Quote:
Originally Posted by eiyuu99
Suppose a murderer has already killed hundreds and will continue to do so.
After narrowing down thousands of suspects to just 50. Will you
1. Kill the 50 to ensure the murderer is dead.
2. Illegally imprison all 50 for life to stop the murderer.
3. Free the 50 and allow the murderer to continue its killing spree
If you choose 1 or 2.
Can you be 100% sure the murderer is among the 50 and not a scapegoat or an accomplice?
Suppose the murderer is among the 50. You may saved many from potential death but at what cost?
If you choose option 3.
You may have saved 49 lives but at what cost?
Does it mean your "Justice of no murder" has failed?
Or you have a plan to go around the loophole?
|
An actual detective would study the previous murders, find a link and catch the murderer without using underhanded means.That way he would stop the murders at the cost of his hard work.