• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Someone catches themself on fire burning the US flag; would you try to help?

Someone catches themself on fire burning the US flag; would you try to help?


  • Total voters
    73
As far as I know it is only Americans who treat a flag as some primitive tribal fetish.
 
Of course I'd put the fire out. I'm certainly not the kind of person who would allow another human being to be burned alive in my presence without doing everything I could to save a life.
 
The guy's demise would not be the fault or responsibilty of anyone but himself.

Ok. Doesn't make them any less of a terrible person, really. It takes quite a sociopath to just watch someone burn to death because they're not on their political team.

Although there are actually a number of states where you would be criminally liable for not assisting, especially if you were literally carrying the life-saving substance at the time. But people of decency shouldn't need the shove of the law to just be decent.
 
The guy's demise would not be the fault or responsibilty of anyone but himself.

I can virtually garuntee you, walking away from that guy and not helping him because of a flag... Would keep you awake many a night after.

Even men who've killed men trying to kill them, lie awake wondering how it could be different, and the flag guy actually harmed no one.
 
Ok. Doesn't make them any less of a terrible person, really. It takes quite a sociopath to just watch someone burn to death because they're not on their political team.

Although there are actually a number of states where you would be criminally liable for not assisting, especially if you were literally carrying the life-saving substance at the time. But people of decency shouldn't need the shove of the law to just be decent.

You're getting too used to UK law. There is no duty owed to someone random on the street in the US. Should I be obligated to run into a burning building or jump into the ocean simply because I have arms and legs? What if I'm not the best swimmer (in the ocean example)?

I tell you honestly, even though it equally means that I'm owed nothing by other folks if I'm in trouble, I think it right to be that way. The law obligating the actions of someone else would concern me more.
 
For my purposes, the flag being burned is important (and hell - part of the actual title :lol:). You want to change that for some reason that I'm rapidly losing interest in.

(not fast enough :lol: )

You seem intent on whining rather than thinking- not uncommon I guess... I DID answer your little POS hypo. I would do my best to put the angry old vet trying to burn a Mexican flag- why is the country important??? it isn't important to me- why so important to you??? you only think the US flag is important??? You don't respect other nations??? :confused:

In another thread the angry old vet was trying to make the point a flag is a flag... why are you having trouble with that... (after all you allude to other threads)
 
I can virtually garuntee you, walking away from that guy and not helping him because of a flag... Would keep you awake many a night after.
You don't know that. X Factor could be a psychopath. :(
 
(not fast enough :lol: )

You seem intent on whining rather than thinking- not uncommon I guess... I DID answer your little POS hypo. I would do my best to put the angry old vet trying to burn a Mexican flag- why is the country important??? it isn't important to me- why so important to you??? you only think the US flag is important??? You don't respect other nations??? :confused:

In another thread the angry old vet was trying to make the point a flag is a flag... why are you having trouble with that... (after all you allude to other threads)

Ah, so there's another thread. I haven't seen it, but that does make more sense.
 
Sooo, since we're changing things, does your answer change any if the dude on fire was in the act of trying to torch a house?
 
You don't know that. X Factor could be a psychopath. :(

I might be. :twisted:

I'm probably having more fun with this thread than I really should.
 
There are some people I've met in my life who I revere because their compassion is so strong. I might be complaining about someone and they'll find a way to turn it around so that I see the goodness in that person. It's kind of like all those times in history when a mad man with a gun is compassionately talked down, they lower the gun, and then the person they were pointing it at sticks up for them because they really believe in the mad man's goodness.

I can't claim I'm at that level, but it inspires me.

I would try to save someone on fire who was making a political statement I disagreed with. There's a basic humanity that goes beyond ideology. How can you watch someone screaming in flames and do nothing? No one deserves that.
 
No, it would be interfering in a surefire darwin award
 
You're getting too used to UK law. There is no duty owed to someone random on the street in the US. Should I be obligated to run into a burning building or jump into the ocean simply because I have arms and legs? What if I'm not the best swimmer (in the ocean example)?

I tell you honestly, even though it equally means that I'm owed nothing by other folks if I'm in trouble, I think it right to be that way. The law obligating the actions of someone else would concern me more.

No, I'm not. There are 10 states where you would be liable.

Most such laws include clauses such as "reasonable ability." A person without fire gear, alone, has no reasonable ability to assist people trapped in a burning building. They can call the fire department, which is where their liability would end. A guy holding a bucket of water, however, does have reasonable ability to dump it on a person standing 5 feet to their left who is on fire.

But that isn't the point. The point is, whether it's the law or not, if someone feels it's acceptable to stand there and watching someone scream in agony and then die when it would be so easy to help them, they are a sick excuse for a "human being." Especially if their reasoning is "I don't like his politics," while said person is residing in a country that supposedly values free expression over virtually everything else.

That is anti-American, and mentally disturbed.
 
No, I'm not. There are 10 states where you would be liable.

Most such laws include clauses such as "reasonable ability." A person without fire gear, alone, has no reasonable ability to assist people trapped in a burning building. A guy holding a bucket of water, however, does have reasonable ability to dump it on a person standing 5 feet to their left who is on fire.

But that isn't the point. The point is, whether it's the law or not, if someone feels no guilt leaving watching someone scream in agony and then die when it would be so easy to help them, they are a sick excuse for a "human being." Especially if their reasoning is "I don't like his politics," while said person is residing in a country that supposedly values free expression over virtually everything else.

That is anti-American, and mentally disturbed.

I agree. Some of the responses here are plain sociopathic.
 
No, it would be interfering in a surefire darwin award

Thanks, buddy. The truth is I actually don't believe that about you. I think you'd do whatever you could, but I also think that in a different set of circumstances, maybe using the example already brought up about the a KKK ****wad burning himself up, a lot of folks likely on this very forum would be mentioning Darwin awards.
 
No, I'm not. There are 10 states where you would be liable.

Most such laws include clauses such as "reasonable ability." A person without fire gear, alone, has no reasonable ability to assist people trapped in a burning building. They can call the fire department, which is where their liability would end. A guy holding a bucket of water, however, does have reasonable ability to dump it on a person standing 5 feet to their left who is on fire.

But that isn't the point. The point is, whether it's the law or not, if someone feels it's acceptable to stand there and watching someone scream in agony and then die when it would be so easy to help them, they are a sick excuse for a "human being." Especially if their reasoning is "I don't like his politics," while said person is residing in a country that supposedly values free expression over virtually everything else.

That is anti-American, and mentally disturbed.

Interesting. How often are we told that we have a right to free speech but no right to be free from the consequences of that speech? Have you ever used that argument yourself? What would be a more direct consequence of using fire as speech but then catching yourself on fire.
 
First....burning the flag after cutting it into squares is the only way to properly retire a flag. Fact.

This is the first I have ever heard of the cutting into squares. Do you have a reference for that? But burning I was aware of. I work for a thrift store and any flags that aren't good enough for resale I take home to retire.
 
Interesting. How often are we told that we have a right to free speech but no right to be free from the consequences of that speech? Have you ever used that argument yourself? What would be a more direct consequence of using fire as speech but then catching yourself on fire.

All the time.

And I have every right to say that a person who would basically spitefully condone the death of a fellow countryman because of their politics -- which aren't even hurting anyone -- is a sick and terrible person. It is insane that American political discourse has fallen so far that this can even be asked as a serious question. If you can't see why that is, I don't know how to help you.
 
Of course I'd try to help.


Je Suis, Charlie. (Right?)
 
I can't guarantee I'd help a person like that. It depends on my mood at the time. For now I'd say yes I'd help them. My mood right now is pretty good.
 
I'd help them out. No one should have to die like that, even if I disagreed with their opinions.
 
Thanks, buddy. The truth is I actually don't believe that about you. I think you'd do whatever you could, but I also think that in a different set of circumstances, maybe using the example already brought up about the a KKK ****wad burning himself up, a lot of folks likely on this very forum would be mentioning Darwin awards.

if i stopped to think about it like we're doing here, he'd burn to death before i decided. That's why i don't think moral hypotheticals transfer well to a real life emergency. There's too many variables. I'm not going to have a bucket of water on me, i'd have to jump on him with my coat or w/e to put the fire out

but one thing that sets me apart from my age group is i know i wouldn't pull out my damn phone to record it
 
Been some conversation about flags and flag burning and this is just a hypo I thought interesting. You're out walking with your bucket of water (as everyone does sometime throughout the day) and you happen upon an angry protest complete with flag burning. The fire from the flag actually ignites the person lighting it and very soon, his clothes will be fully ablaze if someone doesn't act. What would you do, what WOULD you do?

poll on the way

Ok, top 4 include a little commentary which, I learned is not always so appreciated, so included a yes and a no with no comments. Happy now - you know who you are? :2razz:

Yes, of course I would. Jesus Christ...

Edit: Please tell me you made a lulz vote.
 
Back
Top Bottom