If it's my person dog vs. some random kid I don't know, I'm picking the dog.
MuayThai85 posted...
Gotta say, if my daughter and someone's dog were both in a building that's on fire and they chose to save the dog and not my child, that person wouldn't be alive much longer. Same as in this scenario. I'll happily spend the rest of my life in jail while you spend the last moments of yours in agony.
Considering the kid might exhibit the same kind of psychotic behavior that you're showing if it's a genetic thing, probably for the best that those genes don't get passed down.
LOL I'm the psycho yet you're the one who would literally let a child die to save your dog. How about we both go see a psychologist together and see which of us they think is the actual psycho.
They are taught to think objectively and not to treat things personally so youre not going to get them to take your side. Adding in that you would murder someone who chose to save their dog over your kid would probably end up with you committed once they deep digger into your psyche.
No, he's the same one. Only a psycho saves a dog over a child.
This scenario is completely ridiculous as both could be saved in the ops scenario but youre asking people to potentially make a split second decision to save a beloved companion or strangers child.
There is nothing pyscho about choosing the dog at all. Saying you would murder someone for choosing to save their dog over the child they dont know is. It shows a lack of reasonable thought for a scenario that most likely would never happen to that poster.