When the legal outcome conflicts with the moral outcome
I've seen similar analogies before. In today's society, the smart thing to do is protect yourself and yours; unless you are a police officer with a certain amount of professional immunity, you're better off not acting until your own life or that of your family is at risk.
But ... people don't like that. That doesn't feel right. It doesn't feel moral. It discourages morally correct action, which is to save that life if you can. And the idea that saving that life -- assuming you read the situation accurately -- will cost you $50,000 or more just for society to agree that you did the right thing is seen as both immoral and (unless you have explicitly thought about it ahead of time) unpredictable.
It's an imperfection in our legal system that the heroic course of action can be very costly. But perhaps that's why we call them heroes.
This entry was published Tue Mar 26 07:47:19 CDT 2019 by TriggerFinger
and last updated 2019-03-26 07:47:19.0.