Survival The question “Should people be held accountable for their actions?” has created a big controversy. Many people believe people should pay for themselves to be rescued because they got themselves into that situation, others believe they should not be held accountable for their actions. People should not be held accountable for their actions in life or death situations. Some people in very bad situations will delay calling for help or won’t call because they are scared that they will have to pay thousands of dollars to get rescued. That means hundreds of lives are being lost every year because they fear that the saving of their life will be expensive. Citizens should not be afraid or worried about money problems because they don’t want to die. Especially in natural disasters. You can not prevent natural disasters and if you or a loved one is in trouble, you should be saved without having to pay. It is not your fault if a natural disaster occurs and somebody gets hurt, dies, or if your property is destroyed. “Not everyone agrees that people should be responsible for the cost …show more content…
It doesn’t matter if they got in a bad accident by choice or by bad luck, everyone deserves to be saved. When a natural disaster occurs you have no way of preventing it, especially if you don’t know what the severity of the disaster will be. “Even as climate change increases the risk of natural disaster, cities can be made increasingly safe, as long as public policy makers carefully prepare”(Kim par.4). It doesn’t matter how much you prepare, there is always someone that will get hurt or something goes wrong. When something does go wrong, it is not your fault and you shouldn’t have to be held accountable for the issue. You would not want to pay for the issue that happened and neither do they. People shouldn’t be held accountable and pay with money or guilt for theirs or anyone else's
I think that even when our acts are driven by an automated machinery - the brain, that should not be an excuse to exculpate us but instead an approach to find solutions. II. Why blameworthiness is the wrong question. Eagleman states that the question no longer makes sense because a person and its biology are now understood to be the same.
When someone finds themself in a life-or-death situation, their judgement becomes clouded. People can make a decision that they may regret in the long run, but it has saved their life. Most of the time, these people do things that they don’t know enough about- leading to clouded judgement in life-or-death situations. They do not inform themselves as much as they should, and they decide to do something that would put them in threat of danger. People take risks every day, they know what these risks are- but they still choose to go through with their actions. People in life-or-death situations should be held accountable for their actions because they have control over putting themselves in these types of situations that have any risk.
Society should pay because it is the right thing to do. If someone went hiking and was in a rock slide the family and friends of that person would want them to be saved. Without someone paying for the rescue through taxes and the person could not afford the bill they would just die in the situation they were in. Most people that rescue others are volunteers, but they are always at risk, they put themselves in danger to save someone they probably do not know. “The four federal agencies involved in search and rescues – the Coast Guard, the National Park Services, the Defense Department and the Federal Emergency Management Agency – will only bill someone if a hoax is involved.” according to “Who pays for rescues at sea?” by CBS News, this quote is saying that society pays until someone calls nine-one-one with a false alarm or lying about being in
The first basis why people do have the right to rescue services when they put themselves in danger is because that is what
others' lives. This is a tough case no matter how you look at it. The
Who decides how much someone's life is worth? Is it even morally right to put a price tag on someone's life? I believe that there should never be a price tag for how much someone's life is worth. Every life is unique and cannot simply be replaced. Every life should be treated the same no matter what the circumstance.
Even though it is the responsibility of the federal and state governments to aid citizens during times of disaster, the people devastated by Hurricane Katrina were not effectively facilitated as according to their rights as citizens of the United States. The government’s failures to deliver assistance to citizens stem from inadequate protection systems in place before the storm even struck. The Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Department of Homeland Security were the two largest incumbents in the wake of the storm. The failure of these agencies rests on the shoulders of those chosen to head the agency. These directors, appointed by then president George W. Bush, were not capable of leading large government agencies through a crisis, let alone a disaster the magnitude of Hurricane Katrina. Along with the federal government, the state of Louisiana and the city of New Orleans did not do enough to lesseb the damage caused by the storm, and forced thousands of poorer citizens to remain in cramped and unsanitary conditions for extended periods of time. The culmination of federal, state, and local government’s failures in suppressing and repairing the damage of Hurricane Katrina to a level acceptable for citizens of the United States is a denial of the rights citizens of the United States hold.
In February of 2005 the Red Cross reported victims of the Asian Tsunami received $500 per affected person. Meanwhile, relief efforts for Uganda’s eighteen year war achieved only fifty cents per affected person. How can people be so generous to one disaster and so cold to another? People are more likely to donate money to natural disasters because they are easier for us to digest. Humans don't want to believe there is war and evil, so they ignore it. Natural disasters have a cause and effect easily identified and understood. Because maintaining popular attention is difficult, complicated crises with “complex political and social origins” are less likely to receive media attention and communal aid (Wheeler).
It is common for a couple not to want to look at their problem because they are dependent on each other and do not want to mess with the status quo (myth of catastrophe).
In most cases, when a disaster hits, most people’s first thoughts are of the people who are vulnerable because they lack the basic care and necessities that could help them safely get through a natural disaster. If there is any sign of vulnerability wherever a natural disaster is planned to happen, then the impact of the disaster has a much greater effect on the individuals. For example, Hurricane Katrina hit an area where the most vulnerable groups of people were housed and” individuals and households lacked the resources to evacuate” (Tierney et al. 76).
Taking responsibility: Am I responsible? The individual needs to take responsibility for helping, but might avoid taking responsibility by assuming that somebody else will (Bystander Effect). If the individual takes responsibility, they move on to the next step.
The truth about people is that most easily know what the right thing to do in situations. The hard part comes with doing the right thing in these situations. Throughout our life, we seen and experience many instances where people who should know from right to wrong do the wrong thing. While many of these people have evil or selfish motives, there are some who commit the wrong for the greater good. These people, looking at the greater good, have a justification for their actions because they want to help people. Therefore, I see that even though a person’s methods are bad, the outcomes of these actions being good for the public outweighs the crimes that were committed to get there.
When my mother saw beggars standing at the intersection asking for help, my mom would try to help them by giving them the money, but my father would argue that you should not help because this would only encourage them to rely on other people’s help. My father says they should be helped by the government, instead of helped by individuals. It is not our responsibility to take care of them. I disagree with both of them because they do not look at or think about the problem closely enough. I think people are not only facing problems with wealth, but diseases, and war.
Everyone reacts differently when faced with a crisis. Some react by panicking, others remain composed, and some become utterly petrified. No matter what reaction one has, a choice must be made when faced with the question: is it more important to you to save your own life, or the life of someone else?
Today individuals tend to overlook to those that need help when something goes wrong in their lives. Even at the toughest moments, we seem passive not in such circumstances in each day action in our lives, including showing no sympathy for people that can be helpless in bad settings. The main reason is how people can be joyful for mistakes in the way their perspective of being safe in their own comfort zone not giving assistance at times. One instance that I am part of such situation was the time in our state of Florida a hurricane name Matthew approach our state. It was quite a complicated matter because many seem glad for such event to occur most were students, although in the first place, this lead