How did you approach the situation? What steps or actions would or should you take? What are some of the positive and negative consequences for the action that you take? Based on your answer, what ethical theory best describes your approach?
Define and critique the differences between the concepts of morality and ethics.
Are there similarities between the two concepts?
Describe moral principles (beneficence, least harm, respect for autonomy, and justice).
Incorporate normative ethics, metaethics, and applied ethics, and discuss one or more the following modern ethical theories: consequentialism, deontology, and virtue theories, taken from utilitarianism, Kantianism, and Aristotelianism.
Relate free will and reason theories to the moral or ethical dilemma.
This material may consist of step-by-step explanations on how to solve a problem or examples of proper writing, including the use of citations, references, bibliographies, and formatting. This material is made available for the sole purpose of studying and learning - misuse is strictly forbidden.Introduction
In intent of this research paper is to provide the “personal experience in which you or someone you know had to make a moral decision” (A.I.U., 2015, para 7) in the right to bear arms. The author will examine the importance of the right to bear arms, and the legal right to protect you or someone you know in case of an intruder on your property and entering your place of residence. The author will provide the approaches of the situation, the steps and actions taken, and the positive and negative consequences for the action that was taken against the right to protect someone’s property from intruders or criminals (A.I.U., 2015). Finally, the author will best describe the ethical theory approach for the moral decision.
Right to Bear Arms to Defend your Property
According to Stark (2001), stated, there is a moral right and obligation under the Second Amendment to the right to bear arms. Property should be protected by the homeowner, which the owner has the right to defend its property, as cited in Stark (2001). The concept of due process requires that a person be given a hearing before being deprived by government action of life, liberty, or property.
As indicated by Stark (2001), the center "self-protection" contention for a privilege to remain battle ready gets it from a major right to save oneself from damage, conjoined with exact actualities about innovation, the dependability of police assurance, and sensibly expected dangers. The creator contends that, given a privilege to protect oneself against sensibly expected dangers, and given that...