The Hostage Situation

You are a negotiator talking with a hostage taker with 200 hostages. It could be in an office building, theatre, stadium, shopping mall, or otherwise medium scale location.

After having a heated discussion, the hostage taker threatens to execute 10 of them if you do not give a timely accurate response describing the condition of the breach team outside.

First question: Do you do as the hostage taker asks?

After this situation resolves, the hostage taker promises to let all but 50 go... given a condition.

The condition is those remaining 50 hostages will be controlled for the next 5-50 years. Every 5 years that pass, 5 hostages will be released. They're insurance to make sure the hostage taker is not harmed. If at any time the hostage taker is harmed, ostracized from, or quarantined in society, some or all of the remaining hostages will be executed via a remote signal. You don't know how this will happen. If you don't believe the hostage taker, he can execute 5 in front of you to show the remote signal is operational.

The hostage taker will also request medical care to insure against death from old age. If the hostage taker passes on, remaining hostages will be executed if due diligence is not exercised.

Second question: Do you claim suspicion?

Third question: Do you let the hostage taker go?

You kill the bastard.

haymarket said:

You kill the bastard.

Click to expand...

You understand all 200 hostages will be executed, correct?

Daktoria said:

You are a negotiator talking with a hostage taker with 200 hostages. It could be in an office building, theatre, stadium, shopping mall, or otherwise medium scale location.

After having a heated discussion, the hostage taker threatens to execute 10 of them if you do not give a timely accurate response describing the condition of the breach team outside.

First question: Do you do as the hostage taker asks?
Second question: Do you claim suspicion?
Third question: Do you let the hostage taker go?

Click to expand...

#1 -- I'll describe everything except the snipers on the roof waiting for a clear shot.
#2 -- If you mean do I have him execute 5 hostages to prove himself, the answer would be no. So I would not claim suspicion.
#3 -- No. At the possible expense of the lives of all of the hostages, I would not let him leave with them. Alone? Only 'til a sniper could get a clean shot.

Daktoria said:

You understand all 200 hostages will be executed, correct?

Click to expand...

The Israeli's have it right on this issue - you do NOT negotiatie with terrorists. YOu do what you can to kill who you can. The next team that thinks about it will know what is in store for them. In the longrun, lives are saved.

haymarket said:

The Israeli's have it right on this issue - you do NOT negotiatie with terrorists. YOu do what you can to kill who you can. The next team that thinks about it will know what is in store for them. In the longrun, lives are saved.

Click to expand...

Interesting take.

Did you consider this could provoke the situation worse? Radicals could interpret your response as confirming of negligence.

In turn, they could become kamikazes, realizing their lives are meaningless in society, so they might as well do as much damage as possible.

To be clear, my position on Israel is they should have wiped the Palestinians out and occupied the Sinai Peninsula when they had the chance.

Daktoria said:

After having a heated discussion, the hostage taker threatens to execute 10 of them if you do not give a timely accurate response describing the condition of the breach team outside.
First question: Do you do as the hostage taker asks?

Click to expand...

Sure, why not. I don't have to tell him the truth. If he was capable of independently verifying the information about the breach team, he wouldn't need me to tell it to him.

Daktoria said:

After this situation resolves, the hostage taker promises to let all but 50 go... given a condition.

The condition is those remaining 50 hostages will be controlled for the next 5-50 years. Every 5 years that pass, 5 hostages will be released. They're insurance to make sure the hostage taker is not harmed. If at any time the hostage taker is harmed, ostracized from, or quarantined in society, some or all of the remaining hostages will be executed via a remote signal. You don't know how this will happen. If you don't believe the hostage taker, he can execute 5 in front of you to show the remote signal is operational.

The hostage taker will also request medical care to insure against death from old age. If the hostage taker passes on, remaining hostages will be executed if due diligence is not exercised.

Click to expand...

Daktoria said:

Second question: Do you claim suspicion?

Click to expand...

No, there is no benefit to doing so. I don't believe for a second he can do what he claims, but I wouldn't tell him that. Either I'm proven wrong, and he kills 5 hostages, or I prove he's bluffing, make him angry and desperate, and who knows what he does.

Daktoria said:

Third question: Do you let the hostage taker go?

Click to expand...

Yes, under the condition that we are allowed to keep him under minimal surveillance for his own protection, since if he dies, the hostages die too. Then, he leaves, we investigate the claim that he can somehow remotely kill the hostages. If he was lying, we know where he is, and we apprehend him. If he was telling the truth, we disable whatever he was going to do to kill the hostages (probably as simple as sticking them in a faraday cage, so whatever signal he was going to send can't reach them) and then apprehend him.

This situation seems too improbable to really comment on.

molten_dragon said:

Sure, why not. I don't have to tell him the truth. If he was capable of independently verifying the information about the breach team, he wouldn't need me to tell it to him.

Click to expand...

Perhaps that's the point. It's not a matter of need. It's a matter of seeing whether you're trustworthy.

If you lie here, why would the hostage taker trust you on letting him go?

No, there is no benefit to doing so. I don't believe for a second he can do what he claims, but I wouldn't tell him that. Either I'm proven wrong, and he kills 5 hostages, or I prove he's bluffing, make him angry and desperate, and who knows what he does.

Yes, under the condition that we are allowed to keep him under minimal surveillance for his own protection, since if he dies, the hostages die too. Then, he leaves, we investigate the claim that he can somehow remotely kill the hostages. If he was lying, we know where he is, and we apprehend him. If he was telling the truth, we disable whatever he was going to do to kill the hostages (probably as simple as sticking them in a faraday cage, so whatever signal he was going to send can't reach them) and then apprehend him.

Click to expand...

With the faraday cage, you're confirming the possible point of the first question.

Often, people don't ask for information for information's sake. They ask for character's sake.

Daktoria said:

You are a negotiator talking with a hostage taker with 200 hostages.

Click to expand...

Oh hell no.

Just patch in Batman, Iron Man, and Wolverine.

you have 200 hostages,the correct thing to do would be to assume whether charging in guns a blazing or negotiation,or a little of both would be the right answer.

if it were 200 hostages and a small number of hostage takers,swat team or special forces can easily overpower them with minimal to no deaths to hostages.

generally no country in their right mind would negotiate unless their demands were simple and it results in less overall damage,many countries have learned however you give a mouse a cookie he wants a glass of milk.

in such a situation where demands are unreasonable or demands are made after previous ones are filled,negotiations can then serve as a distraction for swat and sniper teams.

Daktoria said:

Perhaps that's the point. It's not a matter of need. It's a matter of seeing whether you're trustworthy.

Click to expand...

Then if he does have a way of verifying the information, and he calls me on bull****ting him, I'll just tell him that I told him the information that I was given, and I'm sorry that it wasn't correct, but I'm still negotiating with him on good faith.

Daktoria said:

With the faraday cage, you're confirming the possible point of the first question.

Click to expand...

No, the point of the faraday cage is not to determine if they're rigged to blow up or whatever, it's to protect them. Electromagnetic radiation can't penetrate a faraday cage, so whatever signal he was going to send to blow them up won't reach them.

beerftw said:

you have 200 hostages,the correct thing to do would be to assume whether charging in guns a blazing or negotiation,or a little of both would be the right answer.

if it were 200 hostages and a small number of hostage takers,swat team or special forces can easily overpower them with minimal to no deaths to hostages.

generally no country in their right mind would negotiate unless their demands were simple and it results in less overall damage,many countries have learned however you give a mouse a cookie he wants a glass of milk.

in such a situation where demands are unreasonable or demands are made after previous ones are filled,negotiations can then serve as a distraction for swat and sniper teams.

Click to expand...

I'm not really sure what convinces you someone with 200 hostages isn't sophisticated enough to rig the place to blow the instant you take a single step.

On the other hand, maybe it's rigged to blow once you're inside.

molten_dragon said:

Then if he does have a way of verifying the information, and he calls me on bull****ting him, I'll just tell him that I told him the information that I was given, and I'm sorry that it wasn't correct, but I'm still negotiating with him on good faith.



No, the point of the faraday cage is not to determine if they're rigged to blow up or whatever, it's to protect them. Electromagnetic radiation can't penetrate a faraday cage, so whatever signal he was going to send to blow them up won't reach them.

Click to expand...

Do you have a Star Trek teleporter? The signal can be sent before they're inside the cage.

Daktoria said:

Do you have a Star Trek teleporter? The signal can be sent before they're inside the cage.

Click to expand...

And how will he know what we're doing with them? Remember that we have him under surveillance. We'll know if he's watching them, and honestly, one person is not capable of monitoring 50 people round the clock. He has to sleep sometime, we'll do it when he's sleeping.

If you're going to say that he's part of some big conspiracy and there are other people watching the hostages for him and reporting to him, our surveillance will find that out too, then we'll find out who the conspirators are, apprehend or kill them (they aren't protected by the deal we made with him), and then continue with the plan I mentioned above.