Barrack Room Lawers

Funnily enough I was thinking about this self same moral question the other day and as Markintime says below about the falklands war...



I recall that whilst no disciplinary action of any kind was brought against the medic who put the Argy out of his misery (and it is well documented how severly injured and in agony the guy was in) apparently his career was 'put on hold' for a long time afterwards.

I guess people who werent there should not be in a position to pass any judgement whatsoever on somone who has to make a quick decision on whether to take a life to end suffering.

If it were me in that boat, then yes I think I would kill a mortally injured enemy to take away his suffering.

Okay, would any one kill a badly wounded comrade.
 

Punch

LE
Okay, would any one kill a badly wounded comrade.

This is the unanswerable question. And hopefully a question few will ever have to face. It will certainly not give opportunity at the moment it has to be answered for the sort of discussions we have here. It is perhaps best avoided as a thought process for those closest to finding themselves in a situation where such action may be necessary; if it happens it will not be well thought out decision but an instinctive human reaction to an appalling challenge.
And that could be any of us: the example of the family burning in the car happens.
 
Okay, would any one kill a badly wounded comrade.

Interesting question. There was a study done in the US that found that only 5% of the Armed Forces would kill anyone, friend or foe! The rest would aim to wound or 'in the general direction'.

I would say that whatever you might think, that question can only be answered when presented by a set of circumstances that might demand it. You can theorise all you want but I'd bet that many who would say definitely no might act differently in certain circumstances and vice versa.
 
Interesting question. There was a study done in the US that found that only 5% of the Armed Forces would kill anyone, friend or foe! The rest would aim to wound or 'in the general direction'.

Given the average marksmanship standards, the safest thing to do is probably to take deliberate aim! :)

I would say that whatever you might think, that question can only be answered when presented by a set of circumstances that might demand it. You can theorise all you want but I'd bet that many who would say definitely no might act differently in certain circumstances and vice versa.

You'd win your bet. And many who say 'yes' would also do differently.
 
B

Biscuits_AB

Guest
I would have quite happily shot one of my OC's.. wounded or not! (and I werent the only one, even the Squadron 2ic said he would..... in the bar one night after a lot of prompting of course!)

I've worked for one or two cnuts who I would refuse to shoot if they were badly wounded. I might flick fag ash into their gaping wounds though. Poke around with a stick, that sort of thing.
 

BuggerAll

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
IIRC correctly the reason that there was no prosecution in the Falklands case was that it was accepted that the medic was providing the casualty with the only appropriate care.

I would imagine a similar claim could be made in the AFG situation. Given the circumstances I don't think anyone would quibble if The Capt had given the casualty a life a huge dose of morphine. Enough to end his pain with the side effect of prematurely ending his life.

I would hope that the jury or CM board had the moral courage to see beyond a narrow interpretation of the law and deliver justice.

Sent from my iPhone using ARRSE so please excuse fat fingers and slips of the keyboard.
 
IIRC correctly the reason that there was no prosecution in the Falklands case was that it was accepted that the medic was providing the casualty with the only appropriate care.

I would imagine a similar claim could be made in the AFG situation. Given the circumstances I don't think anyone would quibble if The Capt had given the casualty a life a huge dose of morphine. Enough to end his pain with the side effect of prematurely ending his life.

I would hope that the jury or CM board had the moral courage to see beyond a narrow interpretation of the law and deliver justice.

Sent from my iPhone using ARRSE so please excuse fat fingers and slips of the keyboard.

If you read post 58 hes been found guily of disgraceful conduct and accrding to the procecution he wasnt charged with murder more due to the fact the body was never recovered rather than the court showing any moral courage.
Leveillée explained the burden of proof with a second-degree murder charge is that a person dies as a result “and they (the panel) may have had a reasonable doubt about this,” especially since the body was not recovered
 
Top