would you give your life to save a child who wasn't your own?

Robsweezie

At school once we were presented with burning building and sinking boat" scenarios where we were asked who would we save from a list of people like pregnant women, children. The elderly etc. or just save ourselves, it was like a test of character and morality. One thing that was brought up is that children should be saved first and foremost as they have more to live for and have had little life experience in comparison for those from older age groups.

In a situation where a child's life was threatened, and ONLY you were around to intervene, say a hostage situation, or any situation where one of you will surely die, would you take a bullet for said child, even though they are a mere stranger to you?

It's an emotional one definitely, but my heart says that I would.

Into The Blue

Of course

bjork

No, **** them

Simi

Sure

MRnotlob606

I would save them and sell them to santa.

johnny osbourne

yes

Merrion

Yes if it were to happen instinctively - probably no otherwise.

Filmer Paradise

bjork wrote: »

No, **** them

My first reaction too!

Still, you never know till you're in the situation....

Gerry T

No way, I have 2 kids depending on me. A child can be easily replaced, say the endangered child was 4, it would only take 5 yrs to replace.

AndonHandon

If I had no connection, no. But I would try to save them if I could.

Señor Fancy Pants

Scene safety.....SCENE SAFETY!!!!!

I'd do my best not to die but I doubt it's what I'd think about in that millisecond. I'd like to think I'd do the right thing at the right time but who knows.

smash

If you had your own children would you give your life to save that of a child you don't know, leaving your own children without a parent? I think not...

Knasher

Sure, I'm always the hero when asked these types of questions on the internet.

Frito

I don't have my own children and I probably wouldn't. I don't wanna die!

Tails142

No, I hate children

Penny Tration

Nope. I don't want to die. I'd rather the child were to live, too, but if it were a choice, I'd save myself.

I don't know if I could live with the knowledge that I could have done something but chose not to.

Robsweezie

And here I was expecting tons of PC "of course I would" responses, but no..

Dave_The_Sheep

Robsweezie wrote: »

And here I was expecting tons of PC "of course I would" responses, but no..

This place is so edgy.

NachoBusiness

When I was younger, no - but now I would, as I have less to live for and a child has so much to.

If I happened upon the following girl's abduction (or any like it) I know I'd risk my life to help.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0416/694603-man-confesses-killing-nine-year-old-girl-in-france/

Not that I think I'm alone, I'm sure many would do the same.

mushu

I think I would instinctively. My husband was a security guard a few years ago in a big shopping centre and was hit by a van (speeding shoplifters making a getaway) when he ran & pushed a toddler out of harms way. Husband was lucky & only got a glancing hit from the side of the van but the child would have been hit dead on and had no chance.

fleet_admiral

No. I would have no hesitation giving my own life up for my son though

RayM

Robsweezie wrote: »

it was like a test of character and morality.

I think it's more a test of instinct than anything. I really hope I'd unthinkingly dive in and save the child. I'm not sure I actually would though...

anncoates

bjork wrote: »

No, **** them

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udZ_o727M68

Teyla Emmagan

No, I have responsibilities. Like to my geraniums. And to my cats.

Anyway, other people's kids are a pain.

Turtyturd

Nope, although I'd give up another kids life to save mine.

hopgog

A child more the likely not unless I knew the parents where upstanding people. I wouldn't give my life for some scum kid off an estate.

Dave_The_Sheep

hopgog wrote: »

A child more the likely not unless I knew the parents where upstanding people. I wouldn't give my life for some scum kid off an estate.

Make sure you give that kid the aul twenty questions before deciding, to be sure. Wouldn't want to make a mistake and end up accidentally not saving some mansion-raised sprog.

hopgog

Dave_The_Sheep wrote: »

Make sure you give that kid the aul twenty questions before deciding, to be sure. Wouldn't want to make a mistake and end up accidentally not saving some mansion-raised sprog.

You can usually tell the scum by looking at them. Same if they where fat I wouldn't bother trying either.

qt3.14

How do you know the child you're about to save isn't the next Hitler? You could be saving millions of Jews by letting the child die. The really brave thing to do would be kill them yourself. Just to be sure.

Cold War Kid

It's "were", not "where".

Wacker The Attacker

hell no.

little johnny is getting his sorry little ass drowned

NomadicGray

I'd find a way to save us both and bang the kids mother and probably get a medal too

PARlance

Cold War Kid wrote: »

It's "were", not "where".

^^^^
There's a Kid getting left behind

sam34

No, of course not

Robsweezie

To add to the OP, if you had no kids and no binding responsibilities, what about it then?

Tokyo

Robsweezie wrote: »

At school once we were presented with burning building and sinking boat" scenarios where we were asked who would we save from a list of people like pregnant women, children.

In a situation where a child's life was threatened, and ONLY you were around to intervene, say a hostage situation, or any situation where one of you will surely die, would you take a bullet for said child, even though they are a mere stranger to you?

There's a huge difference between the two scenarios described though. The first, of course there is risk involved, but there are some odds of you both walking away from it. The second situation, the kid is in danger, you take a bullet for the kid, and 5 seconds later, the kid is back at square one, in danger again.

The first scenario, if I thought there was any chance at all, then yes, I'd give it my all to try and save the kid (and myself). Maybe die trying, but at least I had a chance to begin with.

The second, probably not, particularly if it's not my own kid. Sorry, i kinda like myself and i'd be much happier if i kept on living. And knowing my luck, the kid would probably grow up to be the next Hitler anyways.

PARlance

Do we get a chance to clear our browser history?

goz83

Depends on the childs nationality and post code

jamesbere

These questions are kind of pointless because no one know's how they will instinctively react under a life or death situation. You might save the child or you might use the child as buoyancy aid to keep yourself alive.

bb1234567

No, certainly not for a child I don't know. The guilt would nearly kill me afterwards though so maybe it'd be best I just took the bullet.

One eyed Jack

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I don't know if I could live with the knowledge that I could have done something but chose not to.

Aye, I'd be the same as this. I couldn't simply let a child perish when I know they could have lived if I had to give my life instead. I wouldn't be able to live with myself.

In saying that, if it were a sinking ship, there'd be no point in lobbing a child into freezing cold water where they were likely to either die of shock on hitting the water, or die five minutes later of hypothermia. In that case I'd simply stay with the child, because like above, I wouldn't be able to live with the death of a child on my conscience if I didn't.

To be perfectly honest, I feel the same way about it if it were an adult in that situation, the end of the day we're talking about another human being here, and in any circumstances I couldn't live with the death of another human being on my conscience.

One eyed Jack

jamesbere wrote: »

These questions are kind of pointless because no one know's how they will instinctively react under a life or death situation. You might save the child or you might use the child as buoyancy aid to keep yourself alive.

Maaaan that's cold :pac:



Wouldn't work anyway because dead bodies don't provide much bouyancy, they sink once the lungs fill up with water, and then it takes some time before they float to the surface again (bacteria release gases - body floats).

Mallagio

I don't think you have any time to think of this when it's happening and if you have any good in you, you'll try your best to save anyone.

Whether you die or not is not something you have time to consider imo.

Filmer Paradise

goz83 wrote: »

Depends on the childs nationality and post code

Good point.

I'd also draw the line if it was a fat child.

jamesbere

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Maaaan that's cold :pac:



Wouldn't work anyway because dead bodies don't provide much bouyancy, they sink once the lungs fill up with air, and then it takes some time before they float to the surface again (bacteria release gases - body floats).

You've tested it out so :pac:

Junkyard Tom

Robsweezie wrote: »

And here I was expecting tons of PC "of course I would" responses, but no..

I have a question for you. How exactly would answering in the affirmative be 'Political Correctness'?

Take your time.

Noobascious

It's yes or no. Do a poll

My head says No, you should only concede your remaining days for a good cause.

My better sense says Yes, a child has more fruitful promise, and more fruitful promise again for your having added your days unto his. O do not wallow in your excess of life.

I hope I would say Yes, Yes! (and his heart was going like mad, and Yes I said Yes I will: Yes")

strobe

Are they hot?

Steve_Carella

No. I prefer being alive to being dead. Shoot the kid and hurry up. I'm starving, I wanna get a burger on the way home.