Christ Centered Gamer

And... it used to be military food.

Oh yes, I've heard stories from my parents about this...

Drewsov wrote:Hmm, no, because the honorable thing to do would be to kill or disable the attacker.

You really believe the honorable thing to do would be to shoot a man in the back?

Yeah, I'm gonna have to slap you with a "Doesn't think before posting" label.

...Ok, I don't have one of those. But I'll get my order in soon, then I'll slap you with one.

Chozon1 wrote:

Drewsov wrote:Hmm, no, because the honorable thing to do would be to kill or disable the attacker.

You really believe the honorable thing to do would be to shoot a man in the back?

Yeah, I'm gonna have to slap you with a "Doesn't think before posting" label.

...Ok, I don't have one of those. But I'll get my order in soon, then I'll slap you with one.

Note that I said "disable." That doesn't mean "shoot the attacker in the back."

I also believe that "honor" and "the right thing to do" are not always one and the same. See, Chozon, I'm far more complicated than you give me credit for.

Oh look. A squirrel.

No, that's a chipmunk.

Oh.

Thank you trusty side-kick!

That's what I'm here for.

Drewsov wrote:

Chozon1 wrote:

Drewsov wrote:Hmm, no, because the honorable thing to do would be to kill or disable the attacker.

You really believe the honorable thing to do would be to shoot a man in the back?

Yeah, I'm gonna have to slap you with a "Doesn't think before posting" label.

...Ok, I don't have one of those. But I'll get my order in soon, then I'll slap you with one.

Note that I said "disable." That doesn't mean "shoot the attacker in the back."

I also believe that "honor" and "the right thing to do" are not always one and the same. See, Chozon, I'm far more complicated than you give me credit for.

I doubt it.

Haw are you going to disable a man from 50 feet away? I said you didn't have time to reach him, and your only shot is most likely a kill shot. It can't get clearer: Your only chance is to shoot him to save the others, and you will most likely kill him.

And of course the right thing and honor aren't always the same! The right thing to do would be to fire the gun. There is no honorable action in this sequence. It's another conundrum. You can't allow the others to die. That would be both wrong and dishonorable. But you can't shoot him in the back and make it honorable.

Chozon, you forget. There are limbs. There are non-fatal shots. All of those wouldn't equate killing a man from behind.

Also... allowing others to die, sometimes... well, let's just say that the world is not made of black and white. There are shades of gray. What I might see as acceptable, you might not, and vice versa. Yes, there is absolute black and perfect white, but in between? That's where your little "conundrum" lies, in that it has no right answer and that all possible answers can mean different things to different people. That's a shade of gray.

And forgive me, but you don't know me personally; I only let one side of me show here, and that side is far less simplistic than you consistently imply.

Or you could just kill him and never have to worry about him again. Why must we always care about such scum?

Or we could all grab a taco.

Or a burrito.

Quesadilla!111!!!

Empanada!! Has anyone tried those ball of fried mashed potatoes with beef in the center?