A Sniper and a Soldier

Steezie · Jun 5, 2007

I play a sniper on Battlefield 2142. and I was discussing the game and my experiences on annother forum when someone made a rather interesting comment.

They said that snipers were immoral because they stalk and hunt thier targets rather than a solider who simply engages thier targets as they are presented to them. A soldier's bullet is marked "To whom it may concern" but a sniper's bullet has a specific name on it.

Do you think that sniping is immoral because of what it entails doing and how it does it?

Ryal Kane · Jun 5, 2007

But a soldier can hunt and engage and a sniper can fire at targets presented to him.

Both are acts of deliberate killing. From a practical standpoint the actions of the sniper are likely to be much more planned and thought out than the actions of a soldier. (this is not to say the individuals themselves are any more or less moral, jsut stating an observation)

TuxThePenguin · Jun 5, 2007

From what I have read about snipers , the best tactics involve wounding a soldier so that his screams of pain demoralize his squad and possibly draw other members into the open.
This isn't really news, I once saw an interview with a mine manufacturer. Who said that maiming is much better than killing, as if the troop is sufficiently wounded they will be as incapable of fighting as a dead troop but that the morale hit is much greater to his squad.

Yusuf Evans · Jun 5, 2007

A sniper has a rifle and a round with someone(s) name on it. A soldier kills indiscriminately. A sniper has a specific target, and is not prone to take out innocent bystanders; soldiers can and do take out those bystanders.

Cerberus~ · Jun 5, 2007

A sniper is no more immoral than the soldier, but that doesn't mean they are on the same page.

I play a lot of airsoft, and whenever I encounter a sniper a survive it, I take special pleasure in shooting him many times in the face before I let him give up.

Bombila · Jun 5, 2007

Cerberus~ said:
A sniper is no more immoral than the soldier, but that doesn't mean they are on the same page.

I play a lot of airsoft, and whenever I encounter a sniper a survive it, I take special pleasure in shooting him many times in the face before I let him give up.

I know you are referring to a game, but that is still a very disturbing statement. Why does that give you 'special pleasure'?

I personally think all deliberate killing of other human beings is immoral. A case can be made for sef defense, and a case can be made for a soldier defending others, but if all soldiers, on all sides, refused to kill, perhaps wars would end.

Futuwwa · Jun 5, 2007

Steezie said:
I play a sniper on Battlefield 2142. and I was discussing the game and my experiences on annother forum when someone made a rather interesting comment.

They said that snipers were immoral because they stalk and hunt thier targets rather than a solider who simply engages thier targets as they are presented to them. A soldier's bullet is marked "To whom it may concern" but a sniper's bullet has a specific name on it.

Do you think that sniping is immoral because of what it entails doing and how it does it?

This reminds me of the attitude of British soldiers during the American War of Independence. The Brits used smoothbore muskets which sacrificed accuracy for rate of fire, and weren't trained to aim at specific enemy soldiers, but rather point in the direction of an enemy formation and fire. Whereas American partisans used rifled hunting muskets accurate enough to pick off individual soldiers. The Brits were outraged, considering the Americans to commit conscious murder while they only "let fly" in the enemy's general direction and thus couldn't be held responsible for any hits scored.

Sniping is no less moral than an ordinary grunt's work, or that of a British redcoat. They all kill consciously, and both serve the same cause. The redcoat might not aim, but he fires despite knowing that someone might get hit.

katautumn · Jun 6, 2007

My husband wanted to be a sniper in the Marine Corps, but his eyesight wasn't good enough. I don't think that anyone who is dedicated to serving their country honorably should be labeled as immoral, regardless of whether they are infiltrating enemy lines in a group or from five-hundred years away hidden in the brush. Snipers are typically given one specific target, because they have proven themselves as excellent marskmen. They are usually assigned to take out a leader of a specific group who is typically sequestered away from where the other soldiers are dropping bombs. It's a very tedious profession.

WhiteMageGirl · Jun 6, 2007

I play a WhiteMage in FFXI(or used to). Healers in any game and reality are the most moral class.

A sniper is no more immoral than the soldier, but that doesn't mean they are on the same page.

I play a lot of airsoft, and whenever I encounter a sniper a survive it, I take special pleasure in shooting him many times in the face before I let him give up.

That's not very nice.

Ryal Kane · Jun 6, 2007

WhiteMageGirl said:
I play a WhiteMage in FFXI(or used to).

Really? I'd never have guessed..oh....wait...

I too tend to feel a little bad about immoral actions in RPG's... apart from taking stuff from peoples houses. But they see me do it an don't complain so it must be okay.

RavenPoe · Jun 6, 2007

IF you think about it, perhaps a sniper can be even more moral depending on circumstance. If a sniper can take out one key man that causes the surrender of one side, it could save countless lives. Of course that's more of an assasin really, a sniper doesn't neccessarily have a "name" on a bullet, just waits in a secluded spot and shoots any enemy that happens by. You have to be a sniper to be an assasin though, unless you're ninja.

Blackguard_ · Jun 6, 2007

You have to be a sniper to be an assasin though, unless you're ninja.

Not true at all. There's an endless variety of ways to assasinate people, poison for example or bombs. Shooting is just one of the simpler and more dramtic methods.

Sneaky =/= ninja, if that's what you're thinking.

And to the OP, I fail to see how the there is a signifigant moral difference between "shoot the rank-and-file of the 4th batallion" and "shoot the commander of the 4th batallion". Either you're justified in killing all of them or none.

Secundulus · Jun 6, 2007

Steezie said:
Do you think that sniping is immoral because of what it entails doing and how it does it?

The purpose of war is to win as quickly as possible (so as to minimize suffering). It is not to play fair. This normally involves killing enemy soldiers and removing their will to continue fighting. Sniping is an effective way of doing this so it is moral.

This assumes of course that the reason the country is fighting the war is just.

jwu · Jun 7, 2007

The victim still may be an innocent person who was merely drafted into the enemy army (and personally i disagree with capital punishment all the way, "just wars" are a special case of capital punishment in my opinion).

However, if it helps to quickly end the war and save more lives, then i'd consider it the lesser of two evils.

kevin36 · Jun 9, 2007

Steezie said:
I play a sniper on Battlefield 2142. and I was discussing the game and my experiences on annother forum when someone made a rather interesting comment.

They said that snipers were immoral because they stalk and hunt thier targets rather than a solider who simply engages thier targets as they are presented to them. A soldier's bullet is marked "To whom it may concern" but a sniper's bullet has a specific name on it.

Do you think that sniping is immoral because of what it entails doing and how it does it?

It certainly is an interesting question...

Even speaking from a Christian point of view, a soldier taking another soldier's life on the battlefield is killing, but not inherently murder, and is not necessarily immoral. That isn't to say that some soldiers haven't acted immorally in the course of their duty, but... well, you get the idea.

And as far a sniper, well, it could easily be argued that he/she is engaged in a much more precise form of warfare than a normal soldier. There isn't any collateral damage; no innocent civillians being hurt or killed.

For those against war because of the innecessity of much of the death, wouldn't snipers be a solution, and to them even more moral than the other?

SeraphymCrashing · Jun 22, 2007

Actually snipers act in a recon role far more often then shooting someone.

That said you could make an argument that any kind of action taken in a war setting is inherently immoral, but I don't think you can make an accurate blanket statement about what kinds of soldiers are more moral than others.

A Sniper and a Soldier

Steezie

Guest

Senior Veteran

Ghost of Corporate Future

Well-Known Member

Cerberus~

Guest

Veteran

Well-Known Member

Prodigal Daughter

Humanists &lt;3 u

Senior Veteran

A soul in tension thats learning to fly

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.

Well-Known Member

Senior Member

Regular Member

Senior Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency

Humanists <3 u