How far is too far? Sheppard's Actions in MC.

[Actionhank]

I, for one, applaud the way TPTB did this. I am really enjoying where they are taking this. SGA is darker than SG1, but it is not the over-the-top, chew-the-scenery, angst-all-day-every-day we see on other shows. I can’t wait to see where they go with it.

What I like - the charackters are becoming more "realistic" and maybe their actions too. I like 3d-charackters, not the plain black and white stuff. The struggle to find out what's the right thing to do or at least the thing that comes closest to the right thing is what gives them depth. And I hope they are allowed to make more mistakes in the future (whole season 4 seems to be about coping with the consequences how they dealt with the Assurans in season 3 and they thought they would do a good thing activating the attack code and - boom! The Assurans are nuking human worlds ^^).

[Jackie]

Would a man have been mugged if he hadn’t been asked to dinner?
Would a woman have been raped if she hadn't worn the dress her husband asked her to?
Would a couple have had their child kidnapped if they had never had a child?
Would a woman have had an accident if a friend had not emailed her about a sale?

Get real!

Would Wallace have died if Sheppard hadn't asked him too?

[Actionhank]

When I find out their reasoning, I'll let you know.?* To answer Actionhawk I agree its a lot different when your in the heat in moment and talking about it right now.This is off topic, so let me propose another ethical dilemeaYour spouse is dying of a deadly diease.?* The only cure is an expensive vaccine you can't afford. The only way to afford it, is to committ a robbery.Do you committ the crime or let you spoude die?I once had to write a paper on this in Psychology 101?*

Hmmm, from a legal point of view it's clear you can't rob the vaccine. From a personal point of view I would probably give it chance. But on the other hand this is like driving drunk - you could harm others in the process (maybe you hurt or even kill people in the robbery).
In the end you would have to live with either horrible thing and in this case I think you would always chose to help your own people rather than thinking what might happen to others. It sounds selfish but it's also some kind of self-preservation that comes into play, I guess.

[2ndgenerationalteran]

he didnt ask him to kill himself, he presented the opportunity to help someone who was going to die when it was his fault to begin with. He didn't pull out a gun and say "We're gonna feed you to a Wraith." He didnt even ask if that is what he wanted, he just silently let it be an option. And whose to say he wouldnt recieve the death penalty? Kidnapping, murder, illegal drug testing on a human being they could have warrented a death penalty and his death could have had no positive significance. He OFFERED to rectify his wrongs.

[Jill_Ion]

Would Wallace have died if Sheppard hadn't asked him too?

I didn't interpret Sheppard as "asking" Wallace to die, as in, "Will you please die?"

I think he laid out the case and Wallace chose to do it. I watched the ep again and saw resolve in Wallace's face after Shep talked to him.

YMMV, of course.

[jelgate]

Would Wallace have died if Sheppard hadn't asked him too?

It would depend what country he was tried in.Canada:NoUS:Yes

[Jackie]

When I find out their reasoning, I'll let you know.?* To answer Actionhawk I agree its a lot different when your in the heat in moment and talking about it right now.This is off topic, so let me propose another ethical dilemeaYour spouse is dying of a deadly diease.?* The only cure is an expensive vaccine you can't afford. The only way to afford it, is to committ a robbery.Do you committ the crime or let you spoude die?I once had to write a paper on this in Psychology 101?*

I would do the robbery to get the vaccine--because you cannot place a value on any human life. (BTW that question is bogus because it's illegal for the hospital to turn you away and deny you medical treatment because you cannot afford it.)

And this is how I would do it--I would make sure that I don't own a thing in my name. No deeds, no titles, no nothing. Then I would take advantage of every single stupid credit card offer I get the mail and do a cash advance tomax them all out. Pay for the meds and then act like a deadbeat father and quite my job so I won't get my wages garnished and then work under the table.

[Jackie]

When I find out their reasoning, I'll let you know.?* To answer Actionhawk I agree its a lot different when your in the heat in moment and talking about it right now.This is off topic, so let me propose another ethical dilemeaYour spouse is dying of a deadly diease.?* The only cure is an expensive vaccine you can't afford. The only way to afford it, is to committ a robbery.Do you committ the crime or let you spoude die?I once had to write a paper on this in Psychology 101?*

It would depend what country he was tried in.Canada:NoUS:Yes

US--only in texas.

[2ndgenerationalteran]

Amongst other places, California, Nevada, Georgia to name a few.

[jelgate]

US--only in texas.

He would be tried in federal court and they have put their fair share people on death row.

[Actionhank]

I would do the robbery to get the vaccine--because you cannot place a value on any human life. (BTW that question is bogus because it's illegal for the hospital to turn you away and deny you medical treatment because you cannot afford it.)

And this is how I would do it--I would make sure that I don't own a thing in my name. No deeds, no titles, no nothing. Then I would take advantage of every single stupid credit card offer I get the mail and do a cash advance tomax them all out. Pay for the meds and then act like a deadbeat father and quite my job so I won't get my wages garnished and then work under the table.

Hehe, you're cheating. Like Kirk did with the Kobayashi Maru Test. LOL

I would sharping the odds a little: Let's say the vaccine is rare and it's already for another patient. It's not for sale. So if you rob it and give it to your spouse, the other person dies.

[2ndgenerationalteran]

I wouldn't take it, you killed some one to do that, and you spouse wouldnt want to live if her living means someone dieing.

[Jackie]

We don't know what country Wallace was from but we do know his company's name was DMT--not where it was located. There is no mention of location in the transcript. You are assuming he is a US citizen.

We don't know Wallace's nationality but it's a safe bet that the IOA would use a committee to conduct the trail and there is no Death penalty for such international organizations like the UN.

It's not likely to have a civilian trial and not likely to have a court martial. It would be an IOA committee going by show cannon and how the IOA is now their watchdog.

[2ndgenerationalteran]

Well just about every major military contract (especially concerning the stargate program) requires that the person is a US born citizen. There was this brilliant real life rail gun expert, the military wanted to hire him but he wasn't born in the US so they couldnt. This alone makes it a safe assumption that he is American, therefore under US jurisdiction.

[blue-skyz]

Your spouse is dying of a deadly diease.?* The only cure is an expensive vaccine you can't afford. The only way to afford it, is to committ a robbery.Do you committ the crime or let you spoude die?

After reading the posts here, I guess, a lot of people think that stealing can be justified by the situation. If you need money for an altruistic reason, e.g. a family member is dying, then you are justified in stealing it from any random person (or maybe only rich ones). Armed robbery is probably okay too.

So morality really is situational. It can be measured by the motivation/need of the person involved. If one is acting for the welfare of another, especially a family member, then one can be in the right even when committing a crime and harming other people.

Let me get this straight, we’ve worried about Sheppard’s morality?