Why is it wrong to kill someone who’s trying to kill you?
Me, if someone is trying to seriously injure or kill me, I’ll do whatever is most expedient to make them stop. Cripple, kill, whatever. They’ve made the decision, and I would have no regrets over protecting myself.
Fortunatly I’ve only had one occasion where my life was in danger from someone else, and it didn’t require that degree of force. Guy was bit banged up afterward, but nothing serious.
I really don’t see how someone can reason that murder and killing in self defence are the same degree of wrong.
I don’t expect you to see it the same way I do. I’m just saying, this is why I would say “I will suffer anything before I will kill another human” (which is the question in the OP). I believe that making the choice to take someone else’s life is the worst thing you could ever do, regardless of the circumstances. Obviously I wouldn’t hold everyone else to my personal standard, but this is what works for me.
I found the posts in this thread by the OP seemed to be skirting around the statement that it is totally wrong to refuse to use lethal force to protect your children. My feelings are exactly opposite. To find people of my mindset being judged as if we were responsible for the deaths of minors in our care if we didn’t kill to save them horrifies me.
Please understand, I do not oppose self defense. I just draw the line at lethal force.
Having a gun (or other killing thing) won’t do you a bit of good in most situations because you won’t have time to get it/draw it/fire it. Much as we like to fantasize about being heroic in these situations, the advantage of surprise is most often held by the attacker.
Not having weapons in your home does not ‘doom’ your family.
(e.g. look up statistics for US children killed by gun accidents and compare to the UK figure.)
As a teacher I always tell my pupils to watch the traffic before they cross a road.
This is a proven safety measure, especially as car deaths are massive everywhere, and many are due to pedestrians not looking.
How many children are killed in the sort of incidents you are describing?
How many deaths could have been prevented by a household weapon?
Whoa! Almost everything is dictated by circumstances. You cannot ignore the context that an action occurred in.
Suppose, for example, that John Doe is about to kill you. In this situation, the only way you can stop John is by killing him. Sure, you don’t mind so much if John kills you, and you want to stick to your moral convictions. But right behind you is Jane Doe and all of her children, and after John disposes of you, he’s going after Jane and her kids. You have a clear opportunity to take John out, and you know it. You have two options.
Don’t kill John. You die, as does Jane and all of her children.
Kill John, and save your life, as well as the lives of Jane and all of her children.
Are you still sure that you want to disregard the circumstances?
Cazzle, I like the last sentence in this paragraph, but I do have one question. Are you involved with or do you support efforts to restrict my owning of firearms? If so, then I think you are “passing judgement”.
The two boldings are mine, The first shows that you have not read what I have written. (except I am not a criminal )The seconds shows the same as the first and that you are calling me the criminal. LOL I have no issue with what you have said. he he he, but at least now, you have told folks where you stand and that is good. be well and happy…
Buck the Diver I am not active in the gun control community. Also, I live in Australia, so by voting anti-gun, I still wouldn’t affect YOUR ability to own firearms. That said, gun control is not my primary concern when I go to the polling booth as I believe our gun laws are sufficiently restrictive here. I chose my political party by other criteria.
Gaijin, for myself, I don’t believe the action of saving others outweighs taking a decision to kill someone else. This is just the way I feel, I can’t justify it or convince others that it’s right, but this is the standard I hold myself to. If I killed him, I would be as bad as him, even if I saved three other people.
Wild assumptions because you live in England. Are the assault and robbery crimes increasing in England or not since the gun ban? This statements above also shows that you did not read what I said and want to fuss about guns. The thread is not about guns…
#'s killed depends on where you are. Peace Corps in a lot of the world. Inner city of Detroit, Washington DC, Baltimore, and comparing the US to England makes no more sense than using Canada. The US of A had people, then government and then law. Canada had law then people. Every Canadian I have ever had a face to face talk with says the whole outlook of the people is completely different. Bring your family and children to my favorite place in South America and tell me again what you believe. I am not talking about violence in a particular place, I am talking about parents who make those statements and if they have thought about them.
Numbers of crimes prevented is a number that can be looked up. No number would you give credit too because it would not come from a viewpoint that you can accept. No matter who says what about guns it seems to me you have a set view about that. That is why I made this thread not about guns… :smack: It’s the idea of committing a violent act that could kill in defense of your child or loved ones who are dependant on you for their well being.
See, Thought through, not trying to change the world to his way of thinking by saying others are wrong. I personally do not understand and since no kids. I will not even go there. No problem. This kind of thought and response is what I am after…
Also, as long as this is known up front and if you are ever in a place where someone would be expecting different, IMO you should tell folks of that stance so they won’t count on you for help. That is just my opinion on that.
Not a problem with your own children… but… if you do not inform others for whom you might be caring of their children of your admittedly minority view point, then you are misrepresenting yourself. IMO… YMMV
I do get the feeling that all who know you would know this about you. Thank you for being candid.
GusNSpot, I only see one knee jerking in this thread, and it’s yours. No one who has said they wouldn’t use deadly force has said you are wrong or have no right to, all we have said is that you have no right to judge us.
For me, it is a control issue. No dumbass attacker will ever make me a killer, I can’t control their actions… but I can control my own.
The thread you linked to in the OP actually asks the exact same question in a far less insulting and presumptios manner.
Once again, no one has said anything against your view, you are the one who attacks people with a different view.
Cazzle, I’m wondering how extreme your viewpoints into not killing someone under any circumstances goes.
Let’s say that a sadistic serial killer broke into your house, and tied you and your spouse (i’m making an assumption you are male and are married for the purposes of this discussion. If you don’t have a spouse imagine a beloved family member or good friend) up.
The aforementioned serial killer puts a gun in your hand. Then he holds up a skinning knife and says “you have a choice: You can either shoot me, or I will brutally skin your wife alive and then afterwards go after you.”.
Would you let the guy kill her, screaming in agony, and then going after you? Do your beliefs extend that far?
Gus…sorry if you thought I was addressing you specifcally earlier. I was in fact simply making a proclamation of my position in no UNCERTAIN terms. I am not a violent person, nor do I wish for confrontation. At one time in my life I was an avid hunter and have had my share of conflict w/ those who would do me harm.
I will not stand idly by and watch an innocent human being be brutalized by the vermin that infest our society. To those of you w/ gentler souls, I understand and respect your personal decisions regarding violence. I might do the same if this concept were universal.
BUT, I have to live in this world and when the bad man is killing your children in front of you, while your wife is screaming for you to do something. I hope for your children’s sake one of (my kind) is there.
I pray that someone would do the same for my family if necessary
The statistics show that the handgun ban (not gun ban) has had zero effect on crime levels in the UK (no cite: I have a downloaded pdf, not a URL, but you should be able to find this easily enough on Google). This is hardly surprising given that there were almost no handguns anyway: some 160,000 in a population of nearly 60,000,000. In comparison, the over 2,000,000 shotguns are still legal. Do you really think that removing a massive 8% or so of the guns is going to make a difference?
Actually, crime has fallen since handguns were banned. It was also falling before they were banned. There has been a recent uptick, but to suggest that is caused by the criminals taking 4 - 5 years to realize that the handguns were gone as arrant nonsense.
However, I would not suggest that the handgun ban is responsible for the decrease in crime. The fact that most Americans simply do not understand is that there were so few handguns in the UK (and they were not used for self-defence anyway) that their banning is an almost complete irrelevancy.
And “self-defence” has not been a permissible reason to get a firearms licence in the UK since 1946. We simply have no modern history of using guns for self-defence. So to attempt to draw any conclusions from removing handguns from a few unfortunate target shooters who often kept their pistols at the club anyway is completely misguided.
Blalron, not fair. we can dream up all kinds of bad deals and that is not the point IMO. Cazzle has thought out his stance and replied to the best of his beliefs in what he can/is willing to do. Here on the board, I don’t think this continued hammering will help explain why people who make flat statements about it in less than a thought out a manner do that. I feel that Cazzle has fulfilled that request. YMMV
No grendle72, I made no attack, I asked if they had thought it out. You yelled guns, I said no, not about guns. Is about letting others kill your children without you doing a violent act to stop it if that was the ONLY way to save them.
'You then said I had no experience, so I posted my experience, actually just a part of it and you won’t address that? Just yell at me that I am attacking. I feel that those who have read the thread have , I hope, come to the realization that you are wrong in what you stridently proclaim I am doing. So… You say that your control and belief is such that you will not take a life if that is what it would take to save your child. And that you really believe that you are correct to do so for yourself and your children. Okay. I disagree with that stance… so what. I just felt that those around who yell about the absolutes, …never, always, without exception, at any cost,… have not thought it through and so I challenged them in a generic way to respond. I said it was not about guns, no one seemed to read what was written. You too seem to do that, just the most surface skim and then play the ‘anti-tape,. not reading, just blast with all the preconceived rhetoric. :: sigh ::;
"You say that your control and belief is such that you will not take a life if that is what it would take to save your child. And that you really believe that you are correct to do so for yourself and your children. " That is what you are saying, correct?
If I am not correct in this, that I think you are saying about yourself please explain your stance if you want to. Please do not just yell about things I have not said.
Cool info, thanks for it. We get some really skewed press here. Can you say “Yellow”, “Slanted”, " With a real ugly agenda"? LOL I thought you could.
I was told and read that all guns were banned in England. :: :smack: Just goes to show ya. This also makes me even more against tring to use one country in comparison to another in these kinds of debates because it really is apples and oranges a lot of the time. Thanks.
The first shows that you have not read what I have written. (except I am not a criminal )The seconds shows the same as the first and that you are calling me the criminal. LOL 
