Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: cuban leaf

Quote:Killing is something to be avoided at all costs.

Oh really? At all costs? So a woman should allow herself and her children to be raped rather than shoot the s.o.b.? Or a person should allow an arsonist to burn down that person’s home rather than stopping the crime? Or any of dozens of other acts of great evil should be tolerated if stopping the evil meant killing the perpetrator?

AT ALL COSTS is much too strong a qualifier.

I was taught that a person who is armed is presumed to have an advantage and therefore is under legal obligation not to provoke violence;but that still wouldn’t require one to allow himself to be beaten to death.


100 posted on 03/26/2012 8:10:18 AM PDT by hoosierham (Freedom isn't free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies ]


To: hoosierham

I think what was meant was that a shoot to kill should be the final defense. To be blunt, though, I suspect Zim was not shooting to kill. Rather, he was shooting to get the beater off him. It just happened to be a fatal shot. Just a conjecture.


108 posted on 03/26/2012 8:48:11 AM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson