Dashcam recording of Castile's shooting released.

[Roy]

Is it morally acceptable to kill non-combatants, including babies and children, who are attending funerals of dead enemy combatants?.

Non-combatants are to be avoided when at all possible. It's not always possible though, so it is morally acceptable as collateral damage in times of war.

You've avoided answering. It's always possible to choose not to bomb areas where there are non-combatants, such as funerals of dead enemy combatants. So, is it morally acceptable to kill non-combatants, including babies and children, who are attending funerals of dead enemy combatants?

Is it also a morally acceptable position to kill some-one who hasn't intentionally killed someone else as a criminal offense, but has instead had the misfortune to be wrongly accused and convicted?

It's exceedingly rare. And I am only for the death penalty where it is beyond a shadow of a doubt, such as Manson, Dahmer, and Gacey.

It may be rare, but it does happen - so is it morally acceptable?

[Tassman]

Non-combatants are to be avoided when at all possible. It's not always possible though, so it is morally acceptable as collateral damage in times of war.

"Collateral Damage is one of the great euphemisms of our time.

It's exceedingly rare. And I am only for the death penalty where it is beyond a shadow of a doubt, such as Manson, Dahmer, and Gacey.

Capital punishment is legalised murder and unacceptable at all times. It's astounding that those who get so hysterical re the aborting of innate fetuses are so cavalier about taking the life of adult human beings.

I am not a fan of what happened to Castile. It was a tragedy. But it was a split second potential life and death situation that few of us are even capable of comprehending.

Castile had a permit for the weapon, and prosecutors questioned whether Yanez ever saw it. They quite reasonably argued that the officer overreacted and that Castile was not a threat. This shooting was just one of a string of killings of African Americans by police around the US...the “collateral damage” of being black I guess.

[Bill the Cat]

"Collateral Damage is one of the great euphemisms of our time.

It's a reality of war as old as civilization itself.

Capital punishment is legalised murder and unacceptable at all times.

Sorry, but if you refuse to call abortion "legalized murder", you sure as hell don't get to call the death penalty that.

It's astounding that those who get so hysterical re the aborting of innate fetuses are so cavalier about taking the life of adult human beings.

Because you lot see the fetus as something that deserves nothing more than the brutal death it gets. Adult humans who are on death row typically have earned that punishment.

Castile had a permit for the weapon, and prosecutors questioned whether Yanez ever saw it.

I'm sure Trooper Michael T. Walter never saw the gun Travis Ball pulled on him in time to do anything about it...

They quite reasonably argued that the officer overreacted and that Castile was not a threat.

In a split second, officers have to make that determination when someone is reaching into their pants for something after the driver's license was already given earlier in the stop.

This shooting was just one of a string of killings of African Americans by police around the US...the “collateral damage” of being black I guess.

You guess wrong. It was one of a string of idiots who didn't listen to the damned cop when he said to stop moving.

[Bill the Cat]

You've avoided answering.

No I haven't. Target selection is a part of war, as is opportunity. If the commanders make the decision to take out someone who is responsible for thousands of deaths, and will probably cause more, then the cost/benefit of collateral damages has to be measured and decided upon.

It's always possible to choose not to bomb areas where there are non-combatants, such as funerals of dead enemy combatants.

And then hope the targets you are after don't kill your family because you decided to let them walk...

So, is it morally acceptable to kill non-combatants, including babies and children, who are attending funerals of dead enemy combatants?

Yes. It may not be desirable, and it may be tragic, but it is morally acceptable if it saves lives.

It may be rare, but it does happen - so is it morally acceptable?

I already said it was. 15th word on in my post you quoted above.

[Meh Gerbil]

You've avoided answering. It's always possible to choose not to bomb areas where there are non-combatants, such as funerals of dead enemy combatants. So, is it morally acceptable to kill non-combatants, including babies and children, who are attending funerals of dead enemy combatants?It may be rare, but it does happen - so is it morally acceptable?

All killing is wrong, but like so many things in life the pervasive evil makes it unavoidable.
I think we get put in positions where there is no good answer so we try to pick the one that does the least damage.

Not satisfying at all.

[Mountain Man]

All killing is wrong, but like so many things in life the pervasive evil makes it unavoidable.
I think we get put in positions where there is no good answer so we try to pick the one that does the least damage.

Not satisfying at all.

It's known as graded absolutism which is basically a means of resolving a moral dilemma when two moral absolutes appear to conflict. The general rule is that we are obligated to make the choice that does the must good, or alternatively the least harm.

[Mountain Man]

The officer was obviously a head case, unfit to be a cop. It was pure negligence on his part, which I believe amounts to manslaughter aqt the least.. Mr. Castile, even without having to, told the cop he had a licenced firearm. How pathetic! One bullet just missed the little girl in the back seat, and another landed in the console just inches from the girlfriend, 5 bullets hit Mr. Castile, 2 right in the heart. I wonder what the verdict would have been if he killed the little girl. What do you think?

I like how you leave out the part about Castile continuing to reach towards his weapon after being repeatedly warned not to. That's a significant fact in this case.

[JimL]

I like how you leave out the part about Castile continuing to reach towards his weapon after being repeatedly warned not to. That's a significant fact in this case.

Odd how you seem to know these things MM, the officer himself admitted that he never saw a gun, what he saw was the driver obeying the officers direction to turn over his license and registration. Why would Castile want to shoot the officer over a taillight being out anyway.

[Bill the Cat]

Odd how you seem to know these things MM, the officer himself admitted that he never saw a gun, what he saw was the driver obeying the officers direction to turn over his license and registration. Why would Castile want to shoot the officer over a taillight being out anyway.

For the same reason Travis Ball shot Trooper Walter. Something to hide.

[One Bad Pig]

Odd how you seem to know these things MM, the officer himself admitted that he never saw a gun, what he saw was the driver obeying the officers direction to turn over his license and registration. Why would Castile want to shoot the officer over a taillight being out anyway.

Odd how you seem to know what Castile was reaching for, when the officer who was actually present didn't.

[JimL]

Odd how you seem to know what Castile was reaching for, when the officer who was actually present didn't.

I know now just like you do, but you don't murder someone, like this officer did, because you don't know. Thats called negligence, which is why he is no longer a police officer.

[One Bad Pig]

I know now just like you do, but you don't murder someone, like this officer did, because you don't know. Thats called negligence, which is why he is no longer a police officer.

What the officer did was unfortunate, but was not murder. As others (who have actual experience as police officers) have pointed out, he was in legitimate fear of his life. He is no longer a police officer because he could have handled the situation better and he's been crucified in the court of public opinion.

[Mountain Man]

Odd how you seem to know these things MM, the officer himself admitted that he never saw a gun...

The guy said he had a firearm and then reached towards his waist. What was the officer supposed to think? Now assume you're the officer and have literally seconds to make a life-or-death decision. What would you do?

[One Bad Pig]

The guy said he had a firearm and then reached towards his waist. What was the officer supposed to think? Now assume you're the officer and have literally seconds to make a life-or-death decision. What would you do?

Like most of us, Jim would freeze up and do nothing. His life would be in the hands of Castile at that point.

[Roy]

So, is it morally acceptable to kill non-combatants, including babies and children, who are attending funerals of dead enemy combatants?

Yes. It may not be desirable, and it may be tragic, but it is morally acceptable if it saves lives.

But it doesn't save lives, it costs them.

And then hope the targets you are after don't kill your family because you decided to let them walk...

Who said anything about letting them walk? I'm talking about the acceptability of methods.

You find it acceptable to bomb innocent people. I would look for an alternative method.