Too much poll.
Then hit them over the head with it until they die.
Jack, I included the verb choose because I wanted to allow for the possibility that some persons might see a difference between their rational preferenced expressed in a moment of calm & safety and what would happen under pressure. It’s possible, after all, that someone might think the killing justified, but nevertheless be too panicky to actually do it; likewise, someone might, while sitting calmly at the computer, think no killing is justified no matter the sitch, but when seeing an innocent child or whatnot menaced, lose his or her temper.
This is what I’ve trained for and am paid to be willing to do. Kill for strangers. For myself. For family and friends. I carry a gun with me nearly 24/7 and would not do so were I not prepared to face the reality of using it.
I don’t think I would use the word strongly but otherwise the exactly explains why my answer for strangers is different than the other categories. I’d hate to discover that I had jumped in to save the scumbag from the guy who was doing exactly the same thing I said I would do in the earlier poll options.
I was going by Skald’s OP, where he said you know the attacker is not innocent. I was interpreting stranger to mean “clearly, obviously, verifiably the victim, but a person unknown to you before this moment”, and not “you’ve come across a situation where 2 people are fighting and one has a weapon, do you kill the armed person” .
You captured what I meant precisely.
Well in that case I change my vote to kill for a stranger too.
“We” means I voted to kill, too, but I don’t brag about it or appear eager. 
You should have included an ‘Are You Canadian’ option to see if we really are more bloodthirsty.
We need a bloodthirsty smiley.
So no bees then?
I’d say “other” still applies to me, because despite any bravado I might want to slap on and say “I’d kill any sumbitch who tried to lay a hand on my kinfolk … hell, I’d kill 'em twice” … even if I really think that’s what I’d do … I just don’t know.
Retrospect: maybe I should have chosen the “I don’t know” option … whatever.
Here’s the thing … I heard something on the radio yesterday, someone was talking about a story a vet had told him about how he’d killed three enemy soldiers in hand to hand combat. What struck me was not how the guy was going on about how big his balls were, but rather that he freely admitted that he was scared out of his wits to the point that he pissed himself when it happened.
I tend to think that most normal human beings when forced into a situation where they felt they had to kill someone out of panic, instinct, self-preservation, whatever … it would probably closer to pants-wetting and less like a Clint Eastwood movie.
Yeah, with blood dripping from the lips!
;
;
I marked that I would choose to kill in all situations. As others have said, if you own a firearm you need to give this hypothetical serious thought.
I stupidly followed a friend into a bad situation instead of staying outside and calling the cops. Her scary, steroid-fueled boyfriend threatened to kill us both, it was a very scary situation. We spent an hour talking him down and escaped at the first opportunity.
I was terrified and I know with absolute certainty that if I had been carrying that night, I would have drawn down on him. He was irrational and literally so mad he was spitting, I don’t think the sight of a firearm would have stopped him. I think I would have ended up killing him.
That’s a sobering thought. It took ~3 more years of beatings and rape before my friend left this guy and pressed charges, he’s in prison now. It probably would have been better for my friend if I had killed the guy. I’m sure glad that I didn’t have to deal with the consequences of killing someone though. I’d like to think that it would have been ruled self-defense and that it wouldn’t have weighed on my conscience but you never know.
I would kill to protect myself and others but it’s not a question I take lightly and it’s something a hope I never have to do.
This is a hard one.
On one hand, I can be disablingly empathetic. If someone is crying in a room I will often fall to pieces myself. I really have trouble understanding the mindsets of people who distress other people. I have never stopped speaking to someone because I was mad. I feel sick even imagining myself killing the guy in the scenario.
On the other hand, there’s a truely frightning undercurrent of rage when I let myself go. My nuclear family are the only ones I am able to be less-than-sunshine-and-flowers with, and my brothers in particular… well, sibling rivalry (although I get the impression our rivalry was/is a bit atypically voilent). So if, say, my father wants Big Bro to go upstairs, and Big Bro is loudly and emphatically refusing, and my dad asks me to just go and drag Bro upstairs… well, in the struggle I find myself enthusiastically beating him up. I scare me. So if I was grappling with Mr. Bad Intentions I might come to with my teeth in his throat. I dunno. I think I’ll just cross my fingers and hope to only fight hypotheticals.
I am a very fearful person, but when my ‘‘fight or flight’’ response is triggered, I generally choose ‘‘fight’’. I consider myself a pacifist, but I’m convinced I would be so terrified if someone broke into my home I would kill them as long as they weren’t actively running away from me. I would probably feel guilty for the rest of my life, but I’d be alive.
Given the option, I’ll run away from danger with utterly undignified speed, usually whilst crying out for help. But if flight isn’t an option, and I’m facing any serious violence, I’m going to try to inflict as much damage as necessary to make the violence stop. I’m not big or strong enough to attempt any sort of holds or restraining maneuvers, nor can I take a lot of hits and keep functional - so that means I need to inflict as much damage as I can, as quickly as I can, with no regard to my assailant’s survival. If I have a rock, I’m going for his head. If I have a gun, I’m going for center of mass. And no matter what I have, I’m not going to stop inflicting damage once the other guy is down - I’ll continue until I’m certain he won’t be able to get up and stop me from fleeing. This treatment may well prove fatal, and may also cross the line between legal self-defense and manslaughter/murder - can I reasonably fear for my life from an assailant who’s bleeding on the ground? Maybe, but it’d be tricky to make the argument. Doesn’t matter - I’d rather be in jail than dead.
As for killing for others - in principle, I have no moral problem with intervening. And once I’m in the fight, I’m in just as much danger as the person I’m protecting, which brings me back to the paragrph above. The wrinkle, though, is that I’m a coward. I certainly hope I’d put my life on the line for my sister, for example - but could I actually do it? I doubt it.
In the black and white world of the question I could easily choose to kill the bad guy to save the good guy, even if I didn’t know the good guy.
The real world problem is that by time I figured out that I was (or we were) in such a life or death situation it would probably be too late for me to save anyone. How do you know when someone is trying to kill or rape until they’ve already started? Assuming I know for certain that the bad guy is trying to do the bad deed, he must be less than competent because he has tried and failed so far. Then I might feel a little bad about killing him.
What do you do, if I may ask?
I should add that, if I could intervene with lethal force from a safe distance to save another’s life, I certainly would. For example, if I had both a handgun and a clear shot at the bad guy. This wouldn’t require me to put myself in danger, and would produce the least-bad outcome - no reason not to do it.