Poll: another ethics question: would you rather kill an innocent man or let a mass murderer loose?

[DkLnBr]

My answer is pretty cold, but if its guaranteed that he`ll kill again then I`d kill the innocent. One life to save many.

Edited after reading OP in more detail (that'll teach me for skimming an article):
Wait, the townsfolk just assumed the newcomer is the killer/rapist/generally evil doer? So it isnt guaranteed to be him, just a lynch mob going after a stranger? like a "better safe than sorry" type situation? Then no, I wouldn't kill anyone until I get something concrete

 

[Flatfrog]

I'd hang him AND the rest of the surviving towns people just to be sure. It's gotta be one of em.

I say we nuke the whole planet from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

 

[stormeris]

Ehm, if i'm the hangman, i don't think i'd have a choice.

Executioners weren't there to decide who to kill.

But i would probably not kill him if it was my choice. Which it wouldn't be, but whatever

 

[Thanatos5150]

What, no trial? No investigation? No clapping him in irons while I run down leads? Just Sunup -> Murders -> New Guy -> Hangin' ? This solves nothing.
Regarding the title: I'd rather kill the innocent.
Assuming the given situation: this isn't a binary choice. Making it binary is stupid.

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

I'm pretty sure they still held trials in the old west so it wouldn't be on my head as the hangman. If the dude was convicted, sucks to be him for sure. If he was convicted on no evidence and only suspicion, I'd probably resign as hangman and take it up with the larger authorities as there seemed to be an abuse of power.
Other than that, just do my job and drop the trap door, cut 'em down and load em up for the fields. Life sucks, especially in old school justice...

 

[Flatfrog]

ITYM 'kill an innocent man and let a mass murderer loose'

 

[Whispering Cynic]

Presumption of innocence is a big deal for me, so I'd let him go. I'd have him watched, of course, but I'd never execute a person without having solid evidence of their guilt.

 

[Kaymish]

normally i am a hang 'em all and i can sort them out later kinda girl but this scenario is just too far even for me the poor dude is obviously just turned up at the wrong time there is absolutely zero proof it was him and even without forensic evidence there is still traditional police work available to you and besides forensics only helps you nail the person once the traditional asking of questions and figuring out of means motive and opportunity have pointed out 2 or 3 most likely suspects
and if you only have 1 or 2 suspects then hang em all just to be sure randomly hanging people left right and center is all well and good but make sure the innocent ones are not getting hanged while the murder gets away
and besides if you hang the wrong guy here the town is going to get complacent and leave themselves wide open again

 

[Griffolion]

-snip-

Innocent until proven guilty has been in use since Justinian first wrote "Proof lies on him who asserts, not on him who denies". In that sense, I cannot in good conscience let a potentially innocent man die on a hunch.

That said, I will certainly keep a close eye on him.

 

[DanielBrown]

As the hang man I don't think I have a choice in the matter. However, if I could I'd go with the commonly written response here; let him go as there is no evidence. An angry mob would kill him shortly afterwards, so it wouldn't be my problem anymore.

 

[Queen Michael]

The title of this thread is misleading. I was planning to do both.

 

[Frankster]

I'd say this doesn't go FAR enough.

Hang him and all able bodied men of the town, it's the only way to be sure and guarantee justice is delivered.

Serious answer: "Oh but you might be letting a mass murderer walk" is basically a way to emotionally pressure you into killing someone without proof so you don't feel guilty about it.
Let the stranger go, it's far more likely a local is taking advantage of this small town mentality to stick the blame on the convenient new arrival.

 

[bartholen_v1legacy]

I had to go back and check if the OP was the same who did this [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.833277-Poll-Would-You-Push-The-Button-Moral-Dilemma?page=1] thread a couple of weeks ago. Luckily it wasn't, but the """"dilemma"""" (notice the amount of quotation marks) presented here is just as nonexistent and bad.

It boils down to "Would you kill a man without any evidence of his guilt?" Does that seem like an ethical question?

3/10. Points for at least trying. And the title is misleading.

 

[PG]

Why would you do either? If there's any concern at all that he's the killer then lock him up somewhere. 'No forensics' doesn't mean no evidence. It's also strange that they assumed it was him when he arrived the next day. I'm sure they'd keep an eye on him but who would jump to the conclusion that a complete stranger snuck into town, killed and raped a bunch of people, snuck back out and then came back in the morning for coffee and cake?
This seems more like a question of hysteria than ethics.

 

[McKitten]

The whole question is wrong. If you hang him and he's innocent, then you've just killed an innocent AND the guilty mass murder is obviously also still free. You can't choose either/or.

 

[mitchell271]

Neither. I throw him in a cell, I use a thing called due process.

I would hang him immediately to help cover up the fact that I am the real killer!

We have a confession! Time for a good, old fashioned lynching!

 

[Little Woodsman]

Neither. I throw him in a cell, I use a thing called due process.

I would hang him immediately to help cover up the fact that I am the real killer!

We have a confession! Time for a good, old fashioned lynching!

You'll never take me un-fainted! Bonemerang attack!

 

[Reiper]

I'd remember that I'm in Canada and the Death Penalty doesn't exist here.

Except that this is an "old western" town, and regardless of whether you are in Canada or not, they had the death penalty in the old west.

Does this guy who came into town have an ungodly look about him? Since I am the judge, jury and executioner, I may as well also be the resident priest. Perhaps he is some satanic worshipper and the murders are a string of ritual sacrifices to bring damnation upon us.

In any event I am burning him at the stake.