How does the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation interprets the “Wagon problem”?

An uncontrollable trolley rushes along the rails. Five hostages are tied to the paths that cannot be free. If the trolley passes along them, all five will die. But you can switch the arrow, and then the trolley will go to the spare tracks, to which only one person is attached. He will die too. Do you switch the arrow, knowing that, having sacrificed one, you will save five?

What do you think?

Leave a Reply

GIPHY App Key not set. Please check settings

5 Comments

  1. It is necessary to solve the question of who “you” – a person who made a decision? If you are an employee of the power structures that conduct the operation to free hostages, then, most likely, the goal of saving the largest number of people, and the death of one of them will be acceptable for saving five. But we note that this choice has nothing to do with the Criminal Code. Death in this case I think will be within the extreme necessity. (The text of the articles is given below) If you are a minute or metro employee, you will act according to job descriptions. If the director of the station, then get ready to initiate a case of 238 Uknak from the fact that the Criminal Code will interpret the problem of the trolley if it causes someone harm to someone . For inaction, the Criminal Code punishes only those who have the obligation to act. A doctor who did not show honey. Help, for example. Article 125 of the Criminal Code does not provide for a punishment for unwillingness to be God. If you are an accidental eyewitness, then the Criminal Code will not regulate you until you intervene in the situation and change the direction of the trolley. If you redirect it, the investigator will find out if there is a crime in your actions. In fact, this murder of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code and I, being an investigator, would choose a preventive measure in the form of detention for the first time. It would later become clear that, by virtue of Article 39, you may be exempted from criminal liability, and the first time you will have to sit in SI. You can complicate: you redirected the trolley to the path with one potential corpse, but she did not reach. Then another article 30 of the Criminal Code is added to the qualifications of the murder. It turns out you wanted the onset of the death of one person, but it did not come for reasons beyond your control. If you pass by you nothing can be imputed, because however in theory, but in practice you can always say:
    “I thought the cinema was being shot there and did not interfere.” Having compiled an answer to the question, I found a similar one in the service, but in the philosophy section. Most likely you were not arranged for answers to him, however, like me, I will write comments there later) Article 30 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Preparation for crime and attempted crime
    The preparation for the crime is recognized as a person’s execution or adaptation by a person or tools of committing a crime, an appropriation of accomplices of a crime, a conspiracy to commit a crime or other deliberate creation of conditions for a crime, if the crime was not completed due to circumstances that are beyond this person.
    Criminal liability occurs for preparation only for serious and especially serious crimes.
    The attempt on the crime is recognized as intentional actions (inaction) of persons directly aimed at committing a crime, if the crime was not brought to the end due to circumstances beyond this person.
    Article 39 of the Criminal Code. Extreme need
    It is not a crime that causes harm to the interests protected by criminal law in a state of extreme necessity, that is, to eliminate a danger that directly threatens the personality and rights of a given person or other persons, the interests of society or the state protected by law, if this danger could not be eliminated by other means and at the same time There was no exceeding the limits of emergency.
    The exceeding the limits of emergency is recognized as causing harm that clearly does not correspond to the nature and degree of danger and the circumstances in which the danger was eliminated when these interests were harmful or more significant than prevented. Such an excess entails criminal liability only in cases of intentional harm.
    Article 105 of the Criminal Code. Murder
    The murder, that is, intentional infliction of death to another person, is imposed by deprivation of liberty for a term of six to fifteen years with restriction of freedom for up to two years or without it.
    Article 125 of the Criminal Code. Leaving in danger
    The deliberate abandonment without the help of a person who is in a life -threatening state and deprived of the opportunity to take measures for self -preservation by infancy, old age, illness or due to his helplessness, in cases where the guilty person had the opportunity to help this person and was obliged to care about him either he himself put it in a life -threatening condition or health, is imposed by a fine of up to eighty thousand rubles or in the amount of wages or other income of the convicted person for a period of up to six months, or by obligatory work for up to three hundred and sixty hours, or correctional work on the work on The term is up to one year, either forced labor for a term of up to one year, or arrest for up to three months, or by deprivation of liberty for a term of up to one year.

  2. From the point of view of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, it is impossible to touch the arrow at all. Then the one who: either launched it, knowing about people, either tied the poor thing, knowing that the trolley would go, or tied and launched. Switch the arrow- a criminal role and the degree of your guilt will determine the court. The choice of two evils, a smaller concept is not legal. The point of view of the law, you must do everything to stop it or try to untie all the six, since you are also aware of the presence of people on the tracks and, if inaction, are inactive in danger. I will not answer for myself a personal opinion and the emotions of a lawyer are not important.

  3. From the point of view of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, it is impossible to touch the arrow at all. Then the one who: either launched it, knowing about people, either tied the poor thing, knowing that the trolley would go, or tied and launched. Switch the arrow- a criminal role and the degree of your guilt will determine the court. The choice of two evils, a smaller concept is not legal. The point of view of the law, you must do everything to stop it or try to untie all the six, since you are also aware of the presence of people on the tracks and, if inaction, are inactive in danger. I will not answer for myself a personal opinion and the emotions of a lawyer are not important.

  4. Why not a whole steam locomotive? And then I involuntarily begin to multiply the mass by acceleration, wondering if the body of a highly spiritual switch will be enough on the rails. So, the “problem of the switchman.” There is not a matter of the Criminal Code, but in this four: besides the judge, also the investigator, the prosecutor, the prosecutor And the defender. And before any connection of the Criminal Code, you must first conduct an investigation.
    Look for it. The switchman has an instruction. So, it’s not about him, but in it. On this with the question of the Criminal Code, we finished. Because this is not a question about the Criminal Code. But the “Philosophy” label, therefore, I am in this matter.
    The situation is described abstract, and philosophy is not mathematics, it, philosophy, about life. And in life, if there is a problem, that is, its solution. The abstract description does not roll. The abstraction is obviously unreasonable, so it is composed, but life is not an abstraction. And therefore: all the specifics in the studio, please! In life, there is always a certain Prokhindey who lets and lets the trolley after the trolley – and all uncontrollable. And he gets away with everything. Moreover, he is over the superior and super -bull. Isn’t it time for the highly spiritual to do these epiccenters of evil? So that you do not have to count again and again what to choose: 200 thousand from a baby with a fat man or a million (this is a Korean minimum) without these two.

  5. You have strange problems :-). The Criminal Code of the Russian Federation does not interpret such problems. Since anyone understands that in the case of a “problem of the trolley” – enough on a flat (direct) section of the rail or on the turn of the rail – disassemble the rails. The train – softly and along a given trajectory will come off the rail. Softly falling into the slope. On the side.:-). Long before the bumper of the train contacts these people here. And not one of the people will die. Neither five, nor the one that is one. As the Criminal Code of other countries looks at such “problems” – I do not know. Also, probably. Due to the far -fetchedness of this kind of problems. This is if we are talking about one trolley. Stationary. And there are no passengers in it. And for a whole train in which there are no passengers. And if the train cars are filled with passengers, everything is also solved. Without victims. Passengers – sequentially (wagon behind the car) – unhook the cars from the train. And wagons – stop. And the five are the strongest – they jump from the train wagon, which adjacent to the locomotive. And if you are reluctant to jump, this car is also unhook. He also stops. Well, then the task of the ballistics is: to disassemble the rails (if it is impossible to stop the train with the efforts of the crepers, getting into the cabin) … to disassemble so that the train departs downhill along a given path. So, probably.

Spiritual values ​​above economic.?

Where to draw resources to the marketer?