Necessity, Moral Liability, and Defensive Harm

A person who is liable to defensive harm has forfeited his rights against the imposition of the harm, and so is not wronged if that harm is imposed. A number of philosophers, most notably Jeff McMahan, argue for an instrumental account of liability, whereby a person is liable to defensive harm when he is either morally or culpably responsible for an unjust threat of harm to others, and when the imposition of defensive harm is necessary to avert the threatened unjust harm. Others may favour a purely noninstrumental account of liability: one that looks only to the past behaviour of the potentially liable person. We argue that both views are vulnerable to serious objections. Instead we develop and defend a new view of liability to defensive harm: the pluralist account. The pluralist account states that liability to defensive harm has at least two bases. First, if an attacker is morally or culpably responsible for an unjust attack then he has forfeited what we call his agency right, and in doing so he has made himself partially liable to defensive harm. Whether the attacker is fully liable to defensive harm depends, however, on whether the imposition of defensive harm would infringe a different right held by the attacker: his humanitarian right. Humanitarian rights are rights to be provided with urgently needed resources or to be protected from serious harms when others can do so at reasonably low cost. We argue the pluralist account avoids the objections to which the instrumental and noninstrumental views are vulnerable, coheres with our intuitive reactions in a wide range of cases, and sheds new light on the way different rights combine to determine a person??s liability to suffer harm.     

Identification and synthesis of by-products found in 4-methylthioamphetamine (4-MTA) produced by the Leuckart method

The synthesis of the designer drug 4-methylthioamphetamine (4-MTA) has been carried out using the well-known Leuckart reaction in four versions. The treatment of 4-methylthiophenylacetone with formamide, mixture of formamide/formic acid, ammonium formate, and mixture of ammonium formate and formic acid followed by acid hydrolysis brought about the formation of 4-MTA contaminated with a number of impurities. The gas chromatography mass-spectrometry (GC-MS) analysis of the reaction mixtures allowed identification of the most prominent impurities, such as diasteromers of N,N-di-[β-(4-methylthiophenyl)isopropyl]amine, N,N-di-[β-(4-methylthiophenyl)isopropyl]methylamine, N,N-di-[β-(4-methylthiophenyl)isopropyl]formamide, the Schiff bases derived from 4-MTA and 4-methylbenzaldehyde (benzaldimine) and 4-methylthiophenylacetone (ketimine) as well as some heterocycles: 4-methyl-5-(4'-methylthiophenyl)pyrimidine, 4-(4'-methylthiobenzyl)pyrimidine, 2,6-dimethyl-3,5-di-(4'-methylthiophenyl)pyridine, 2,4-dimethyl-3,5-di-(4'-methylthiophenyl)pyridine. The correctness of identification was confirmed by independent synthesis of these compounds. Each synthesized reference compound was characterized by means of MS, (1)H and (13)C NMR, and IR methods. The stereochemistry of (RR/SS) diasteromer of N,N-di-[β-(4-methylthiophenyl)isopropyl]amine was confirmed by a crystallographic method.     

Police officers who commit suicide by cop: a clinical study with analysis

Suicide by cop has become a familiar topic among members of law enforcement, mental health professionals, and the general public. This paper presents two cases where police officers chose to commit suicide by getting other police officers to kill them. The two police officers studied, by examination of closed case files, were found to be similar to civilians who committed suicide by cop on several demographic (gender, age, history of mental illness, and suicide attempts), and situational (stress factors, trigger) variables. The cases help us to understand possible motives and management for individuals who choose to end their life in this manner.