Spel Case

After cleansing the friend who was left with the shortest straw, the remaining pl chthonians be rescued a couple weeks later and dual-lane their story with their familiarity. The friends are before long met with turn ons of homicide and disapproval from the public for their lack of clean-living awareness. This essay will argue that assassinate is Justifi satisf solveory when the reality of grim conditions exists. Consequences from much(prenominal) an action do non source to oral sex when terminations are establish completely on emotions and non represent with morality and ethical obligations set by baseball club.The spelunkers depended on the murder of matchless of their friends in devote to survive. In a normal military post, these friends would never purposely hurt, let al single ill, 1 an some other(prenominal). The Intent of the psyche cancel outing Is something to consider. When confronted with the dilemma of having Limited resources, annihilateing e ach other was the only option for solid food. The fussy precondition these friends were demonstrated with, guide too godforsaken act of survival. The spelunkers waited a week by and by cosmos trap before usually commit, but cannibalism is something they would non practice either.The popular opinion of occupying human flesh to the fair(a) person is non desirable. But when sick in extenuating circumstances, the reasonable person would do anything in order to live. The massive amount of pressure the friends experienced in making this decision was heightened by the thirst in their bellies and the timidity in their hearts. Still, belligerence and emphasis is usually associated with murder. That is not the national in this situation. in that respect was no scheme to purposefully and maliciously kill one of their friends before they were trapped.Death was the inevitable future of the quartette friends and the act of killing the randomly chosen friend brought that re ality forward. The system that the spelunkers chose in picking who would die for the greater sound of the group was a fair method. matchless person was not singled out to be killed for any other reason anyway having the shortest straw and to be the emergency food source. This is validates that killing one of their friends was only to enlarge their chances of living. Murder, even though a forceful measure to survive, was absolutely necessary delinquent to the reality of their awful situation.Once the spelunkers were caved in, the reality of their mass was sealed and the probability of surviving this black-market event was unlikely. The friends had no mentation that a trip full of adventure and gambling would lead to such a criminal decision. When the subject of reality comes up, the idea of spiritedness and existence follows. Human existencenesss contrive instincts that serve them adapt and thrive in roofless mishaps. When lives are threatened or gainsayd, the law is, race will do anything in their power to save themselves. The case of the spelunkers is no different.Even though the idea of having to kill and eat their friend is unwelcome, it was the best option for survival. Thither are some things in animateness that are uncontrollable and the natural incident of a cave-in is Just that. The spelunkers had no partnership to the outside world and the session to kill and eat another human was made in the security of their own world, onward from the rules of society. Though unintentional, the reality of the spelunkers situation led to an irreversible decision, in which the consequences were an afterthought.Consequences usually have a negative connotation associated with them. The dire circumstances in which the friends were in, led them to make creams in order to survive. The repercussions the three friends would face were an afterthought in light of seek to survive. In the moment of making the decision to kill another human eyeing, t he finish thing on their minds was what community would signify of them afterwards. They were simply move to live. Instead of being regarded as brave and courageous in the eye of death, the remaining spelunkers were shamed and ostracizes from society for killing their friend.To be snubbed by the community where one lives is very difficult to process, especially after the ordeal they Just went by means of. thusly to be categorized as murderers and aerated with homicide is unfair. The rules of law should not apply to special circumstances like the case of the spelunkers. If the here friends had not killed their friend and ate him, they would not be alive to tell their story. The consequences of being shunned by the community and being aerated with murder, though unanticipated, undoubtedly stirred up emotions of transgression and shame for doing what they needed to do in order to survive. Tit feelings such as fearfulness, despair, or hopelessness, the human mind can make decis ions it would not normally. The spelunkers went through a spectrum of emotions before and after the killing of their friend. Being presented with such a inglorious situation, such as being trapped in a cave, can consume a state of panic and anxiety. As much as the four friends cherished to stay calm and wait patiently for help, the idea of dying was too frightening. The dim-witted fear of not being able to survive due to limited resources prompted the idea of drawing straws.After the straws were drawn, reality set in that one of them would be eaten. And for the three friends to not feel remorse or guilt after killing their friend was around impossible. This act was not an easy one and the remorse and guilt will not go away. Without the sacrifice of the friend who died, none of the men would be alive. The friends are pleasing and appreciative for their friends sacrifice for them to live, yet sad and remorseful that their situation led them to that conclusion.Since the spelunker s were face with fear they may not live, they acted with their emotions kind of of the morals they would have normally abided by in everyday life. Having morals helps people chose from right and wrong doings. For the most part, the absolute majority of humans would not result to violence or murder in a normal, everyday circumstance. There must be a catalyst for such behavior. In the case of the spelunkers, their feelings superseded moral consideration establish on the fear of death. The emotionally charged spelunkers thought with their hearts and not with their minds.So is the deviation between emotions and morals. The friendships that the four men shared were strong and the loyalty they had to one another was proven by the participation in drawing straws. This moral dilemma was the last-ditch test of the bond the friends shared. The three friends should not be held responsible for murder based on their limited options of survival. The mens morals did not come into consideratio n when trying to employment to stay alive. Though the decision to kill their friend for the benefit of the groups survival is questionable, the spelunkers should not be charged with homicide.Killing someone under any other circumstance is a plausible reason to arrest and charge someone of murder. But the reality of the situation is, if the spelunkers had enough resources and if emotions such as fear for survival did not exist, murder would not have occurred because their morals would tell them that the consequences for such action, such as the absence of their friend, being charged for murder, and being ostracizes, was not charge it. The truth is, the spelunkers had no other choice but to omit this powerful act if they wanted to stay alive.And, if they had not killed their friend, four people would be dead alternatively of Just one person. Every day, people are faced with moral dilemmas and disputable subject matters. Those people are no different than the spelunkers. Although th e circumstances surrounding this lean are not a normal, fear can drive people to do things they would not typically do. If the roles were reverse and if anyone else were in the place of the spelunkers, it would be a challenge for people to accept death without trying everything they could to survive.