To go along Kuma's book recommendation, I propose reading Crime and Punishment. It's truly an outstanding book and it makes one feels as if they are the criminal themselves. It's quite psychological. I actually just beat this game (highly recommended; one of the best I have played so far) Batman: Arkham City. I know I'll get it's just a game line, but it centers around Gotham City's approach to handling violent inmates by putting them all in one large section of the city, sealing it off, and letting them duke it out. They drop food once in a while, but criminal groups quickly acquire it and many inmates are left starving. It gets so far as to drop military grade weapons so that the inmates kill one another more efficiently. While the story is a little far-fetched, the city meets its demise after Gotham City decides to implement Protocol 10 which is just a fancy name for bomb-the-shtick-out-of-everything. Batman's role in the game is get rid of Arkham City because it's morally wrong. He has this code of honor about not killing, and quite frankly it bites him the the ass a lot, but who cares? He's the God Damned Batman! :yeleyes: Slip's right, there are people who won't lose a night's sleep over killing another human being, but for the rest of us who have some form of conscious, I don't know if it will ever be justifiable even if it was by law. At least for me.
I've gone with the minority and said no. BUT to give an extreme example if I may, if I was holding a handgun and the person opposite me had their finger on the big red button ready to kill millions of innocent people I would have to shoot them. It is such a hard question to answer honestly.
Would I do it? I think so. I have never been there, and hope I never will. But I don't think it is morally wrong to kill in self defense. When in doubt, choose life. People who say that this would make us no better than the killer... bollocks I say. Someone is trying to kill me (or even someone else). I don't have to let them do it. Stopping them from doing it does not reflect badly on me. Letting yourself be killed is stupid. Now, I would feel guilty, probably. However, Whether he is tying to kill only me, or an entire country with a nuke, is irrelevant. Defense is defense.
Just letting you folks know that I have completely changed my views completely regarding self defense. No I wouldn't want to kill, but If it came down to a life or death situation and he or she was the one wanting to kill me, then it is only just that they face the consequences to their own actions. Killing out of self defense is not murder, life is precious and you have the right to protect it. Your actions from protecting your own life could of saved future lives from the hands of a potential murderer.
Kuma, Hannibal, I wouldn't mind hearing your views on this. It could be in PM if that's more appropriate. Trying to get some perspective on something. I'll understand if you don't want to talk about that stuff, though.
I hope I never have to be put in a position where I would have to make a decision like that. I don't believe in any type of killing, and would do whatever I can to avoid it.
This is a tough but realistic question I guess if we are serious about defending ourselves, our families and loved ones. Personally, I know I would fight back and defend myself to the best of my ability. Never again do I want to be the victim of a violent assault or ambush. But have I dealt with my personal glitches or issues with the "k" word?? I don't know. But I will keep fighting regardless. Even if I am hurt badly, at least I can feel pain lol.. it means I'm still alive!! I would hope I have the capacity to keep fighting off the threat until the threat is no longer a threat but.. until it happens... I can't prove anything. I saw the Lt. Grossman documentary "On killing" I think is what its called and I believe there is truth in that documentary.
Isn't it along the lines of survival semantics, really? The end result is fairly identical. Where are you drawing the line?
You mean "how far will you go to survive"? Yes it is, but it is not as simple as that. Many people have a difficult time getting past any level of physical violence/conflict, so to then up the ante even futher and ask them to kill is quite something else. We have had individuals drop out of the service in training because the realised that they could not, or would have an exceptionally hard time, killing another. That took courage for them to admit that. That said, they are not the individuals cut out for an LEO role. We do not EXPECT to kill anyone, but each and every day I am READY to. I used to have a mantra to put myself in mode, but I do not need or use that anymore because it is so ingrained in to me that, should it be required, I am ready to end someones life. Paradoxically being aware that I am comfortable with this "bottom line" means I can evaluate a lot of situations very quickly and my responses is always appropriate. Having access to a full spectrum mentally means that I don't often go in at a "high end " resolution. That might not make sense and i can clarify further if needed. Killing is not easy to do, depsite what others may say or believe. You have to find a "bottom line" for you to determine where you WOULD kill and then plug yourself in to that feeling. It is a difficult practice, and quite draining, but it helps you come to terms with what is the nastiest thing you may have to do to someone so that if/when it does happen you lose that "freeze" or "red mist" response and you know that, in your heart , you did what was required
This is definitely what I was asking about. Thanks for such a detailed and thoughtful reply. Personally, I'd really, really, really rather not have to go past that line with someone. How would you recommend training that mindset for civilian self-defense? It's easy to find some rather "intense", "hardcore", "real-combat" types who probably do more harm than good, but how would you suggest approaching it in a healthier manner that's not going to have people freaking out and going too far?
Killing is easy when your life or that if a loved one is on he line. You'd be surprised of the so-called "non-violent" people who can and have.
Not in any way, shape, or form is killing easy unless you have certain psychological disorders: sociopathy, psychopathy, anti-social personality disorder... Even killing is self defense is often not enough for untrained people to kill. Defense of family makes it easier but still not easy.
Isn't easier and easy the same? What I am saying, it is easy for man to kill another. We try to harness this, but we cannot control the very nature once pressured Of course, man is not a mindless animal, and there will be people who will "freeze" or cannot. This is nature's way of rooting out the non-fittest for survival.
No it's not. One refers to degree and one to absolute. Killing is not easy, but there are certain things which can make it easier. You mean restrain, the military tries to harness it. And it's not easy for humans to lift the bio-psychological restraints to killing one another without training or certain physical or psychological aids. Mammals exhibit the same patterns of aggression when beginning, engaging in, and ending intraspecies conflict. The way humans generally fight until submission or clear dominance is reflected in the animal kingdom. Animals with more natural weapons have a greater inhibition toward rough-housing because it is more likely they will kill their opponent thereby eliminating a member of their species/gene-pool which is not good for the survival of the species and hence their own offspring. Animals with less natural weaponry (like humans) have less inhibition toward aggression therefore when you put a weapon in someone's hand it is more likely they will kill someone by accident than actual intent. When engaged in a fight for survival your mind goes out the window and instinct takes over. It may interest you to know that pre-Vietnam when military training wasn't all that great there were a greater percentage of non-firers in war than people who actually used their weapons and that includes killing in self defense. No actually it's a way which has evolved of preserving a gene pool to increase the survival chances of many species. And even though humans have actually gotten better at killing one another through better military training and better weaponry our population continues to go up, and up, and up, and up.
To answer the OP's question specifically, I'd have to say I'd like to avoid that becoming necessary. Someone is going to notice or care that you killed "Poor So and So who was really such a good, misunderstood, upstanding member of society" and it's possible to attract a lot of problems by killing such a poor, misunderstood soul (who's just tried murdering you and/or your loved ones with a knife). The consequences could plague you and your loved ones for years and years (unless you all get killed fairly quickly as retalliation). Even if you don't go to prison for killing, there could be very undesirable consequences for doing so.
