A quote in another thread got me thinking. It was:
While I am a huge proponent of every scenario being different and a judgement call, engage brain, etc., this got me wondering about the "general" reason you would consider using lethal force. A lot of folks say they are unwilling to use it to protect property. Some are. But what about that situation when someone is pointing a gun at YOU but says they only want property?
And I think that sums up my view on it "AS A GENERAL RULE". If someone is pointing a gun at me and threatening me with anything, robbery, arse whoopin, foot massage (durn fetish muggers...), etc., they have threatened me with lethal force and have crossed the line of where I feel comfortable with retaliating. I'm not saying I would or even should engage in a situation like this. But I am saying, it would be past my moral "NO GO" or "think veeeery carefully" point. In my mind, I'd have the green light.
So, where do you folks stand at this point?
I am not trying to get into the details here but if you feel the need to go into that to explain your position, it's not like I can stop you!
Some guy I couldn't find said:
a cell phone and some credit cards are not worth ending someone’s life over. You don’t shoot someone to punish them for their bad deeds, you shoot them because if you don’t you will likely die. I think it is a great mistake to kill someone over material items.
While I am a huge proponent of every scenario being different and a judgement call, engage brain, etc., this got me wondering about the "general" reason you would consider using lethal force. A lot of folks say they are unwilling to use it to protect property. Some are. But what about that situation when someone is pointing a gun at YOU but says they only want property?
JohnKsa said:
Armed robbery is grounds for use of deadly force, NOT to allow you to shoot someone to retain property but because it is absolutely abhorrent to any sort of civilization to allow a criminal to bargain with you for your OWN LIFE.
You're not shooting someone over your wallet and credit cards, you're defending your LIFE against a person who says that AT BEST it's only worth what you have in your pockets.
And I think that sums up my view on it "AS A GENERAL RULE". If someone is pointing a gun at me and threatening me with anything, robbery, arse whoopin, foot massage (durn fetish muggers...), etc., they have threatened me with lethal force and have crossed the line of where I feel comfortable with retaliating. I'm not saying I would or even should engage in a situation like this. But I am saying, it would be past my moral "NO GO" or "think veeeery carefully" point. In my mind, I'd have the green light.
So, where do you folks stand at this point?
I am not trying to get into the details here but if you feel the need to go into that to explain your position, it's not like I can stop you!