Is it ok to kill if it is in self defense?

@Awinds (2468)
United States
July 28, 2011 5:24pm CST
This has been a hot topic for a long time: is killing justified if the killer was defending their own life, family or property? One one hand, life is precious and the last thing one wants to see is a family member die (especially when one can do something to prevent it). Some go as far as to kill the attacker before the attacker can harm them or their family. Other people hold to the belief that all life is equal and violence is never appropriate. They will not fight (and especially not kill) even if their life or life near them is in danger. Where do you stand on this? Is self defense killing right or wrong? Are you more on the pacifist end of the scale or the opposite end? Why do you hold the view that you do?
3 people like this
17 responses
@BeetleBam (171)
• United States
29 Jul 11
If someone is trying to kill you try to knock them out or incopacitate them in some way, but if you kill them in the process that's alright because self preservation is the first law of nature. It is either them or you.
1 person likes this
@Awinds (2468)
• United States
29 Jul 11
And its ok since they attacked you first. :)
@mantis36 (4219)
• Philippines
9 Aug 11
kill or be killed.... retaliation is the thing that they only put on their mind... the more your accept their game to engage fight... the more they retaliate because they doesn't want to loose also.... so be better to stay away from trouble if you can.... if isn't it a life threatening situation, escape if you can.... if you can't escape, and if your life is threatened.... then that is the time you fight.... but if you fight, be sure there is no one witnesses... just only the two of you.... if he live's, he will retaliate, he will retaliate not to his enemy but to his enemy's families.... so to make the story short.... be better to escape and don't engage in a fight if you have 1,001 ways just to escape.... by that, you win a combat without fighting......
@mantis36 (4219)
• Philippines
9 Aug 11
then i use the principles of offensive martial arts.... If the opponent doesn't move, I wont move; But if the opponent moves slightly, I move first. trapped in a one room hotel? i hope the scenario is no one around witness, not even a video cam witnessing.... i will use my Wing Chun Kung Fu.... and since a Wing Chun is an offensive type of Kung Fu... which means.... Killing is an option.... and finish the job within 60 seconds.... hit those 7 fruits first.... don't let him live.... or else, if he live... he will retaliate by expecting the unexpected.... attack by surprise is what expecting for.... if you only disable that assailant and put to jail, soon he will only go out by parole... or his friends will retaliate after 3 days of imprisonment.... it's a kill or be killed.... that is the only option if no way to escape if your life is threatened....
@Awinds (2468)
• United States
9 Aug 11
Escape isn't always possible. For example the guy has you trapped in a one room hotel room on the seventh floor...ouch.
@celticeagle (156096)
• Boise, Idaho
29 Jul 11
I would certainly hope so. If I was in a situation where my children were in danger and it the attacker or my children you can bet heavy that I would shoot. I think anyone in such a situation might shoot to stop, not kill. But if it was an accident I would hope that that would be taken into consideration. I am a pacifist until someone harms my family!
@Awinds (2468)
• United States
30 Jul 11
It would just be strange if a parent did nothing while the lives of her children were threatened right in front of her!
1 person likes this
@celticeagle (156096)
• Boise, Idaho
30 Jul 11
Not this Irish Indian!
@lampar (7584)
• United States
29 Jul 11
It is perfectly fine to kill in self defense, i will not loose sleep over it so long as l am alive. Call me whatever you like, it will not bother me a bit.
@Awinds (2468)
• United States
30 Jul 11
Would you do so immediately or only do so in a situation where you had no other option?
• Philippines
30 Jul 11
I don't think it's right to kill but if it's an accident due to self-defense then I think they'll be left off the hook. Killing is never good to say the least. Even if it's self-defense I don't think anyone would see it as okay.
• Philippines
31 Jul 11
Anything that appeals to you as accident would be acceptable.
@Awinds (2468)
• United States
31 Jul 11
What would you define as an accident involving self defense and killing? Would if be it the one being attacked was aiming for the arm but accidentally shot the person in the lung instead?
• India
29 Jul 11
If one can defend himself without killing other then he should better do that but if it is question of only one will survive then it should be alright if you kill in self defence. However self defence is always to be proved, that indeed it was you who would have got killed by the assailant had you not acted.
• India
7 Aug 11
Depends on the circumstances as well as capability of your lawyer also.
@Awinds (2468)
• United States
30 Jul 11
Do you think it would be difficult to prove that your reason for murder was self defense? :)
@urbandekay (18278)
29 Jul 11
For the Christian there can be no doubt; to kill another is to kill Christ. Those that follow Christ cannot take up arms, with the possible exception of immediate defence of another, not themselves all the best urban
@urbandekay (18278)
30 Jul 11
Aye, but also from an understanding of Christianity as a whole. Love thy enemy Turn the other cheek etc all the best urban
@Awinds (2468)
• United States
29 Jul 11
Does part of this come from that verse which says love your neighbor as yourself? If If I recall, it is the second greatest commandment. :)
@_sketch_ (5742)
• United States
30 Jul 11
I think that it is okay in self defense, but I don't think that property should go under self defense. A life isn't worth any stuff. I very much respect strict pacifists who will not kill in any circumstance, but I don't think that that is something I would do. I hold this view because it is natural to kill in self-defense. It is built into us. Fight or flight. And I do not consider war to be self-defense, unless of course it is a civilian who is doing the self-defense.
@Awinds (2468)
• United States
31 Jul 11
I agree with what you said about war - war is about each nation wanting to get it's way rather than defense. I also agree with your property point - a house, a car, or a computer are pricy but not priceless like human life.
@lala501 (1532)
• United States
29 Jul 11
If it's self defense and it's my life/families life or their life then i will kill them.I could not just sit by and know that i am going to die without trying anything,i have a long life to live and if someone is so crazy that they would want to kill me for some reason then i will try to kill them before they do so.
@Awinds (2468)
• United States
30 Jul 11
So you would be motivated to kill in a desperate situation by a desire for you and your loved ones to live rather than anger or impulse? :)
@Masihi (4413)
• Canada
28 Jul 11
Tough question there. I'd do anything to push away that attacker from my family and property, probably grabbing anything to knock him out or something, and I'd use my full force. It's part of our fight or flight syndrome, I suppose, we need to survive. If the attacker gets killed in the process, I'd probably end up feeling so guilty and relieved at the same time. Guilty that I took a life and relieved that my family/property's going to be safe. I would support self-defense killing because of the need to protect.
@Masihi (4413)
• Canada
29 Jul 11
I honestly don't know, I never been in this situation and I hope and pray I never have to be in this situation. I have depression/anxiety disorder, so the guilt of taking a life would definitely haunt me, no matter if the person was trying to kill me/my family or not. I'd probably go for counselling, since it would be a traumatic event.
@Awinds (2468)
• United States
29 Jul 11
How would you deal with the guilt afterwards? :)
1 person likes this
• Philippines
15 Oct 11
it's never ok to take someone's life. even in self defense. subdue if you can. kill if necessary.
@Awinds (2468)
• United States
16 Oct 11
That summarizes my feelings on the matter pretty well. Killing is such a weighty thing - perhaps the weightiest matter of all.
• Malaysia
29 Jul 11
When if there a situation grows in which you have 2 options. first is to kill and second is to be killed. In my opinion it is wise to choose first option because if you choose not to kill then thats all you will no longer be there to think whether whatever you have done was correct or not. Nothing is more precious to you than your life.
@Awinds (2468)
• United States
30 Jul 11
Then there is also the fact that your lethal attacker might be a serial killer - if you kill him, then other people might be saved. :)
@wazabe (154)
• Canada
28 Jul 11
If necessary I will kill to protect my loved ones. If the attacker doesn't care about the victims well-being then why should I care about his. But, of course, if killing is the last resort, if I could subdue the attacker then it would be great.
@Awinds (2468)
• United States
29 Jul 11
So you would only kill if you had to?
@wazabe (154)
• Canada
29 Jul 11
Yeah, I would. I think anyone will, when their life or their loved ones are endangered. Being a pacifist has its limits. And mine, is when they attack with the intent to kill.
29 Jul 11
I think if I still have a choice that I don't need to kill the attacker, and still have other way to stop the killing, I will not kill anyone, but if when I'm already on a position that the attacker will surely kill one of my love ones, and if I didn't make an action right away is any of my love ones will die, maybe I could consider fighting back, but not really kill the attacker if possible, just to stop it from killing someone that I love. well it's a hard scene to imagine, and I know that until I didn't experienced it yet I will not surely know what I'll do.
@Awinds (2468)
• United States
30 Jul 11
Another thing is, in the head of the moment, you don't know how clear your head will be. You're adrenalin is going and the sight of family in danger is right before you eyes. It is possible that in such a circumstance you may lost your reluctance to kill.
@suspenseful (40193)
• Canada
15 Jan 12
Let me put it another, the reverse. Supposing you are threatened by an evil person. He has a knife or a club, and he makes threatening advances on you. So you say to yourself, "I will not stoop to his level. I will use my firm voice." but he raises his weapon, and you black out. You wake up in the hospital, the doctors tell you that they barely saved your life, but at least you are alive. " You smile with pride that you did not turn into a killer. Then the police give you the news. Your wife and children have been slaughtered, and not only that the murderer, the one whom you did not stoop as also killed your grandparents as well as the nearby neighbours who would have indentified him. They just have your desscription but it is not that reliable because he beat you about the head as well and you are suffering from cuncussion. So if yiou say that if what you had done if you killed him was immoral, well would it have been immoral to have let a killer go to do even eviler deeds? Yes ut would. If you had called the police but they would not have made it, you were justified in defending you, and your family against a monster.
• United States
29 Jul 11
Yes if your life is in danger your protecting your loved ones or friends than yes if there just looking to fight than I don't think so you should only do it if you absolutely have to.
@Awinds (2468)
• United States
29 Jul 11
So only get violent if there is no other choice? :)
@mythociate (21438)
• Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
29 Oct 12
On the one hand, I have to believe that no one wants to kill; that--if I can persist long enough to show them how they're hurting themselves more than anyone else--they'll stop before they kill somebody. However, the other hand can't convince them fast enough to stop them before they make the kill ... so the only other way to stop them is ...