In Case of Zombies

  • 862 Replies
  • 41364 Views
*

theonlydann

  • Official Member
  • 24172
Re: In Case of Zombies
« Reply #420 on: January 09, 2010, 03:44:44 AM »
We are talking about a super rabies virus that totally wipes out the "personality" part of the brain, making the person equivalent to them being dead, except that they are bloodthirsty monsters now.
By "dead" we mean all traces of the old person's thoughts, emotions, and memories have been destroyed.

Except they aren't dead. They are alive. If they are alive there is a chance we can cure them. We must find out whether the wipe is impossible to reverse. If it isn't then we'd have to euthanize them, if it is reversible we'd have to reverse it. If we don't know/can't find out we'd just have to contain them.
Or we could preserve our own right to life and let all the Zombie sympathizers ( also known as zombie snacks) go talk to them and try to figure out cures.
I agree with this.,
:-*

Re: In Case of Zombies
« Reply #421 on: January 09, 2010, 09:34:53 AM »
It's understandable if there are a few hundred of them, but when they start spreading to the major cities it's time to GTFO.

*

Jack1704

  • Official Member
  • 11311
  • Francine?!?!?
Re: In Case of Zombies
« Reply #422 on: January 09, 2010, 12:00:10 PM »
i think i will be staying out of the major cities.
Stop all this nonesense and bring on the lapdancers.
I understand Jack1704. It's a Brit thing.

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: In Case of Zombies
« Reply #423 on: January 09, 2010, 01:07:08 PM »
We are talking about a super rabies virus that totally wipes out the "personality" part of the brain, making the person equivalent to them being dead, except that they are bloodthirsty monsters now.
By "dead" we mean all traces of the old person's thoughts, emotions, and memories have been destroyed.

Except they aren't dead. They are alive. If they are alive there is a chance we can cure them. We must find out whether the wipe is impossible to reverse. If it isn't then we'd have to euthanize them, if it is reversible we'd have to reverse it. If we don't know/can't find out we'd just have to contain them.

So when we are attacked by another country should we figure out what is wrong with them and try to help them get past their stage of wanting to kill us? People that are trying to kill other people lose their rights. When you pull a gun on a cop you officially forfeit your right to live. Same would apply to becoming a zombie.

Re: In Case of Zombies
« Reply #424 on: January 09, 2010, 06:18:37 PM »
We are talking about a super rabies virus that totally wipes out the "personality" part of the brain, making the person equivalent to them being dead, except that they are bloodthirsty monsters now.
By "dead" we mean all traces of the old person's thoughts, emotions, and memories have been destroyed.

Except they aren't dead. They are alive. If they are alive there is a chance we can cure them. We must find out whether the wipe is impossible to reverse. If it isn't then we'd have to euthanize them, if it is reversible we'd have to reverse it. If we don't know/can't find out we'd just have to contain them.

So when we are attacked by another country should we figure out what is wrong with them and try to help them get past their stage of wanting to kill us? People that are trying to kill other people lose their rights. When you pull a gun on a cop you officially forfeit your right to live. Same would apply to becoming a zombie.
But its not their fault. Yes, if they are going to kill you and there really isn't a way around it shoot them. Yes, during the inital outbreak of panic blow their brains out. But after that, when stability has more-or-less returned (because a zombie apocalypse would never actually destroy civilization) then we need to start trying to make them better.

I'm not saying don't kill zombies if you have to. I'm saying when you don't, you shouldn't.
When I was 5 years old my mum always told me that happiness was the key to life.
When I went to school they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up.
I wrote down "happy."
They told me I didn't understand the assignment.

Re: In Case of Zombies
« Reply #425 on: January 09, 2010, 06:19:47 PM »
It's understandable if there are a few hundred of them,
This.
That's what I'm talking about. After the inital outbreak when we're all fine again we should contain the zombies, not kill them.
When I was 5 years old my mum always told me that happiness was the key to life.
When I went to school they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up.
I wrote down "happy."
They told me I didn't understand the assignment.

Re: In Case of Zombies
« Reply #426 on: January 09, 2010, 06:24:26 PM »
We are talking about a super rabies virus that totally wipes out the "personality" part of the brain, making the person equivalent to them being dead, except that they are bloodthirsty monsters now.
By "dead" we mean all traces of the old person's thoughts, emotions, and memories have been destroyed.

Except they aren't dead. They are alive. If they are alive there is a chance we can cure them. We must find out whether the wipe is impossible to reverse. If it isn't then we'd have to euthanize them, if it is reversible we'd have to reverse it. If we don't know/can't find out we'd just have to contain them.
Or we could preserve our own right to life and let all the Zombie sympathizers ( also known as zombie snacks) go talk to them and try to figure out cures.
You do realize I mean locking them up in pens, not trying to make them human again by sitting down for some one-on-one therapy.
I mean herding them into walled areas (a hunk of meat attached to the back of a car would be sufficent bait I think) and keeping them there, then doing medical research on them. You'd just subdue them every time you needed to get at them.
When I was 5 years old my mum always told me that happiness was the key to life.
When I went to school they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up.
I wrote down "happy."
They told me I didn't understand the assignment.

*

theonlydann

  • Official Member
  • 24172
Re: In Case of Zombies
« Reply #427 on: January 09, 2010, 06:41:18 PM »
We are talking about a super rabies virus that totally wipes out the "personality" part of the brain, making the person equivalent to them being dead, except that they are bloodthirsty monsters now.
By "dead" we mean all traces of the old person's thoughts, emotions, and memories have been destroyed.

Except they aren't dead. They are alive. If they are alive there is a chance we can cure them. We must find out whether the wipe is impossible to reverse. If it isn't then we'd have to euthanize them, if it is reversible we'd have to reverse it. If we don't know/can't find out we'd just have to contain them.
Or we could preserve our own right to life and let all the Zombie sympathizers ( also known as zombie snacks) go talk to them and try to figure out cures.
You do realize I mean locking them up in pens, not trying to make them human again by sitting down for some one-on-one therapy.
I mean herding them into walled areas (a hunk of meat attached to the back of a car would be sufficent bait I think) and keeping them there, then doing medical research on them. You'd just subdue them every time you needed to get at them.
So you want to herd them into pens, and keep them alive for medical research? How very humane.

Also, what if it is found that the only way to sustain their life is through HUMAN flesh>? then what?

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: In Case of Zombies
« Reply #428 on: January 09, 2010, 07:44:27 PM »
We are talking about a super rabies virus that totally wipes out the "personality" part of the brain, making the person equivalent to them being dead, except that they are bloodthirsty monsters now.
By "dead" we mean all traces of the old person's thoughts, emotions, and memories have been destroyed.

Except they aren't dead. They are alive. If they are alive there is a chance we can cure them. We must find out whether the wipe is impossible to reverse. If it isn't then we'd have to euthanize them, if it is reversible we'd have to reverse it. If we don't know/can't find out we'd just have to contain them.

So when we are attacked by another country should we figure out what is wrong with them and try to help them get past their stage of wanting to kill us? People that are trying to kill other people lose their rights. When you pull a gun on a cop you officially forfeit your right to live. Same would apply to becoming a zombie.
But its not their fault. Yes, if they are going to kill you and there really isn't a way around it shoot them. Yes, during the inital outbreak of panic blow their brains out. But after that, when stability has more-or-less returned (because a zombie apocalypse would never actually destroy civilization) then we need to start trying to make them better.

I'm not saying don't kill zombies if you have to. I'm saying when you don't, you shouldn't.

If a mentally handicapped person grabs a gun and starts shooting it doesn't matter whether they can help it or not, they are shot.

I don't see this magical point of "after the panic" that you are talking about. Do you mean the zombies will come down and chill? Or we should get used to them and let them eat us? There's no safe way to catch a rabid person with a disease spread through bodily fluids.

Another point, brain dead people don't ever gain their cognitive functions back. Once a zombie permanently a zombie, the non zombie parts of the brain are shut down and killed by the virus while the instructions for being a zombie are left functioning. The person is completely gone and will never return.

Re: In Case of Zombies
« Reply #429 on: January 10, 2010, 02:59:44 AM »
We are talking about a super rabies virus that totally wipes out the "personality" part of the brain, making the person equivalent to them being dead, except that they are bloodthirsty monsters now.
By "dead" we mean all traces of the old person's thoughts, emotions, and memories have been destroyed.

Except they aren't dead. They are alive. If they are alive there is a chance we can cure them. We must find out whether the wipe is impossible to reverse. If it isn't then we'd have to euthanize them, if it is reversible we'd have to reverse it. If we don't know/can't find out we'd just have to contain them.

So when we are attacked by another country should we figure out what is wrong with them and try to help them get past their stage of wanting to kill us? People that are trying to kill other people lose their rights. When you pull a gun on a cop you officially forfeit your right to live. Same would apply to becoming a zombie.
But its not their fault. Yes, if they are going to kill you and there really isn't a way around it shoot them. Yes, during the inital outbreak of panic blow their brains out. But after that, when stability has more-or-less returned (because a zombie apocalypse would never actually destroy civilization) then we need to start trying to make them better.

I'm not saying don't kill zombies if you have to. I'm saying when you don't, you shouldn't.

If a mentally handicapped person grabs a gun and starts shooting it doesn't matter whether they can help it or not, they are shot.

I don't see this magical point of "after the panic" that you are talking about. Do you mean the zombies will come down and chill? Or we should get used to them and let them eat us? There's no safe way to catch a rabid person with a disease spread through bodily fluids.

Another point, brain dead people don't ever gain their cognitive functions back. Once a zombie permanently a zombie, the non zombie parts of the brain are shut down and killed by the virus while the instructions for being a zombie are left functioning. The person is completely gone and will never return.
If they can never become human again then they should be killed. End of story.
The panic will end once the military kills most of zombies. Think about it, what would a zombie do to harm a tank?

If a mentally handicapped person grabs a gun and starts shooting it doesn't matter whether they can help it or not, they are shot.

Yes. Because they are a threat. When the zombies are no longer a threat (confined to the countryside etc.) is when we should try to help them.
When I was 5 years old my mum always told me that happiness was the key to life.
When I went to school they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up.
I wrote down "happy."
They told me I didn't understand the assignment.

Re: In Case of Zombies
« Reply #430 on: January 10, 2010, 03:01:47 AM »
So you want to herd them into pens, and keep them alive for medical research? How very humane.

Research that leads to a possible cure, and no other. More humane than writing them off.

Also, what if it is found that the only way to sustain their life is through HUMAN flesh>? then what?

Then you kill them.
When I was 5 years old my mum always told me that happiness was the key to life.
When I went to school they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up.
I wrote down "happy."
They told me I didn't understand the assignment.

*

General Douchebag

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 10957
  • King of charred bones and cooked meat
Re: In Case of Zombies
« Reply #431 on: April 14, 2010, 05:43:03 AM »



So you want to herd them into pens, and keep them alive for medical research? How very humane.

Research that leads to a possible cure, and no other. More humane than writing them off.

Also, what if it is found that the only way to sustain their life is through HUMAN flesh>? then what?

Then you kill them.
So you are saying that we either cure them or kill them?
Isn't there some other alternative we can try besides become one of us or get killed?

Thank you for necrobumping this epic thread, but it's basically kill or be killed.
No but I'm guess your what? 90? Cause you just so darn mature </sarcasm>

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: In Case of Zombies
« Reply #432 on: April 15, 2010, 02:55:40 PM »
We are talking about a super rabies virus that totally wipes out the "personality" part of the brain, making the person equivalent to them being dead, except that they are bloodthirsty monsters now.
By "dead" we mean all traces of the old person's thoughts, emotions, and memories have been destroyed.

Except they aren't dead. They are alive. If they are alive there is a chance we can cure them. We must find out whether the wipe is impossible to reverse. If it isn't then we'd have to euthanize them, if it is reversible we'd have to reverse it. If we don't know/can't find out we'd just have to contain them.

So when we are attacked by another country should we figure out what is wrong with them and try to help them get past their stage of wanting to kill us? People that are trying to kill other people lose their rights. When you pull a gun on a cop you officially forfeit your right to live. Same would apply to becoming a zombie.
But its not their fault. Yes, if they are going to kill you and there really isn't a way around it shoot them. Yes, during the inital outbreak of panic blow their brains out. But after that, when stability has more-or-less returned (because a zombie apocalypse would never actually destroy civilization) then we need to start trying to make them better.

I'm not saying don't kill zombies if you have to. I'm saying when you don't, you shouldn't.

If a mentally handicapped person grabs a gun and starts shooting it doesn't matter whether they can help it or not, they are shot.

I don't see this magical point of "after the panic" that you are talking about. Do you mean the zombies will come down and chill? Or we should get used to them and let them eat us? There's no safe way to catch a rabid person with a disease spread through bodily fluids.

Another point, brain dead people don't ever gain their cognitive functions back. Once a zombie permanently a zombie, the non zombie parts of the brain are shut down and killed by the virus while the instructions for being a zombie are left functioning. The person is completely gone and will never return.
If they can never become human again then they should be killed. End of story.
The panic will end once the military kills most of zombies. Think about it, what would a zombie do to harm a tank?

If a mentally handicapped person grabs a gun and starts shooting it doesn't matter whether they can help it or not, they are shot.

Yes. Because they are a threat. When the zombies are no longer a threat (confined to the countryside etc.) is when we should try to help them.

So once they are infesting the woods we should let them stay there maintaining their threat to our existence? Humans have never left a threat at our door when we had the power to force it into extinction.

Re: In Case of Zombies
« Reply #433 on: April 16, 2010, 05:28:27 AM »
So once they are infesting the woods we should let them stay there maintaining their threat to our existence? Humans have never left a threat at our door when we had the power to force it into extinction.

No. When there are few left we should go out with intent to capture, not exterminate. Obviously, people in "zombie zones" should get government aid to ensure their safety. And if it turns out we can't help them then we go out with intent o extermnate.
When I was 5 years old my mum always told me that happiness was the key to life.
When I went to school they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up.
I wrote down "happy."
They told me I didn't understand the assignment.

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: In Case of Zombies
« Reply #434 on: April 18, 2010, 02:19:39 PM »
So once they are infesting the woods we should let them stay there maintaining their threat to our existence? Humans have never left a threat at our door when we had the power to force it into extinction.

No. When there are few left we should go out with intent to capture, not exterminate. Obviously, people in "zombie zones" should get government aid to ensure their safety. And if it turns out we can't help them then we go out with intent o extermnate.

What right do they have to live? If they are going to attack humans, it is our duty to kill them.

*

General Douchebag

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 10957
  • King of charred bones and cooked meat
Re: In Case of Zombies
« Reply #435 on: April 18, 2010, 02:22:38 PM »
Quick poll:

In an open area filled with Z, how much fun would a buster sword be?
No but I'm guess your what? 90? Cause you just so darn mature </sarcasm>

*

theonlydann

  • Official Member
  • 24172
Re: In Case of Zombies
« Reply #436 on: April 21, 2010, 05:14:10 AM »
Not as fun as an Uzi.

*

SupahLovah

  • 5164
  • Santasaurus Rex!
Re: In Case of Zombies
« Reply #437 on: April 21, 2010, 09:53:21 AM »
Not as fun as an Uzi.
not as fun as land mines.
"Study Gravitation; It's a field with a lot of potential!"

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: In Case of Zombies
« Reply #438 on: April 22, 2010, 09:22:55 AM »
Not as fun as if they were people. Pain reactions ftw.

*

General Douchebag

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 10957
  • King of charred bones and cooked meat
Re: In Case of Zombies
« Reply #439 on: April 22, 2010, 12:13:06 PM »
Not as fun as if they were people. Pain reactions ftw.

I'd feel bad about killing them slowly if I thought they were suffering.
No but I'm guess your what? 90? Cause you just so darn mature </sarcasm>

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: In Case of Zombies
« Reply #440 on: April 22, 2010, 02:31:14 PM »
Not as fun as if they were people. Pain reactions ftw.

I'd feel bad about killing them slowly if I thought they were suffering.

What is the point of killing something slowly without them suffering?

*

General Douchebag

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 10957
  • King of charred bones and cooked meat
Re: In Case of Zombies
« Reply #441 on: April 22, 2010, 02:38:18 PM »
Not as fun as if they were people. Pain reactions ftw.

I'd feel bad about killing them slowly if I thought they were suffering.

What is the point of killing something slowly without them suffering?

The orgasmic ecstacy of killing? I mean, I'd happily torture a child to death if there was any chance at all of them being a zombie.
No but I'm guess your what? 90? Cause you just so darn mature </sarcasm>

Re: In Case of Zombies
« Reply #442 on: April 22, 2010, 05:52:29 PM »
 :-\

Re: In Case of Zombies
« Reply #443 on: April 23, 2010, 04:20:16 AM »
So once they are infesting the woods we should let them stay there maintaining their threat to our existence? Humans have never left a threat at our door when we had the power to force it into extinction.

No. When there are few left we should go out with intent to capture, not exterminate. Obviously, people in "zombie zones" should get government aid to ensure their safety. And if it turns out we can't help them then we go out with intent o extermnate.

What right do they have to live? If they are going to attack humans, it is our duty to kill them.

Should we also exterminate lions? Tigers? Elephants? They all attack humans. In fact they have even less of a right to life because there is no chance of even turning them human.
When I was 5 years old my mum always told me that happiness was the key to life.
When I went to school they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up.
I wrote down "happy."
They told me I didn't understand the assignment.

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: In Case of Zombies
« Reply #444 on: April 23, 2010, 09:54:26 AM »
So once they are infesting the woods we should let them stay there maintaining their threat to our existence? Humans have never left a threat at our door when we had the power to force it into extinction.

No. When there are few left we should go out with intent to capture, not exterminate. Obviously, people in "zombie zones" should get government aid to ensure their safety. And if it turns out we can't help them then we go out with intent o extermnate.

What right do they have to live? If they are going to attack humans, it is our duty to kill them.

Should we also exterminate lions? Tigers? Elephants? They all attack humans. In fact they have even less of a right to life because there is no chance of even turning them human.

They may attack humans but except in rare cases they do not hunt humans. That is a very large difference. As for the chance of returning a brain dead person to normal after having over half their brain shut down, The odds of it are 0, at least the elephants lions and such are actual animals and living things.

Re: In Case of Zombies
« Reply #445 on: April 23, 2010, 10:04:02 PM »
So once they are infesting the woods we should let them stay there maintaining their threat to our existence? Humans have never left a threat at our door when we had the power to force it into extinction.

No. When there are few left we should go out with intent to capture, not exterminate. Obviously, people in "zombie zones" should get government aid to ensure their safety. And if it turns out we can't help them then we go out with intent o extermnate.

What right do they have to live? If they are going to attack humans, it is our duty to kill them.

Should we also exterminate lions? Tigers? Elephants? They all attack humans. In fact they have even less of a right to life because there is no chance of even turning them human.

They may attack humans but except in rare cases they do not hunt humans. That is a very large difference. As for the chance of returning a brain dead person to normal after having over half their brain shut down, The odds of it are 0, at least the elephants lions and such are actual animals and living things.

If zombies are truly brain-dead (as you say) then they wouldn't hunt humans either.
Also: are we talking living dead or infected people? Because if they are living dead I am wholeheartedly in favour of re-killing the fuck out of them.
When I was 5 years old my mum always told me that happiness was the key to life.
When I went to school they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up.
I wrote down "happy."
They told me I didn't understand the assignment.

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: In Case of Zombies
« Reply #446 on: April 24, 2010, 11:52:29 PM »
So once they are infesting the woods we should let them stay there maintaining their threat to our existence? Humans have never left a threat at our door when we had the power to force it into extinction.

No. When there are few left we should go out with intent to capture, not exterminate. Obviously, people in "zombie zones" should get government aid to ensure their safety. And if it turns out we can't help them then we go out with intent o extermnate.

What right do they have to live? If they are going to attack humans, it is our duty to kill them.

Should we also exterminate lions? Tigers? Elephants? They all attack humans. In fact they have even less of a right to life because there is no chance of even turning them human.

They may attack humans but except in rare cases they do not hunt humans. That is a very large difference. As for the chance of returning a brain dead person to normal after having over half their brain shut down, The odds of it are 0, at least the elephants lions and such are actual animals and living things.

If zombies are truly brain-dead (as you say) then they wouldn't hunt humans either.
Also: are we talking living dead or infected people? Because if they are living dead I am wholeheartedly in favour of re-killing the fuck out of them.

Higher reasoning, while great for solving problems, is not necessary for a zombie to function. They are brain dead only in the non zombie regions of the brain.

Re: In Case of Zombies
« Reply #447 on: April 25, 2010, 07:36:12 AM »
So once they are infesting the woods we should let them stay there maintaining their threat to our existence? Humans have never left a threat at our door when we had the power to force it into extinction.

No. When there are few left we should go out with intent to capture, not exterminate. Obviously, people in "zombie zones" should get government aid to ensure their safety. And if it turns out we can't help them then we go out with intent o extermnate.

What right do they have to live? If they are going to attack humans, it is our duty to kill them.

Should we also exterminate lions? Tigers? Elephants? They all attack humans. In fact they have even less of a right to life because there is no chance of even turning them human.

They may attack humans but except in rare cases they do not hunt humans. That is a very large difference. As for the chance of returning a brain dead person to normal after having over half their brain shut down, The odds of it are 0, at least the elephants lions and such are actual animals and living things.

If zombies are truly brain-dead (as you say) then they wouldn't hunt humans either.
Also: are we talking living dead or infected people? Because if they are living dead I am wholeheartedly in favour of re-killing the fuck out of them.

Higher reasoning, while great for solving problems, is not necessary for a zombie to function. They are brain dead only in the non zombie regions of the brain.
But how do we know? That's my whole point. We don't, and until we do we have no reason to exterminate something that isn't actually a threat and could become human again. It's the same reason they keep terminally ill patients who have a chance of getting better on life support. Sure, they might not get better, but a human life is worth the effort and the money. In this case it could be hundreds or even thousands of human lives. And if it turns out they can't become human again then we haven't exactly lost everything have we?
When I was 5 years old my mum always told me that happiness was the key to life.
When I went to school they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up.
I wrote down "happy."
They told me I didn't understand the assignment.

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: In Case of Zombies
« Reply #448 on: April 25, 2010, 06:45:29 PM »
So once they are infesting the woods we should let them stay there maintaining their threat to our existence? Humans have never left a threat at our door when we had the power to force it into extinction.

No. When there are few left we should go out with intent to capture, not exterminate. Obviously, people in "zombie zones" should get government aid to ensure their safety. And if it turns out we can't help them then we go out with intent o extermnate.

What right do they have to live? If they are going to attack humans, it is our duty to kill them.

Should we also exterminate lions? Tigers? Elephants? They all attack humans. In fact they have even less of a right to life because there is no chance of even turning them human.

They may attack humans but except in rare cases they do not hunt humans. That is a very large difference. As for the chance of returning a brain dead person to normal after having over half their brain shut down, The odds of it are 0, at least the elephants lions and such are actual animals and living things.

If zombies are truly brain-dead (as you say) then they wouldn't hunt humans either.
Also: are we talking living dead or infected people? Because if they are living dead I am wholeheartedly in favour of re-killing the fuck out of them.

Higher reasoning, while great for solving problems, is not necessary for a zombie to function. They are brain dead only in the non zombie regions of the brain.
But how do we know? That's my whole point. We don't, and until we do we have no reason to exterminate something that isn't actually a threat and could become human again. It's the same reason they keep terminally ill patients who have a chance of getting better on life support. Sure, they might not get better, but a human life is worth the effort and the money. In this case it could be hundreds or even thousands of human lives. And if it turns out they can't become human again then we haven't exactly lost everything have we?

But we are talking hypothetical zombie attack here and it has been clarified in this thread that zombification works, in at least part, by brain death of non zombie parts of the brain.

Your idea is equivalent to keeping corpses unembalmed because they "might not be completely dead/might get better" Sure statistically that is true, but it is not worth the risk of spreading disease.

Re: In Case of Zombies
« Reply #449 on: April 27, 2010, 05:03:40 AM »
So once they are infesting the woods we should let them stay there maintaining their threat to our existence? Humans have never left a threat at our door when we had the power to force it into extinction.

No. When there are few left we should go out with intent to capture, not exterminate. Obviously, people in "zombie zones" should get government aid to ensure their safety. And if it turns out we can't help them then we go out with intent o extermnate.

What right do they have to live? If they are going to attack humans, it is our duty to kill them.

Should we also exterminate lions? Tigers? Elephants? They all attack humans. In fact they have even less of a right to life because there is no chance of even turning them human.

They may attack humans but except in rare cases they do not hunt humans. That is a very large difference. As for the chance of returning a brain dead person to normal after having over half their brain shut down, The odds of it are 0, at least the elephants lions and such are actual animals and living things.

If zombies are truly brain-dead (as you say) then they wouldn't hunt humans either.
Also: are we talking living dead or infected people? Because if they are living dead I am wholeheartedly in favour of re-killing the fuck out of them.

Higher reasoning, while great for solving problems, is not necessary for a zombie to function. They are brain dead only in the non zombie regions of the brain.
But how do we know? That's my whole point. We don't, and until we do we have no reason to exterminate something that isn't actually a threat and could become human again. It's the same reason they keep terminally ill patients who have a chance of getting better on life support. Sure, they might not get better, but a human life is worth the effort and the money. In this case it could be hundreds or even thousands of human lives. And if it turns out they can't become human again then we haven't exactly lost everything have we?

But we are talking hypothetical zombie attack here and it has been clarified in this thread that zombification works, in at least part, by brain death of non zombie parts of the brain.

Your idea is equivalent to keeping corpses unembalmed because they "might not be completely dead/might get better" Sure statistically that is true, but it is not worth the risk of spreading disease.
WAIT: Are these the living dead or are they infected people?
Living dead: Kill them.

Infected: does it destroy the brain (i.e. physically stop it from functioning in an unrepairable manner)
If yes: Kill them.
If no: How does it make them zombie-like and can we cure it now or soon (next year)?
If we can: Do it/study how to do it until time runs out and then re-evaluate.
If we can't: Kill them.

It is that simple. Keep them confined in compounds and minimize risk of a spread. A concrete wall should do it (they are only zombies) and chuck in meat a few times a day.
When I was 5 years old my mum always told me that happiness was the key to life.
When I went to school they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up.
I wrote down "happy."
They told me I didn't understand the assignment.