If you choose the inactive track then maybe something will happen to the train and kill all the passengers on it .
the train doesn't have the brake? that is illegal..... and keep going to the active track.....they shouldn'd have played there.....
Yell at them to move their stupid asses out of the way. If you are close enough to change the track those kids will be able to hear you. Whether or not they move after is out of your control. Or Just run to the kids. I assume if you had enough time to deduce moving the track you should have been able to run a good deal of distance in the time it takes to make the decision and implement it. Just run for the kids. Not working around the question though. Do nothing. By doing anything you make yourself responsible for that dead kid on the inactive track. If you do nothing, yes kids die but they would have regardless of your presence. By changing the track you sentence some to death and will be held responsible. So do nothing. Refrain from action beyond warning them of the impending disaster.
Take a video of this while it is happening. Too bad for them, if they got killed by a bus instead of a train they might get a chance to go to another world.
Technically they are all breaking the Law. You are not supposed to cross track except and train crossings or roads. Being on the tracks like that is illegal. Active or inactive.
This guy knows where it's at. The thread starter's question is a modern rendition of Judith Thomson's Bystander Trolley Cart thought experiment (I didn't memorize this, I literally JUST did an assignment on this). The original problem talks about five workers working on one track and one worker working on the other track. There is a trolley car that is out of control and a bystander nearby has the opportunity to save the five workers by switching the track to the one worker. If the bystander lets the trolley go without switching tracks the five workers will die, but if the bystander switches the track then the one worker will die. Based on your ethical beliefs, you will either let the train go or you will switch the track.
You tell the kids to get off the track, if they aren't intelligent enough to know to avoid being hit by a train then it really isn't your problem...
Don't they have those nifty grills on the front of the train for a reason? Built originally to knock off buffalo and steers from the tracks, young wiper-snappers ain't a challenge What if by swapping tracks to only kill the one, you are now destined with a head on collision with a train going the opposite direction?
What I really would do? Let them die. Warnings are there for people to heed. Parents are also responsible for what happened. Let them grieve, and if they don't grieve, they don't deserve to be parents. But if the above option is not allowed, I'd let the group of kids die and let the single kid live. Why? Because at least one kid in that group of kids would know they're not supposed to play on the tracks. The single child was probably a retard who had no idea that he wasn't supposed to do that. That's why none of the other kids would play with him.
hm, that third option though. usually, if that option is given, it usually involves younsacrificing yourself or something, right, in this kind of scenario? because from what i've seen, they usually only give the first two as an option.