Shotgun?

[the tree]

I think it'd be worth generalising the question - the illness doesn't need to be directly responsible for violence.

 

Say someone really didn't want to be under quarantine, to the extent that they broke out of incarceration, then should they be killed as a means of public safety? I would say yes but after alternatives have been explored:effective incarceration would be a start, rubber bullets, tranquillisers, then finally a well trained marksman - preferably not with a shotgun as a non-fatal shot could cause excessive pain which wouldn't be fair considering that breaking quarantine was their only crime.

 

For that matter, does anyone know about the legal workings of quarantine orders? There must be some precedent on people breaking quarantine (hopefully not taken to the extent of lethal force).

[thinkbizom]

I think that would do a lot of damage, but if you have to get head shots I think I would prefer a 8mm or some other smaller gun. I think a 8mm would be nice because of how much ammo you can have in a mag, plus how much you could carry, plus chance of finding more. I would just avoid social interaction and choose not to be found in the case of some virus like the T virus, but if I did come into contact with people, I know I would think about escape.

 

thanks

[Mr Skeptic]

Well, if you are being attacked you have the right to self-defense, whether or not the other person is infected with something. If they are infected with an incurable disease that causes them to violently attack people, then you're also doing everyone a favor (assuming the disease is not spread even more by all that blood flying everywhere). They also would become a legitimate target for law enforcement or in more extreme cases perhaps even the military. At the very least you would want such people captured and placed into quarantine.

[foodchain]

I think that would do a lot of damage, but if you have to get head shots I think I would prefer a 8mm or some other smaller gun. I think a 8mm would be nice because of how much ammo you can have in a mag, plus how much you could carry, plus chance of finding more. I would just avoid social interaction and choose not to be found in the case of some virus like the T virus, but if I did come into contact with people, I know I would think about escape.

 

thanks

 

Thats my text, and 8mm is over doing it. In the actual reality of something like a zombie outbreak, all the moral goings on of daily life would basically cease. If some true pandemic like that were to break out, no one would be safe and existing structure like the government would be hard pressed to really help everyone, as anyone could be a potential carrier from contact. Its nice to think things would stay all happy and logical, but even in a bad natural disaster which is sort of limited in scope such ideas do not hold water.

 

To carry something big and heavy would drain your body of nutrients and energy, plus if you had to walk 20 or so miles a day I doubt you could sustain it. Interaction would be something to avoid, and getting in larger groups could easily lead to your demise if everything is still chaos, more so with some communicable disease flowing about. Would you trust your loved ones safety to moral ideas in such a situation? Personally If I had to hold a home I would probably fire waring shots(if that) at anything that did not look to match the reality at hand in regards to understanding and a way out. Then again I would already be far from civilization and basically hiding, but in a prolonged situation any survivors would still need food and such.

 

You would regret your morality if it truly caused something bad in such a situation, like you or someone you care about becoming infected because you did not want to be harsh.

 

In the case of a single person, what about the first recorded case of HIV in America, and the countless deaths later?