Are all bystanders guilty?
Many social experiments shame bystanders for not reacting to the situation. But what if they have social anxiety, down syndrome, or any other disorder that prevents them from helping? Do they still deserve to be shamed for ignoring the situation?
I know most social experiments are fake, but for the sake of argument, let's just pretend the situations were real.
- MoretimeLv 71 month ago
Lets say this is a fake Q, so NO?
- DianaLv 71 month ago
Those who enable evil are a part of it.
- papasteveLv 61 month ago
I was 19, when on my senior class trip, a few of the 30 in my group, were making fun of a kid, and I said something, but did not go far enough. It is 35 yrs later and it still bothers me. I remember a story about 15 yrs ago, about a woman who was being raped while people were walking by. About a dozen stopped and just stood there. it went on for about 5 minutes until a 10 yr old boy rode by on his bike and went to get a cop. A few minutes later the cop came and arrested the rapist. He berated the crowd. And told them they should be ashamed of themselves. I hope I would react the right way, but in the back of my mind I have a fear I would not.
- Judy and CharlieLv 71 month ago
No pretending allowed.
If someone is suffering or a crime is being committed, a bystander who FAILS to take action is guilty. No exceptions.
- What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
- 1 month ago
I saw a video where some teens laughed while a guy was drowsing so yes in many cases at the very least call for help! If you cant and it's to dangerous no not everyone can be a hero,or as you said might be disabled.
- Anonymous1 month ago
On a number of well-documented occasions law enforcement officers themselves have not reacted in s timely fashion to dangerous situations like school shootings, home invasions and so forth in order to protect themselves but hung back and taken cover ... with the result that innocent people died unnecessarily.... even though the cops were fully armed and backed up by their fellow cops.
Should we believe they had “social anxiety, Down syndrome” or other potential “disorders” you’ve alluded to? Would that be their legitimate excuse?
A lot of people don’t seem to be aware (I wasn’t until fairly recently) that there have been at least two Supreme Court decisions which ruled that police officers are NOT constitutionally obligated to protect individuals.
More often than not their job is understood to consist of protecting property, businesses and other potential sources of tax revenue for the state and municipalities they serve, including issuing summonses and so on to raise said revenue whenever possible by fulfilling their monthly quota requirements.
So the protection of individuals is actually not that much a part of the whole picture in some ways.
Therefore you could TECHNICALLY be in great physical danger and a cop could be there and refuse to act and not necessarily be found guilty of committing a crime.
Because it’s within his or her constitutional right to observe, but not intervene.
This is literally true. You can look
I remember seeing an incident like this in person when I lived in New York. Where some guy was getting into a really bad fight with another guy who he claimed stole his girlfriend’s pocketbook.
One of them, I’m not sure which one it was now, smashed a bottle and was about to attack the other person with it.
There was literally a police officer in his car sitting RIGHT there because somebody had called the cops I guess. Might’ve even been me this was a long time ago before there were even cell phones.
So somebody had to go to a payphone and call the cops. So this cop came and sat right there literally 3 feet away from these two guys in his car and didn’t do anything.
He didn’t even get out of his cop car. I later asked him why he hadn’t done anything and it was because he said he had been “waiting for back up”. OK fine. He was waiting for back up. He had a firearm and neither of these two guys fighting did . He could’ve commanded one of them to drop the bottle or something.
In my experience a police issued firearm trumps a broken bottle almost every day of the week.
But He did nothing. Absolutely nothing. Just sat there and watched. While his supposed “back up” was on the way.
True story. This is an example of what I’m talking about somebody could’ve gotten killed or seriously maimed for life in that situation and he did Nothing to intervene. Because he didn’t have to. By statute.
These are just a few situations. There have been many. I remember a case in Torrington Connecticut years ago where a cop watched while a guy stabbed his girlfriend to death.
It turned out later that the cop was set to retire the next day and he didn’t want to jeopardize his life because he was about to quit.
And he wasn’t convicted of any crime. He had that statutory constitutional right not to intervene. I don’t know if it affected his retirement benefits or anything like that (probably not) but I know he was not convicted of any crime.
Maybe he didn’t even want to try to shoot the guy because he didn’t want to have to wait for the investigation to be done and do the paperwork and find out that maybe it would jeopardize his retirement the next day.
So he just stood there and watched. While she was brutally stabbed to death. And other people watched also who did not have guns like the police officer did. But he did have a gun.
And I’m sure the other people assumed that the police officer that they had obviously called to protect this woman was going to protect her. Big mistake on their part to assume such a thing. In this particular case anyway.
The woman died because he did not take action. She died right in front of him. Stabbed to death. He observed. There was a Lifetime movie made about this.
Now that I think about it at one point the guy with the knife, the boyfriend , made a move towards this officer and the officer pulled his gun and said “better not”, So the guy backed off.
But then he proceeded to stab his girlfriend and the officer did nothing.
Maybe this is why the Second Amendment is also constitutionally interpreted the way it has been and protected. Because in the final analysis we are responsible for protecting ourselves?
Because when push comes to shove we can’t necessarily depend on the police to protect us even though our taxes pay their salaries.
Even though some of us are not armed because we choose not to be. And they always are.
- LANLv 71 month ago
If you are worried about it then show anyone that calls you out your posting history here. No way they could mistake you for someone that could be held accountable after reading a few of your self pitying rants.
- MandyLv 61 month ago
In most cases, except those provided by statute, of course, you have no obligation to act, as a bystander. There are those legal instances where you have a duty to act, as I alluded to above; but, most most bystanders act from a moral obligation that they feel. There are few instances where you have a duty to act.
- Max HooplaLv 71 month ago
If you have Downs Syndrome you can watch.
- Anonymous1 month ago
Many of these social experiments are staged to make you outraged and made to keep you clicking on their videos.