generic person-in-peril scenario is "it depends" with the key being how I assessed the situation at that moment; i.e. what are my chances of success? what's the actual peril & how did it occur? etc etc. Variables in other words.

Every so often in Idaho a dog gets swept away in a river, the owner jumps in after him, drowns, and the dog resurfaces down the river perfectly OK. I can definitely see myself being that pet owner, but it wouldn't be a calculated decision, it'd be a "fuck it, I'm going in" decision. I'd like to think I'd have that instinct for most people too. If I have more time to think about it, I'd draw a line somewhere, but the category isn't expressly defined here. It'd include my family of course, but after I think there'd be a lot of variables.

It's hard to say for sure without being in the moment, but I can pretty safely say I would do anything for my wife and kids and probably my family and close friends as well.

I think I fall in line with a lot of others. I agree that until you are in that situation you really can't say. I would certainly for my wife and children, not really sure about other family members. I have a wife and child, soon to be 2 children, to look after, so I'm not sure I could sacrifice not only my life, but the effect it would have on their lives to save my sister or parents.

As for children, I like to think I'm not the kind of person woho could just stand around and watch a child die without some sort of intervention.

dola- If my house is on fire and everyone is out except the cat I say fuck the cat. IMO it would be very selfish for your kids to grow up without a dad to save the family pet.

I guess I see your point... but along the same lines, why would you risk your life for someone elses kids? either way your kids grow up with no parent, and if its a pet, at least you get something out of it.

To save a loved one yes. Anything beyond that unfortunately no. I'm selfish and want to live.

I'd probably go back for pets, although in my defense with the amount we have by the time I'd counted them all the house would probably have burnt down.

(I managed to persuade my wife to allow me to re-home the two goats so presently we ONLY have 1 pig, 6 dogs and 5 cats ;) )

I don't get the for children part. You are either going to save lives or not. That's like saying for women not men.

I think it depends on the situation, but it boils down to most of the time kids will have no chance to save themselves.

Before I had my own I probably would have been in the camp of not getting why kids would be different.

Not really, I think for many there is a definite line between children and adults. Young children are naive and not always cognizant of danger and often even put in the face of danger because adults are irresponsible.

I can actually give a real life example of my own. When I was 22 and working for Orkin in California I was packing my truck after treating an apartment building. A man came by and crossed the street (a very busy street) and was followed 30 seconds or so later by a child running after crying Daddy. It was apparent the child (probably around 4 years old) was heading out into the street after his Dad with no regard for traffic.

I dove and literally tackled him right at the gutter and held him, screaming and all until his Dad came back across the street. In this situation I got some road rash, but my life was never in danger, though the child would have almost certainly been struck. I would not have done that for an adult as they should have the common sense not to just bolt into traffic.

I think I'd be willing to help try to save an unrelated child (I'll also extend this to include kids of my loved ones, like a friend's baby) if my instincts took over and I acted without thinking of potential consequences. But I wouldn't go in to help if I took a second to think "I could die if I do this" as in that moment I'd be thinking of my fiancee and my potential family and that would win out. I'd certainly try to help in any non life-threatening way possible though.

I can understand that - I can also understand people logically discriminating against older people on the basis that they've less years ahead of them.

(I expect I'll probably be more willing to sacrifice myself in these situations as I get older for similar reasons, although this is currently conjecture on my part as I still feel 18 at present ;) )

Is there an option for just hot chicks?

I would put myself in mortal peril to save my wife, but that is probably about it. I don't have kids. I'd be willing to put myself in some amount of danger for the pets or other kids, but not mortal danger.

Trolley Problem

EDIT: Doesn't go as far in depth as the real problem but does offer a couple of ethical dilemmas.

I like to believe that I would put myself in harms way to save anybody.

I don't think I would though. I have no doubt I would do whatever it takes to save my daughter's life, but I don't know about anyone else.

Think this somes it up for most people

If I was sure that was the only option, without a doubt. I have no doubt it would weigh heavily on me as I would have a hard time coming to grips with the fact I took another humans life, no matter how much it may have been justified......But still a lot to live with.

But given the alternative of losing a loved one, pretty simple choice.

True, in retrospect, it's probably a simple choice in that way.

What if it's someone n your life, but not "risk your life" attachment, and you know they are going to die, if you don't kill someone? Would you do it then?

I honestly think I could, would again try and avoid it through other actions but if push came to shove, very possible.

As an example say I ran across one of my Football players and three guys were assaulting him and one had a knife and I was carrying a gun. I would get out, ask them to drop it and back away, which would hopefully happen. If they went after him again and stabbed or showed intent to stab I would think I would have to pull the trigger. I could not stand there and watch somebody innocent get stabbed to death.....At the end of the day I hope and pray that is a choice I would never have to make, because even in this scenario I would be taking someone away from their loved ones, even if he was bad/had bad intent.

r they hot?

I think the key also is 'would my help be meaningful'? I'm not willing to be a sacrifice in solidarity with someone who can't be saved from whatever imperils them, but if I were in a situation where family, close friends, or a child were in danger and my actions represented a meaningful chance of saving their lives, yes, I'd act, even at the risk of my own life.

But I'm not going to go Thelma and Louise just for the sake of going Thelma and Louise.

It would be hard in the heat of the moment. A lot of it depends on what you are doing? Sometimes you react, not knowing if you would lose your life. Seems a lot of that has happened lately on downed power lines. People risking their lives, not knowing they are in danger or not.

May cost me? Yes
Would cost me? No

I hope I would regardless of the situation, mostly because I don't know if I could live with myself if I didn't do anything and I could have. So that's the way I answered.

In reality - fuck knows. Nobody has any clue how they'd react in a situation like this until it happens. To suggest otherwise is bravado.

I really don't know. There have been 2 times when I saw shady looking characters approaching (downtown, night) and I quickly told my girlfriend each time to get behind me. A different girl each time, so I think it was just an instinctive reaction. One time I grabbed a beer bottle when a drunken bar lout violently cursed at my Dad. I wasn't angry, just ... ready. But each time I had no idea if the situation was life-threatening or not. I just felt a heightened sense of awareness and an intense focus on how I was going to attack, if violence erupted. This concludes my non-helpful contribution ...

It's easy to say "yes," but difficult to know what you would do without knowing the situation and actually being in it.

If you saw a little kid in the street and a car about to hit her, would you run into the street to save her? I thought I would, but when walking down my block in Harlem I look up and see just that situation. I froze and screamed. Lasted all of maybe three seconds and the car slammed on its brakes & stopped just in time. I was disgusted with myself that I did nothing, but there really wasn't any time to react.

I think many who indicated yes would actually do it. If you have that mindset/sense of protection in the back of your mind, especially as it relates to family, it would likely come out as a situational reaction.

But, yes at the end of the day even if you think you would/could put your life in jeopardy, you truly never know for sure until it happens. Which hopefully never does for anyone.

WWARD

I find a lot of these answers hard to believe... unless it's your wife/kid, it's a tough sell

I think I might for other people as well, not because I'm sort of hero. If I stopped to think of it I'd think about my family, and hesitate. But I just know that in the past my instinctive reaction is to rush out and help people, so I'm not sure I'd think enough to hesitate, or consider the risks.

There's a guy with a gun. At a gas station outside. He's got a gun pointed at a woman at a pump, you sit a pump behind her in your car.

Self preservation doesn't kick in? You don't hide or speed off? You consider getting out of the car and trying to save this unknown woman?

Is my car a Transformer? Cause then I'd totally do it.

Yes, and you are invincible.

Given your scenario, if I'm in a car I'd probably try and use said car to do something. If I'm out of the car, I can't imagine a scenario in which I'd confront someone with a gun, especially for a stranger. Although as I said in my original reply I think I'd be more likely on the spur of the moment to do something than If I had time to think about. Once you start thinking about the possibility of being dead I think the odds of you doing anything decrease.

It's threads like this that remind me how
ridiculous this board is.

Did it jump the shark at transformers? :D

I think this probably sums it up best in this scenario...if you have a couple seconds to think about it, you probably don't do much at all (outside of use a cell phone to call the cops as you drive away).

Can homie with the gun see me coming?

Isn't this where someone comes in & says the only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun?

Let the gun control debate take over!