As a gun owner, I would have no problem *stopping *someone who tries to harm me or my family members.
I will *stop *the threat using firepower. Any death is incidental.
To be honest, of course, I don’t actually know for certain, as it’s (thankfully) never been an issue for me in real life, but I don’t have any special moral or emotional problem with it, gut-wise.
I ***stop ***myself from killing people every damned day. It’s kind of exhausting, honestly.
I find that hard to believe. Would you not fight to save your life?
Please expand on that. Do you mean a punch could be potentially lethal? Or that inflicting any physical harm indicates the capacity to kill? Or something else?
I’d be pretty shitty at my job if I couldn’t.
Yes, there are a lot of living people today 'cause in my case the death penalty for me is a deterrent 
Santa Claus von Bülow?
Am I supposed to ignore the consequences of the action? I would never kill anyone for revenge, money, protecting others, or even a battle situation unless it was REALLY clear-cut. But not because I’m not “capable” of it, but because even a very small chance of ending up on trial for murder isn’t worth it for anything less than saving my own life in the first place. And I would have to be really sure it was my only option.
I surprised myself a few years ago by running down the street naked armed with a kukri in pursuit of someone who burgled my house while I was in it. If I’d have caught him I have no idea what I’d have done. So with reservations I have voted yes to all but ‘other’.
Crawlspaces are so old fashioned, may I introduce you to a friend of mine?
CMC fnord!
All the yeses, but for #4 substitute; life of a stranger, idiot trying to rob the store I’m shopping in, I.E. any life threatening situation that escalates to the point that no lesser means* at hand works.
I think the idea is that if you’re capable of being pushed to fighting you’re capable of (perhaps accidentally) killing.
Hell, I’ll kill a man in a fair fight… or if I think he’s gonna start a fair fight, or if he bothers me, or if there’s a woman, or if I’m gettin’ paid - mostly only when I’m gettin’ paid.
It had to be the LAST post :::::shakes fist:::::: 
I was understanding the question to be, could you choose to kill a person, not is it possible that any of your actions could ever result in a death. People who answer “no” to the latter just haven’t thought about it enough. I’m pretty sure that every single respondent here is capable of accidentally killing someone under some circumstances.
I don’t think he was talking about just undertaking some hypothetical action that could somehow result in someone dying. I think he meant, specifically, actually killing someone, as in, violently.
Like running them over with a car?
Including accidents seems to make the question a lot less meaningful and interesting. I answered the question with the understanding that it was a question about decisions, not results.
Like beating them to death in a fight.
And I answered the question the same way you did.
Okay, beating someone to death is functionally deciding to kill them, even if one doesn’t consciously “mean” to kill them.
On the other hand, landing a punch that causes somebody to slip and hit their head and die, isn’t. I would call that an accident in a sense that the first is not.
On looking again at Chessic’s comment, though, I don’t think it’s really about either of those scenarios.
That sounds to me more like a statement that if you’re capable of initiating violence against another human being at all–you’re capable at some point of deciding to kill them. But I’ll leave it to him to explain what he in fact meant, if he likes.
I’d have trouble killing somebody with a knife or a lead pipe or fists, since I just don’t get that angry. But give me a gun (or ICBM launch button or unmanned drone controls) and sure, I’d do it in cold blood. 