Regardless of a suspect's prior behavior or criminal history, the justification for lethal force ends the moment they are disarmed and no longer a threat. Harris emphasizes that in the Alex Preddy case, once officers had removed his weapon and restrained him, the subsequent shooting was an unjustified killing, a principle that transcends the victim's character.
Related Insights
Quoting Rep. Seth Moulton, the hosts highlight a disturbing inversion of military conduct. The treatment of an unarmed citizen in Minneapolis would result in a court-martial if it occurred to an enemy combatant in a war zone, indicating a severe breakdown of constitutional protections at home.
Contrary to the perception of a peaceful death, lethal injection causes immense suffering. The initial sedative alters blood acidity, making the lungs feel like they are burning. A subsequent paralytic drug prevents the person from crying out, masking their agony while they silently scream in pain.
Showing mercy to disabled enemy combatants is tactically superior for three reasons: it encourages adversaries to surrender rather than fight to the death; it yields valuable intelligence from prisoners; and it establishes a standard of conduct that protects one's own captured soldiers from reciprocal brutality.
When police remove a Jewish man from a pro-Palestinian march for his own safety, they are misplacing the responsibility for potential violence. This logic is akin to victim-blaming. The duty of law enforcement in a free society is to protect individuals from attack, not to remove them because their presence might agitate a violent mob.
The GOP has long framed the Second Amendment as a citizen's defense against government overreach. However, by defending federal agents who killed Alex Preddy, a legally armed citizen, many Republicans are contradicting their core ideological argument. This creates a significant fissure between the party and gun rights absolutists.
Harris is profoundly disturbed by the immediate, coordinated effort from all levels of the federal government to publicly vilify Alex Preddy after he was killed. He argues that when a government instantly labels a citizen a 'terrorist' and 'assassin' despite conflicting evidence, it's a terrifying sign of authoritarian behavior and a repudiation of due process.
Sam Harris argues the lack of outrage from gun owners over the killing of Alex Preddy by federal officers reveals a fundamental contradiction. The very people who claim the Second Amendment is a check on government tyranny are silent when that tyranny is enacted by a president they support, suggesting their stance is political, not principled.
The core reason we treat the Trolley Problem's two scenarios differently lies in the distinction between intending harm versus merely foreseeing it. Pushing the man means you *intend* for him to block the train (using him as a means). Flipping the switch means you *foresee* a death as a side effect. This principle, known as the doctrine of double effect, is a cornerstone of military and medical ethics.
An administration's tactic of arguing whether a protest was a "riot" or if a victim was "resisting" is a deliberate trap. It forces opponents to debate legal technicalities, distracting from the undeniable moral atrocity of the act itself, which is visible to everyone.
In high-stakes encounters, the trained professional (like an ICE agent) is responsible for managing their own trauma and emotional responses. It's their job to de-escalate, and we should not expect a civilian victim to be more composed than the paid, trained officer.
