You could disappear into the Los Angeles underground and become a soldier of fortune.
I recently heard of a guy who got a sentence of three life years. Wha? Obvously no one has three lives. If this guy is really that dangerous, you’re just inviting him to commit more violent acts while in prison when you make it clear he’ll never get out. He’ll never change, he’ll just get more and more angry.
But if there is a possiblity, however so slight, that he might get out, he might then think about changing his attitude. He might even sincerely repent. But if you tell him that he’s going to die in the penn, then he’ll just make the penn all that much worse for everyone else in there.
I suspect that that’s a big problem with our penal system (in California, at least). Most get out eventually, but they’re so screwed up by having lived in the penn that they can’t function in society. It’s a self-perpetual system; they’ll be back in the system soon enough, and the prison guards union will be ever-more happy. What surprises me is why they endorsed the sure-fire loser in the upcoming govenor’s election…
Maybe not legally, but morally? It’s me or them. Of course personally, I’m not out for revenge on enemy soldiers, but if they get in my way on the path to escaping, then its on. I’ve got nothing to lose.
Assuming that the POW has been captured by US soldiers, I think it is unfair to characterise the US President as a “dictator … who is violent and evil”. At least one of the last two incumbents in that office has not been.
I see no moral reason that an escaping POW can’t injure or kill enemy soldiers along the way. He’s a soldier. His job is to injure or kill the enemy, in order to help his own country. The soldier might decide to make nice so that his foes won’t be as hard on him if he’s recaptured, but I don’t think he’s living in the same ethical universe as a civilian who’s wrongly imprisoned and is making a bid for freedom.
It occurs to me that we’re all missing the true issue. What if the crime you’re accused of is TREASON, and you’re JACK BAUER? Because if you allow yourself to be imprisoned, millions of innocent people could die.
Of coruse, dozens of innocent people probably will die your hands during your escape, as you’re Jack.
I’m taking a WAG here before Nenno returns, but if you’re captured you obviously haven’t chosen to fight to the death so you must have surrendered at some point and basically agreed to the “social contract” of the Geneva Conventions. As a POW you’re guaranteed certain rights and you cannot be injured or killed but I think you also agree not to try to escape or to be violent until you’re returned to your side in an official prisoner swap.
POW’s are expected to try to escape, and is their duty to try, but this is not what I wanted to explore on the OP.
What are you doing? Are you trying to start some debate that doesn’t exist in this thread? The person I responded to asked about being captured by a dictator. So my response was toward his question. Nobody is saying anything about the US President except you. Why did you feel it necessary to even bring it up? Is there a rule that every single GD thread has to have some mention of the president or his crew?
Skald the Rhymer, sorry I didn’t see your smilie sooner. We’re discussing it in a thread here:
Well, your response was the first to mention POWs:
The question you responded to actually did not assume that the person captured was in the military. Then you started assuming that “enemy soldiers” would be “enforcing the will of their dictator”. Now, to some people, at some times in history, members of the US military have been enemy soldiers. So it becomes a question of perspective.
But I guess I jumped that way, because you’d taken you answer way out of the context of the original question, and I was replying to your answer in a new context, by saying that not all enemy soldiers work for evil dictators.
Wow. Okay, shit you’re right. I just reread the post I was responding to and it looks like I made a huge mistake on that one. It wasn’t my intention to turn the question around. I thought I was actually responding to the specific question. Guess I just saw words that weren’t there.
And since you’ve been generouis enough to say that, might I admit that I was being a bit of a smart-ass in my original response 
You have a moral obligation to escape, expose the warden’s shenanigans, and meet up with your buddy in Zihuatanejo.
