I cannot really say "when it is ok to kill", for self-defense?? We all know that acquiring a skill in martial arts comes with responsibility and likewise to maintain self-control as well. Hope we will not get into that situation that there be a need to kill someone in order to protect a life. God forbid! :Angel:
I understand this. I do not have rules for this. I would not like to take another person's life. ap Oweyn said that he found it disturbing doing knife drills and knife sparring. I found it disturbing when we were at Balikatan and teaching knife to Marines. I mean if you thought about it long enough, you are butchering another person. Could I kill another person ( do I have the capacity to)? yes. Do I want to? No. But if I had to, I would. What is the "have to moment"? I am sure I will know when I am there.
Generally speaking, killing for me is justifiable when (I hope to never find myself in any of these situations, but regardless, I always try to choose the lesser evil); Its my life vs someone who is trying to kill me and I am unable to stop them through conventional self defense means, or unable to escape. When it is consensual or when other options are not available eg; Brain dead, dying from terminal cancer (Euthanasia). As a means of protection or justice eg; ending the life of someone who is a threat to society - terrorist, murderer, rapist etc.
Ooh, good topic. When I'm teaching self-defense, the general philosophy is that people should do what they need to do to get to safety. I'm not teaching any particular "kill moves" or anything, but students need to ready to cause permanent and potentially lethal damage if they must in order to escape a situation. But from a personal morality point of view, I strongly believe in peace and nonviolence, and there aren't many cases where I would fight back in the first place. I'll accept that there are times that damaging a person is the lesser of two evils, but I don't think intentional lethal force falls into that category. Unless I'm carrying a gun, it takes just as much work (or more) to kill a person as it does to stop them without killing them... and I'm not going to carry a gun.
The OP wasn't limited to killing humans. I would kill fish and plants for food every single day without blemishing my conscience. (As it is, other people do that for me. I just eat the food.) ^^^ Me, too. ^^^ When I was in my 20's I thought the world was black and white. I had bright-line tests for everything. I would have easily killed people. Fortunately, I was never in a situation where I had to. Now that I'm in my 40's, though, I see a whole lot of gray. I don't see many bright-line tests anymore. I'm sure that I'll kill if I *have* to, but I'm not really clear on what that moment would look like. As to the "well, what if someone breaks into your home and attacks your daughter? " I answer, that's not realistic. I'd kill him, yes, but that's so far fetched as to be merely a theoretical bright-line test. If that's all you want, fine. Bad Guy in my home attacking any member of my family == dead Bad Guy. I have no reason whatsoever to think that's even a remote possibility, though.
I believe killing is only okay when it is to prevent more killing. My main thought with this is killing people who want to start wars. I hate war so much that sometimes when I think too deeply about it, I get sick to my stomach. So killing the people who are going to be responsible for starting a war is totally okay with me. Killing someone who is about to commit murder, is okay with me. Killing someone who has already committed the murder, is not okay with me. That's just revenge and it doesn't help anyone. Killing rapists and pedophiles, I'm not okay with. I believe rapists and pedophiles should be castrated. Pedophiles instantly and rapists should have a 3-strike "off" or something. Yeah, should give them something to think about... Killing someone who is threatening you or your VIPs life, is fine with me. If he is threatening with murder he should not complain when he is killed himself. Nor should anyone else. Of course if they fail and they are no longer able to do so, killing them is very wrong.
It's OK to kill someone under the following circumstances... They use their phone/talk/put their feet in the seats at the cinema They don't hold a door open for you when you are walking behind them They don't say please and thank you
Isn't there grey even within something as bad as war though? What about people who would start a war to prevent further war? Interventionalism and all that jazz. To answer the OP my response would be the same as everyone else: When it's necessary. What "necessary" actually means is fluid though and depends a lot on the situation. And whether then its "ok" or not I'm unsure on. Ok by my personal morality or by wider society and everyone else's?
They stop to talk in doorways/corridors Those who don't take the time to say thank you. They should be extra killed*. When was the last time your boss/tutor/teacher stpped to say, "I saw what you did, thank you"? It means so much. *Rant over. We now return you to your normal programme. Thank you.
"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..." - Jayne Cobb ("Serenity") Travess
Oh and it's OK to kill people that use "family" car parking spaces when they don't have any kids with them. And no...a 13 year old does not count as a kid.
You'd go nuts living here, that's (more 2 and 3) common Finnish behaviour and not considered rude at all. I think there is rule here though that the more bags you carry and the closer to the door you are, the faster the person must close it behind them. Maybe I should go and rant on one of those god awful ex-pat forums.
I see your point. But I'm looking at the very start of it though. If you're forced to start a war to prevent further war, then the ones responsible for forcing your hand are at fault. I would be okay with killing them. This is pure conjecture though, usually it's nearly impossible to find the root of war. Except with dudes like Hitler. Too bad they didn't assassinate the crazy ******* before he turned Germany into warmongering mad men.
Even then there are roots to WW2 going back to WW1 and beyond. It wasn't all just Hitler but also the political climate at the time of Hitler's rise.
Also going back in Hitler's life. I don't actually know much about him but I'm assuming there's something in his background that explains why he ended up being the reason the name Adolph died out. But yeah your points better. Maybe without Germany being hit so hard by the Treaty of Versailles and all the other problems Hitler would've ended up being just another fringe politic nutter.
