Was this shooting morally justified?

[GusNSpot]

@gigi

I was thinking the other day of folks on the board who don’t believe there’s an afterlife, and when you die here, that’s it forever. And you would shoot someone in the back who is standing in your kitchen drinking milk. That’s enough for them to never exist anymore, for their life to gone because they climbed in the wrong window. It’s unfathomable. But good to know the view is out there.

@gigi

Yeah, talked myself out of that one – if you think this is it for you too, I guess that’s where your justification comes from. You’d keep your life no matter what…?

My belief in an after life or not, you know about how.
They broke the window before they climbed in.

I can see one or two hands, I can’t see if any weapons are in his waistband. There might even be more than one right under his hands.

I should wait until he turns around shooting at me to get my gun ready, aimed & on target because I am James Bond & will be faster than he is? :rolleyes:
You willing to take that chance? I’m not.

I keep my life no matter what? Really?? :smack:
I have put my life on the line & had real bullets fired at me while trying to protect you & everyone else. Do you think I was wrong to do that and renounced me & protested against me?
I am a parent who has had on child murdered at 18 years old, she was a good kid, not a drunk who killed a family of 5 with a car, a meth head, etc. She was a Catholic as is her whole family & extended families. We did not discuss ‘after life’ much in her teen years. :eek:
I have made mercy flights in some very tough weather conditions.

Do not talk to me about " You’d keep your life no matter what…?"

As I stated above, someone breaks into my house, “I am fine with killing you from behind or all the way up to not at all. It is then my choice” which in no way can be considered as saying I would always & without question kill or risk my own life. I said I have the choice.

IMO, if a person is not wise enough to discuss it, think about it decide about what if this or that, then their opinion does not mean much to me.
Before my first child was born, the mother & I discussed and decided that if it came to an absolute choice between her life and the child,s I would tell the doctor. We actually told him before so he knew we both wanted it that way. ( Today I would probably need a 10 page document from a lawyer, signed by 2 judges, 3 doctors which would be ignored anyway. :::: /rant ::: )

But what if you & your husband did not do this & you are unconscious, it has to be decided right now, so husband, what are you gonna do? Might be a touch easier if it was thought about, discussed & decided in advance with options in case of miracles, birth in the wild with no medical help if that might happen & etc…

Again I say, The choice is mine as soon as the window is broken & they are inside.
My particular Catholic conscience is just fine with that.

You really hate someone, give them a Catholic conscience. < VEG >

[Dead_Cat]

Good post, and although it seems we may fundamentally disagree on certain things, my position is that I would hope you would use your discretion (in the situation posited by the OP) to not shoot unless you felt in physical danger. From the facts presented in the OP, I don’t believe physical danger is imminent. If the intruder starts advancing or makes a sudden movement, that’s when it becomes morally justifiable to shoot them, in my view.

[gigi]

@GusNSpot

I keep my life no matter what? Really?? :smack:
I have put my life on the line & had real bullets fired at me while trying to protect you & everyone else. Do you think I was wrong to do that and renounced me & protested against me?

Well, I kind of meant the theoretical “you”, meaning someone who doesn’t believe in an afterlife and would preserve his own life at any cost. So maybe not you, you.

But since you mention it, no, I don’t believe it taking the energy and Life you’ve been given and picking up a gun and going to other countries and attacking them. It would be one thing if you or your country is being directly attacked.

[Larry_Borgia]

As the OP, I suppose I should check in. Again, I really only posted this because I wanted a more ambiguous situation than the one in Skald’s other thread. Interesting to see that most people still feel the shooting was justified. This was my initial thought, though the more I think about it, the more uncertain I get.

I should stress that if it came down to a fight, there is almost no question that Joe could easily incapacitate the intruder with his hands. However he can’t see if the intruder has a weapon concealed on his body.

Also, the race thing, which The Lurking Horror objected to early in the thread. If the intruder had been white, would Joe have taken more steps to try to defuse the situation before resorting to deadly force? I honestly don’t know, and I wrote the damn thing.

[Dorjan]

In the scenario I’m going with Legally OK, Morally unjustified. I’m not going to shoot someone who is unarmed, even if they are in my home. At least, that’s not going to be my first action. It just wouldn’t sit well with my personally. I wouldn’t feel at that point that my life is in immediate danger. I would continue to command him to leave with his hands in view, while maintaining spacing. If at any point he lunges or moves his hands out of view however, I WILL shoot without hesitation.

[Shodan]

OTOH it is hard to be sure that he was unarmed. And it doesn’t take a lot of bullets to over come a fairly large size/skill disparity. That’s what guns are for.

I think it is clearly OK legally (IANAL) and a closer call, but still morally justified. The guy might be armed, and AFAICT that is enough.

Regards,
Shodan