The Power to Save Another

I saw Watchmen a long while ago. There was a statement made by The Comedian to Dr. Manhattan(the blue guy) something along the lines of,

You could have turned the bullet in to a bird or some shit, but you didn't. You could have saved him. You're just a killer.


Then, I was watching one of those Batman movies like a few months ago. Batman said at one point,

"I'm not going to kill you, I'm just not going to save you."

Obviously these quotes are completely contrasting. If you had the power to save someone but didn't, would that be as bad as killing them, bad but not as bad as murder or not bad at all?

Did Batman really do that? o.o Wow, kinda contradicting his entire moralcake that he always goes about.

To not save someone, knowing that it would kill them makes it the same thing as murder, if you know that you could save them.

Depending on the circumstances it can go either way.

Absolutes contradict each other.

Honestly, if I had the power to save someone and didn't. I obviously had a good reason not to. Simply, was the guy worth saving?
Murder? No, I didn't commit the murder thus I refuse to be held responsible. Even if I had to the power to save said person who says that I need to save him, would he do the same?

Killing is the act of taking someone's life. Not saving someone is not killing, thus it is not murder, even if you left him with the intent of letting him get killed. So it is not as "bad" as murdering, but can still be morally considered bad.

I guess not. You just decided not to do anything. Sure people would blame you for not saving the person, but dont blame yourself.... Screw it I lost my train of thoughts.

Nevertheless I think that its not as bad as murdering someone, its just that you dont care about others.

The thing is if you kill them they are dead, if you dont save them, they might still live.

No they are not the same thing. Batman pretty much said so. The Bat can never be wrong. But in all seriousness if you are right there and could save someones life but don't it is pretty much like you are killing them. Of course if your own life is danger that throws a whole new series of ifs into this thing.

I only care about my self so if saving him would help me then yes is not I can always ask for so cash and if he doesn't have any I leave em to die.
(yep im evil)

*This is MADNESS!!*

That is as bad as seeing a innocent girl getting rape and not doing anything.

Yeah at the end of Batman Begins, but yeah it's really contracting to his character.



The line is actually

"And you know what you watched me! You could have turned the gun into steam, the bullets into mercury, the bottle into god-dam snowflakes, but you didn't did you? You really don't give a dam about human beings...... Your drifting out of touch doc."

Sorry for the correction but I love the Watchmen comic and movie.

Though to answer the question I would say it depended on the person for instance in Batman no that guy was gonna kill everyone in the city so I would kill him just ot prevent it.

But if someone was in danger(and either they were good or I didn't know they were bad) and I could save them I would without question.

Not sure if you read this topic, https://www.fakku.net/viewtopic.php?t=29419, but it's basically similar. Both topics talk about how indifference/inaction will mark one as an evil person, or the argument that one isn't evil but is limited by our good vs. evil dichotomy.

But if I could save someone, I would.

@GinIchimaru_09
...you got me...

@g-money
Yeah, I looked at his. It kinda went right over my head.

If you think about it all of us are capable of saving somebody, but I believe that human instinct would put your own safety first unless you were going to save somebody you cared for (The extremely courageous are clearly an exception). In most cases, people kill because they pose a threat to the murderer's/society's wellbeing. In those cases killing somebody would be the same as not saving them even if you could (cuz you're just worrying about your own safety).

is it a hot girl if yes then that would be some hot rape and if not meh let the guy be he only wanna bust a nut

I agree with this guy, but I will go a step farther by saying that there is no such thing as absolute.

Hahahaha...no. If you save a serial killer's life and he goes on killing people you're responsible for every life he takes from that point on.

In my opinion not saving someone that you have the power to do so with no serious cost to yourself is equivalent to killing them.

You're on the money, actually. First, ever hear of Kitty Genovese? Exactly what you posted, except murder instead of rape. And there's a few laws in the USA about this now, I can't remember them exactly, but the gist of it is this: If you can do something that could help a victim, and there is no/little risk to your own health, you help them. That's the law. The law was brought into effect by a case (I don't remember which) where a girl was raped, and the rapist's friend was watching. They had to release him because he didn't do anything to help the rapist, so he wasn't an accomplice, and this upset enough people that them made a law about it. Or at least, this is what they taught me in school.

You should've seen the movie, you'd understand, he was saving millions with his death.

Back to topic: In my country it is ILLEGAL to not act if someone is in life danger, i don't remember what you'll be charged with but it's pretty bad.