No its not better at all. You literally don't get it. Good luck.
You're right, I don't understand your position. Are you arguing that they will not think (correctly) that their lives are in danger? Or that they will not hurt you to stop that danger? Or are you disputing that it's a bad idea?
Myrkul, I'm sorry for calling you a mental nut-case -- I got a little bit stressed as a result of my views disagreeing with your views.
Accepted. I don't mind a little disagreement, that's how progress gets made. Just try not to get stressed over some random stranger being
wrong, and your life will be much calmer for it.
In the example of the gunman randomly waving his weapon around and firing shots, what the potential victims 'think' doesn't alter the likelihood of them getting shot. Sure, they could try to intervene and disarm the madman, and that adds another variable to the story. The gunman could protect himself against retaliation by hiding his gun under a coat, or only shooting while hiding in the boot of a car -- does that somehow make his actions more moral? (No, it doesn't.)
No, it doesn't. But regardless of whether or not they actually have any chance of getting shot (you're shooting over their heads, whatever), it's still a bad idea to make them think you are endangering their lives. It's also a bad idea to actually harm anyone. This, however, is for entirely different reasons, and not particularly relevant. Unless you think that the gunman's intent was to harm, rather than just fire some shots randomly,
not caring if anyone gets hurt?
I think you should take a holiday from all that Ayn Rand/Objectivism stuff, and maybe try to gain insight by looking into some completely different perspectives like Buddhism or something like that.
What makes you think I haven't examined Buddhism? In fact, I have examined every philosophy I could get my hands on, over the course of several years.
