Live Or Let Die!

[sensei8]

While I was watching "Gifted Hands", starring Cuba Gooding Jr., about Dr. Ben Carson, a renowned brain surgeon, I was prompted to think about this topic.

What decision Dr. Carson was faced with on that day is far greater and far more important than what we martial artists could encounter in our daily lifes. But, are our decisions and situations less important than that of a Doctor's because we're just martial artists? No! Why?

Both are trying to save a life!

As this scence unfolds before our eyes, we learn that when Dr. Carson was faced with this desicion he was only a Resident at John Hopkins Hospital. A patient is brought into emergency with blunt trauma to the head, and all of the surgeon's were away at a conference. This patient was rapidly deteriorating and if surgery isn't performed soon, this patient will die.

As a Resident, it is illegal for Dr. Carson to perform surgery without an Attending Physician present. What to do? Life is on a delicate scale; tottering to and fro, from the brink of life to death and back and forth. What to do?

Does Dr. Carson obey the law? Risking everything, including his freedom. Or, does Dr. Carson obey his moral conscious and his moral obligations? Doing what he's sworn to do; save a life.

What does he do? What can he do?

He performs the surgery and in that, Dr. Carson saves the life of the patient. But, it's not over. He's violated the law and he operated without permission and without supervision. Had the patient died, his medical career would've been over.

Dr. Carson, because he saved the life of that patient, he's congratulated on an excellent job and commended on taking the proper actions in spite of the possible consequences.

Dr. Carson chose his good and admirable morality over the imposed legalities, and in that, he saved a life!

When martial artists are faced with similar decisions involving life or death; what do we do? Our lifes, and/or the lifes of our loved ones are in the sensitive balance, and what we decide when our attacker forces our hand; do we choose correctly?

We know that we must decide instantly or my family or I might die if I hesitate. There's nobody around to advice us, we're all alone in our decisions as the attacker is bearing down on us with malicious thoughts to do us or myself great bodily harm. Bodily harm? Yes, what other types of harm are there? Decide correctly or face the direst consequences, either way; die...or...prison!

Therefore,

Do we do what's morally right; to save the life?

OR

Do we do what's legally right; to uphold the law?

Is the answer as simple as that? Is it as simple as right or wrong? Is it black or white? Is it as simple as it's them [attackers] or us?

[tallgeese]

In the case of using deadly force to defend another or ones self, the circumstances that exist legally to allow you employ this level of force are typically in line with the bounds of moral obligation. If you're acting in a moral manner in these instances, you'll be within the boundaries of the law.

A lot of discussion happens over the topic, and that's good that ma-ists are thinking over these lines. However, we do some times over think the issue. The law is pretty clear cut on these things.

If anything, ones moral code might be more restrictive than the law. This is much more common than vice versa.

[bushido_man96]

I think that doing what is right is what is what comes natural to most. When it comes down to a pressure situation, in which it is forced on you, and you have to act, that is where your training, whether it be as a doctor, a Martial Arist, or a cop, comes into play, and you let your training take over. They say as a cop, what is important is that you go home at the end of the day. You deal with the rest as it comes. Chances are that, unless someone is some kind of sociopath or such, then doing what you did to save yourself or someone else, the right thing, will turn out ok in the end.

[rmurray]

People hypothesize about this alot. Take it from me; when the rubber meets the road you are going to do what's in your heart without giving a passing thought to the law. I have had to stand down an intruder with a deadly weapon on two occasions. One that was climbing through my front window in the middle of the night. I live in Oregon. I could have put both of those guys down for dirt naps and been absolved of any wrongdoing. It wasn't in my heart to kill. Although, with the hammer pulled back I was fully commited and only a millisecond away from drawing either of their final curtains. My point being that when the threat is that clear and present, you are hyper focused on the situation in front of you and your state's statutes are the furthest thing from your mind.

[bushido_man96]

That's why in the court of law the focus becomes what "a reasonable person" would have done under the circumstances. Of course, for law enforcement, what is reasonable changes a bit.

[Big Daddy]

I couldnt agree more with everyones posts. When it comes down to it, you do what you feel is right.

[JusticeZero]

I build models for these things for the purpose of framing situations as something other than a duel.

As I have noted elsewhere, it's a lot more clearcut when you aren't thinking "Am I going to kill him?" but instead go "I am working toward an objective, that being escape! If I have to go through them to escape, that is escape, if something happens while I am escaping, I am ESCAPING. If my escape caused them to fall onto the curb and crack their skull open, this is a completely unintended and unplanned side effect of my ESCAPE TO SAFETY."