# Help explain this argument to me.

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-explain-this-argument-to-me/466597>\
**Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\
**Created:** [October 5, 2008, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-explain-this-argument-to-me/466597 "2008-10-05T22:47:42Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 4\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Nobody](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/94ad74/32.png) [@Nobody](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nobody)\
**Post date:** [October 5, 2008, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-explain-this-argument-to-me/466597/1 "2008-10-05T22:47:42Z")

</div>

And now, for something really pointless.

In some movies and TV shows character A kills character B. Character C tracks down A, and before getting revenge, character D steps in and says, “Do do it, killing A won’t bring B back to life.”

Uhm…uhm…neither will letting A live. Neither will sending A to prison. In fact, short of a miracle, nothing will bring B back to life. So I don’t get the argument.

Now if C has a choice, and by letting A live, B will come back to life, I could understand, but since that isn’t the case…

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Oakminster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/77aa72/32.png) [@Oakminster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oakminster)\
**Post date:** [October 5, 2008, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-explain-this-argument-to-me/466597/2 "2008-10-05T22:52:10Z")

</div>

Killing in cold blood is generally conisdered evil and illegal. You can’t bring the original victim back, so you won’t really gain anything by taking revenge. You risk incarceration/execution/eternal damnation, so it’s not really cost/benefit effective.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Nobody](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/94ad74/32.png) [@Nobody](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nobody)\
**Post date:** [October 5, 2008, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-explain-this-argument-to-me/466597/3 "2008-10-05T22:54:16Z")

</div>

So it’s another way of saying, “You have nothing to gain, and everything to lose.”?  
I can see that I guess.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![guizot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guizot/32/3636_2.png) [@guizot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/guizot)\
**Post date:** [October 5, 2008, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-explain-this-argument-to-me/466597/4 "2008-10-05T23:29:36Z")

</div>

> [@Nobody](#):
>
> So it’s another way of saying, “You have nothing to gain, and everything to lose.”?  
> I can see that I guess.

If character C has any brains, s/he knows that killing A won’t bring B back to life. So D’s statement (“…it won’t bring B back to life…”) is not a very good argument. D should say, “After you kill A, you’ll still feel anger and sorrow, and on top of that, you’ll go to prison.”