I think killing in self-defense is a justifiable act, however, it is a very sensitive subject and it is very difficult to judge. I can kill someone and just claim that it was in self-defense. So we would have to automatically include the reliability of the killer as an honest man or not. I mean, I think it is a very difficult topic to consider. You have to judge by human nature. Humans have this nasty tendency to lie to get themselves out of trouble. But, if it's just for yourself, and i am merely answering this question, I think it is ok to kill someone in self-defense, especially if you have a good reason.
Killing someone in self defence.
Started by
Guest_Hitsugeya
, Aug 07 2008 11:42 AM
206 replies to this topic
#177
Guest_empmew
Guest_empmew
-
- Guest
Posted 16 October 2010 - 11:54 AM
However, the current legal system allows a loophole known simply as- justified self defense. So basically, it has already been decided that we have every right to kill someone in the event that they pose a threat to our life or may cause injury to us. Anyway, what you just said also implies that if you prove that you did it by accident, you can get off innocent? If so, then I presume anyone can get off.
#178
Guest_bakaorochizz
Guest_bakaorochizz
-
- Guest
Posted 02 November 2010 - 11:08 PM
there is a difference..yes that some people argue self defence is a legitimate defence but i disagreefor example, even in self defence, you have still taken the life of another personand you should still be charged for killing the personhowever, the self defence should be considered during the sentencing for the crime, whether they should be charged and go to jail, have a lesser sentence, or be acquitted or whatever.The reason is that there is a gray area of what constitutes and self defence so i think that the crime should still be there, just the actions and the nature of the killing should affect the sentencing, but not the crime itself
#179
Guest_atrager
Guest_atrager
-
- Guest
Posted 20 December 2010 - 10:58 PM
i agree with u 100% and even more. if she hadn't shot the man by accident or not the man would have shot her and maybe even gotten away with it Scott free. why on earth should she get punished for saving her and possibly even other people lives? (other peoples lives because he might have gone somewhere else and killed others). it just doesn't seem fair to meI wouldn't consider that an act of Justice but an act compensation for a crime that a person did not even commit, defending yourself is not a crime its a right that every human has, why on earth should a person suffer for a crime he or she did not ask for, it was the other party that caused this issue shouldn't the other party take full responsibility.Take this scenario for instance:A woman walks into an empty alley and there are a few thugs waiting for her. A thug demands that she strips and let them rape her, she refuses and the thug pulls out a gun, the thug threatens her with the gun, the woman and thug struggle as the woman is defending herself to prevent herself from getting raped, the gun misfires and the thug is killed. The rest of the thugs run, in dismay the woman is left there with a dead body.If you were the woman I guess you would the same thing in order to save yourself, I mean you did not want to get raped so you protected yourself but you killed the person in the struggle by mistake, I see no reason why you have to be sentenced to prison or even pay a hefty fine, it is the other party's fault for causing this problem to occur. You were just minding your own business and they started a fight with you. I did not want any of these to happen but they caused it to happen.
#180
The Mothman
-
- Active Member
-
- 805 posts
The Monster of Mason County
Reputation: 3
Neutral
Posted 21 December 2010 - 03:35 AM
As long as the person killed is threatening your life, and trying to take it from you, it is justifiable. Family members of the dead culprit can whine and demand "justice" all they please, but the simple fact is that he/she got what was coming to him/her. Let's say Sarah Jones (remember that this is an example) is walking down "Sugar Street". Sugar Street is basically a ghetto where trouble can be found easily. John Smith brandishes a knife and quietly stalks her. Swiftly, John grabs Sarah from behind, and threatens to slit her throat unless she hands over all of the money in her purse. There is no law--at least not in the United States--that requires people to hand over their belongings to any person who happens to make such a threat. Sarah somehow slips out of John's grasp, kicks the knife from his hand, and they both are engaged in a brawl, gaining the attention of the neighborhood. Sarah manages to strangle John to death, and some anonymous person calls the cops. Now, when the cops arrive, how exactly does this make her a cold-blooded killer? The fact of the matter is that she is not. Because John Smith dared to make such a threat to an apt fighter, he unwittingly gambled with his own life. His consequence was death, because he was inciting the incident. Simply put, a person who is killed by another individual after threatening the life of said individual shouldn't have attempted such a feat in the first place.
#181
Guest_~_Keiko_~
Guest_~_Keiko_~
-
- Guest
Posted 29 December 2010 - 01:21 AM
A very good point... Kill out of self defense and not some stupid person attacking you with a fork and or basket. Killing in self defense should only have either a light punishment (ex. jail time for say...3 months or a reasonable fine) Now killing someone out of stupidity. (ex. the basket thing) Heck yes, someone will go to jail for that. Unless, heaven forbid. them trying to kill you with a fork... and then hopefully both the attacker and the attacked will go to jail... However, it might not be the case. Please for heavens sake, kill to save your own life and or a friends if faced with death at the hands of someone else. DON"T kill if you or a friend is being attacked by a fruitcake with a friggin fork...its alright, if the guy was coming at you with a chainsaw or a shotgun ready to kill you.but if its a person with like a fork trying to stab you or attacking you with a basket, then that would be why people get sent to jail for that.
#182
Klokinator
-
- Active Member
-
- 156 posts
You Just Got Klokked
Reputation: 6
Neutral
Posted 29 December 2010 - 02:14 AM
Well if the gun misfires, correct me if I'm wrong, but since the thug was holding it would that not make HIM responsible for his OWN DEATH? Unless you meant to mention that she stripped the gun from his hands of course, but you didn't say that so I assume not.As for my personal opinion, I believe that if someone walks into my house intending to cause me any sort of harm, be it financial (Robbery), sexual (Rape), or violent (Like a violent rapist or a serial killer) it is my right to shoot them in my house and the powers that be would agree with me. Outside of the house can be much tougher of course. There are always always extenuating circumstances to be taken into account. Was the defender carrying a weapon? The attacker as well? Neither? If the defender killed the attacker, was there signs of a struggle from both of them? Most importantly, if the attacker was killed, were there multiple stab wounds/bullets fired? Was it perhaps an overboard defense situation? There are just too many circumstances to label killing in self defense as good or bad. The circumstances must always be examined carefully.I wouldn't consider that an act of Justice but an act compensation for a crime that a person did not even commit, defending yourself is not a crime its a right that every human has, why on earth should a person suffer for a crime he or she did not ask for, it was the other party that caused this issue shouldn't the other party take full responsibility.Take this scenario for instance:A woman walks into an empty alley and there are a few thugs waiting for her. A thug demands that she strips and let them rape her, she refuses and the thug pulls out a gun, the thug threatens her with the gun, the woman and thug struggle as the woman is defending herself to prevent herself from getting raped, the gun misfires and the thug is killed. The rest of the thugs run, in dismay the woman is left there with a dead body.If you were the woman I guess you would the same thing in order to save yourself, I mean you did not want to get raped so you protected yourself but you killed the person in the struggle by mistake, I see no reason why you have to be sentenced to prison or even pay a hefty fine, it is the other party's fault for causing this problem to occur. You were just minding your own business and they started a fight with you. I did not want any of these to happen but they caused it to happen.
On that day, a brother was lost and a race was wiped out...
#183
Guest_whoisme1
Guest_whoisme1
-
- Guest
Posted 30 December 2010 - 10:51 PM
if the have physically harm you first and injury you then you can do the same back but it would be classed as self defence so you would get a fine but you could win as that guy is deadGPs were deducted for this post, please read the rules! - xeeeeeeeee
#184
Guest_PeTaK_93
Guest_PeTaK_93
-
- Guest
Posted 02 January 2011 - 04:15 PM
whoa...If the person is hurting me,yes, I will try to defend myself .... I do not want to die just like that..hurm..sorry for my poor english...dgemu.com<3GPs were deducted for this post, please read the rules! - tedsb16if the have physically harm you first and injury you then you can do the same back but it would be classed as self defence so you would get a fine but you could win as that guy is deadGPs were deducted for this post, please read the rules! - xeeeeeeeee
#185
Guest_aidan0130
Guest_aidan0130
-
- Guest
Posted 05 January 2011 - 08:07 PM
well if your going to be killed then you are going to defend yourself and if they keep trying and the only way out is by killing them then it has to be done, even in self defence its not nice but that how it is.its not exactly right that you should be punished for killing someone in self defence (i suppose you people would argue that you are being punished for the killing of another human) but i think there should should be some penatly like being watched for a few weeks or months to make sure you havent gone mad and try and kill others say but i dont think jail or sued if ther is proper evidenceThere are many cases where people are sentenced to jail for years for killing someone in self defence, or are sued hundreds of thousands of dollars. Is that justice?
#186
Guest_Anime_girl
Guest_Anime_girl
-
- Guest
Posted 06 January 2011 - 05:53 PM
i don't think it's fair!because if someone wants to kill you, how can he say "i want to kill him"?who says "you can kill him"?then if someone want to kill you , you must defend yourself.what can you do else? die?GPs were deducted for this post, please read the rules! - tedsb16
Edited by tedsb16, 06 January 2011 - 07:22 PM.
Short post, please develop a full argument with evidence and sources in this section.
#187
Guest_parueki
Guest_parueki
-
- Guest
Posted 14 July 2011 - 07:08 AM
In a self defense situation, the only choices are the kill or be killed, so if you value your life, you really have no other option. But there are consequences to your action. Justice for one is injustice for another. The loved ones of the other will feel wronged, even if you are totally innocent and the person came after you, the life of someone important to them was lost. They won't care too much about you. This is assuming the attacker has loved ones. But there are some who don't have loved ones. In that case, to me, it is still not right because that person will dies lacking something. Who are you to judge if they are good or bad people, whether they should or shouldn't live? It's a horrible situation to be put in, but no matter what, killing in self defense is still killing. Once you've killed someone, there's no turning back. No matter what the reason, you have taken away someone else's life. It will have some impact on you that you will have to live with for the rest of your life. Whether it is okay or not is based on your own values, which is different for everyone, but to me, it is not something I would be okay with.
#188
Guest_kapnegative
Guest_kapnegative
-
- Guest
Posted 15 July 2011 - 01:35 PM
If someone has a concield weapon and attacks you and you grab a stick and beat him to death that should be legal. Problem is someone has to see it and this doesn't happen usually in public high traffic areas where someone sees. If you start a fight and mouth off and the guy happens to be much bigger and is kicking your butt around and happens to fall. I don't believe that you can say it would be correct to pick up the biggest rock and smack his head. You should be running away. That would be instigating the fight and the other is defending themselves and happened to end up in a compromising position in which you could take advantage of but you are no longer in defence anymore you are the aggressor and the initiator. It is all in who sees it and its interpretation.Killing is always wrong. It shouldn't feel good if you kill someome. Does that mean that you should be punished for life if it happened to save you from being killed?
#189
Guest_jellis1994
Guest_jellis1994
-
- Guest
Posted 25 August 2011 - 04:29 AM
NO it is not fair that you get time in jail for something like this. Killing someone is something you cant take back so isnt that enough of a punishment? Now the big problem with "self defense" cases in court is the fact that it is legal to kill someone that is in your house in "self defense" but society decides sometimes they wanna kill someone so HEY why not invite them over?There are many cases where people are sentenced to jail for years for killing someone in self defence, or are sued hundreds of thousands of dollars. Is that justice?
#190
mechsftw
-
- Member
-
- 1 posts
Egg
Reputation: 0
Neutral
Posted 26 August 2011 - 07:42 AM
Nope, it's just not nice, lol bad logic. Try not to disobey laws, maybe?
#191
LeofromHK
-
- Active Member
-
- 46 posts
Egg
Reputation: 0
Neutral
Posted 30 August 2011 - 08:12 AM
I think that some people may make use of "self-defense" as an excuse for killing someone, so I disagree that people can kill someone in self-defense. The main reason is how to define self-defense? In most society norm, when there is a danger situation where you can't escape, prevent and cope with, then people can defense themselves. It seems logical, but is killing the offender the best choice? I don't agree it. There are still lots of ways to defend! Maybe the truth that someone is not strong or wise enough to defend rejects my point. However, if he/she is not strong enough, then how can he/she kill the offender?
#192
ƵeRø
-
- Active Member
-
- 162 posts
1stClassSoldier
Reputation: 40
Good
Posted 03 September 2011 - 03:58 PM
It is Not Justice at all,think about it if you were in a situation where you can kill or be killed what will you do?but sometimes ppl attack ppl not for intention to kill so if he got killed i dont think that would be justice so i can only speak about the kill or get killed situation....
#193
Guest_Punk'Ler
Guest_Punk'Ler
-
- Guest
Posted 13 October 2011 - 08:09 AM
I think in a legitimate life threatening situation, anyone who says they would rather be killed than defend themselves, is either lying or foolish. I think it is sad when the "Justice" system works for the corrupt. :/
#194
Guest_llambo
Guest_llambo
-
- Guest
Posted 16 October 2011 - 02:55 AM
Well if you did nothing and someone just came and attacked you and you killed them. I don't think you should be sent to jail if there was no other way. Like if the guy has a gun you have no choice but to kill him or he'll kill you, but if the guy just has something like a baseball bat then killing him isn't necessary.
#195
Guest_firemblemen
Guest_firemblemen
-
- Guest
Posted 22 October 2011 - 10:53 PM
That's the thing. If the guy had a gun does that really means he wanted to shot you or just scare you? In the law, it says under 12 years old, you can't be accused of a criminal act. Because at that age, you don't know what's wrong and what is. Pass that age, you know killing people is wrong and there is always a inbetween move to defend yourself other than kill. Remember, no matter what a person does, he's still human and still believe in some things just like you. No one deserve premature death.Well if you did nothing and someone just came and attacked you and you killed them. I don't think you should be sent to jail if there was no other way. Like if the guy has a gun you have no choice but to kill him or he'll kill you, but if the guy just has something like a baseball bat then killing him isn't necessary.
#196
Yuto
-
- Active Member
-
- 1,278 posts
Dark Duelist
Reputation: 758
Demi-God
Posted 07 January 2012 - 01:38 AM
Hell ya...I would kill and animal if it bit me!!
Edited by Lord Anubis, 12 March 2012 - 07:54 PM.
#197
Guest_thanatos7881
Guest_thanatos7881
-
- Guest
Posted 05 February 2012 - 08:04 PM
Since the thread has shifted towards innocents being imprisoned and the corruption of the system I'd like to talk about that. I think the problem of whether or not it is just can be looked at in two ways: one is it what the majority of people consider morally just, or is it legally just? Often times what people believe others "deserved" isn't legal according to the laws of the state or country. I believe our legal system should be respected, even if sometimes despite the best effort of the defense an innocent person is found guilty. Juries can be persuaded one way or another depending on many different factors outside the facts of the case. I took a class in college about jury selection is a very important process, you don't just pick the people that show up, you have to ask questions to determine who won't be biased for or against you (ex. if a woman had been sexually assaulted she would be dismissed as a juror in a sexual assault case). However, people lie and you never know 100% that a juror won't try to influence the jury once they go to make their deliberation. There are cases of one person shifting the whole jury to either guilty or not guilty based on a story they tell, or even bullying techniques. Humans aren't perfect, but I believe the justice system tries to be as fair as possible and avoid corruption - though this in inherent in human nature. Back to the issue of someone spending life in prison for self defense, no it doesn't seem just but without a specific case it's hard to know what exactly happened. In some states castle laws - laws saying you may defend yourself (kill) someone who breaks into your house - vary widely. For example in some states you may simply shoot someone who steps onto your property with no warning, while in others you must establish that they have intent to harm, that they are armed with a deadly weapon, and that you also must ask them to leave and warn them you are armed before shooting them. If you don't know the technicalities of the law then you will be found guilty in some cases, depending on the sympathy of the jury.
#198
Guest_Busty2431
Guest_Busty2431
-
- Guest
Posted 05 February 2012 - 10:11 PM
If you had to kill someone to save your own life, you've done nothing wrong, morally anyway.At that point, it's the deceased's fault for not backing down enough, and crossing the line of no return.
#199
Guest_zippy123
Guest_zippy123
-
- Guest
Posted 10 February 2012 - 01:07 AM
Well if someone came up to me and had a knife/gun and somehow i got it and stab/shot him with it because i knew he was going to use it on me. Of course i am not going to stab/shoot him 100 times but if it two or three times max i think its fair because i am fighting for my own life. If you didnt start a fight and you accidently kill someone trying to end it. As long as i know i did it to save myself and didnt do anything to start this than my conscience is clear but i probably will be shaky at first.
#200
helisonkim
-
- Member
-
- 9 posts
Egg
Reputation: 0
Neutral
Posted 12 March 2012 - 08:14 PM
Humm... Well, being the question "Is killing in selfdefense right or not?", the answer is impossible. Why? Because of the reasons. If someone came and killed another person because some third party got his family as hostage, it wouldn't "seem" as bad as someone who just goes and kills for the heck of it. I actually didn't read all of the post (So if someone did read it, could you post a summary of it?), but I read some guys talking about what would be right to do.Well, one answer is that from the start, us knowing that it's possible that someone might just come and kill us, the "right" thing would be to be prepared not to kill. How? Well, there are ways (Martial arts, stun guns, preaching about the ideology that not killing is good so the situation doesn't arrives) and the fact that we aren't doing any of them would makes us fully guilty of killing conscious and knowledgeably, even in selfdefense.Well, I did gave one answer. But it's not the only one, of course. The fact that we as humans have emotions makes us too vulnerable to changes of morality that happens every often (Like, long ago it was perfectly moral that girls got pregnant at the low 1x years, just an example). Well, that is without entering the area of religion (the thing about preaching could be considered kind of religion, but since a god wasn't bringed up and only the expansion of an ideology was mentioned, and that can be a not religion too), because that would depend on the teachings of each.
Edited by helisonkim, 12 March 2012 - 08:20 PM.
