I was listening to a podcast and someone sent in the following interview question (shortened, because it's too much):

You're a prison guard, and the bus transporting the prisoners with you stops working on a bridge that is going to get wiped out by a rising river. A helicopter can transport 10 people to the prison, but the rest will get washed to their deaths.

Which 10 do you send to prison, and which ones do you leave to die?
a murderer
a kidnapper
a bank robber
a bad check writer
a drunk driver
a terrorist
a forger
a jay walker
a credit card thief
a child molester
a gun dealer
a drug dealer
a hacker
a peeping tom
a sex worker
a rapist
an exhibitionist
a stripper
a gang member
a speeder
an auto thief
a spouse abuser
a serial killer
a gambler
a tresspasser
an arsonist
an embezzler
a runaway
a youth offender (a young person who committed a crime)

Aside from them obviously running out of ideas, having someone judge who has to die is real messed up. Also, a few are walking free (jaywalker? stripper? runaway?), and a few of them are "dying" with me so we can form a runner team.

I don't think that I can answer this. Sure, I've got my top-level list of people that I'm seriously not a fan of, but there's a difference between that and making a conscious effort to decide who dies or not.

If I had to offer a stance it would be predicated upon "Do no harm".

Or did I miss the point like Jet Li in that film with all the arrows!?

As Iduno suggests, the decision depends on whether it is I making the decision, or one of my SR characters.

Oh man, we're sending people to jail for jay walking now??

I understand walking a bird on leash is illegal in some jurisdictions.

Yeah, but that sounds more like a fine than a jail term.




I don't think so, but the person who wrote the question obviously has some stuff they need to work through.

What all is this interview question even supposed to reveal about the character?

I don't know. It's a real job interview question that is getting asked. I guess it's to determine if you have the same priorities as the sociopath asking it.

Giving this all of no serious thought.

I would save the following, and then encourage them to get to be friends, as the prelude to some kind of insane cyberpunk heist movie.

a bank robber
a terrorist
a forger
a gun dealer
a hacker
an auto thief
a serial killer
an arsonist
an embezzler
a youth offender

I'm the guard. I assume maybe I'm the driver or the driver already died/escaped. 10 people can board the helicopter.

1)Me - obviously
2)a jay walker
3)a speeder
4)a runaway
5)a youth offender (a young person who committed a crime)
Not really thinking these are prison offenses
6)a trespasser - I'm guessing this was the worst part of what they were doing, not an easy minor conviction of a more nefarious plot
7)a stripper
8 )a sex worker
Morality crimes which are usually outlawed because they are associated with worse crimes but of themselve only 'harm' the person

Of those left I narrowed it to these:
a bad check writer - 1 time or habitual?
a drunk driver - guessing nothing was hurt or damaged
a peeping tom - sort of disgusting
an exhibitionist - I'm assuming 'Flasher' not kinky public sex or something
a gang member - being in a gang is illegal?
a gambler - illegal?

Then it hit me I could introduce 2 people and make them both happy so the last seats go to:
9)a peeping tom
10)an exhibitionist

Probably, I'd decide based on the length of their sentence with shortest time getting priority, figuring society through the courts had made the decision.

I'd suspect they might be checking to see if you get sucked into the way the problem is framed or if you can step back.

For example do you remember yourself and maybe a driver in the total.

And do you let the rest go to try to survive the flood at the risk they escape?

Outside of that there are a good seven that should have received little or no jail time. And I'd take the youth.