TheRedChamber
Apprentice
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2014
- Posts
- 2,103
This example is extreme, of course, but I would say that there would be many cases somewhere in between the Superman example and this example. It's not clear what is the right thing to do and it's certainly not universal, IMO.
I don't think this example is particularly extreme or difficult. As soon as you establish the decider as a cop, the rules of engagement are clear.
a) De-escalate the situation, if possible.
b) Incapacitate the mother, if possible.
c) But if either a or b are in any way risky, you absolutely take a lethal shot.
The point is that when the confrontation is happening both people are free citizens and, as a police officer, you don't get to decide that some citizens are more worthy than others. It might be emotionally painful, assuming you know every detail of the case, but a police officer's job is absolutely not to try and fix the flaws in the other part of the justice system. Things like double jeopardy laws exist for a reason and the whole line about it's better to let ten guilty men go free than hang an innocent one still hold true, even when you are confronted with one of those free guilty men.
Make the scenario even more extreme. The rapist/murderer is found guilty and is being escorted to the electric chair. The mother decides she wants to kill him herself and sneaks into the execution with a gun. Five minutes before the scheduled time, she pulls the gun on him as he's being escorted into the room. As a police officer what do you do? I'd argue exactly the same thing as above.
The point about tradiional superheroes, as others have said, is that they always find a way to resolve the situation without killing. Not realistic, but part of the healthy fantasy.