Is using lethal force I.E. a gun, justified in protecting the life of another person?
141949
Personally I have guns and was raised listening to my father stress how important gun safety is because he was a sharp shooter in WW2. I can also say if I was somewhere and there was a robber, rapist, sicko, or any kind of person with intent to do physical harm or attempt to kill an innocent person ( or animal ) I would not hesitate to protect them if I had a weapon on me but I would try to wound them . Now on the other hand if they were to come at me or my family with intent to BTK etc. I would not hesitate to drop em. There was a case where a man was beating a woman in a Walmart parking lot and a man told him to stop.The man kept beating this woman until the guy with a permit took his gun out and shot the guy. He killed the man but was not charged because he saved the womans life.
645638
Yes.\n\nIt was a criminal act towards other humans who were neither soldiers nor combattants. They were just folks living in a village.\n\nWar does not give you the right to take an innocent's life.
1167539
Nothing is right when it is used to kill.It is not right to kill in order to spread democracy.It is not right to kill because of a political view.It is not right to kill for a belief.\n\nUnfortunately, many don't care what is right and what is wrong.
860134
I beleive that once you have commited a heinous crime against another human being, not petty thfts, but say theft with an agrivated assault thrown in, that you automatically lose all rights as being treated like a human being. You shoot a criminal in your house after he or she has just brutalized your family, and now he can sue you for assault ? Screw that, I will shoot him dead and let him try to sue me for that ?\n\nBefore someone tries to say that me killing a criminal in my own house is just as wrong, I will tell you that defending your family and property to an uninvited guest is NOT criminal, and would most likely be considered justifiable homicide.
975332
IF human nature was all good, you would be right.  Sometimes one has to fight to stop bad/evil.\n\nIf you had a weapon in reach & an individual was spraying your friends with machine gun fire, would you use the weapon on him?
535158
From a law enforcement perspective use of force is using any means necessary to bring a volatile situation to a more manageable and/or resolved state.  This means using both lethal and non-lethal types of force.  Lethal tending to be an excessive amount of force, as well as severe man handling during arrest that seems unnecessary.  Non-lethal uses of force, including Pepper Spray, Bean Bag guns, Tazers, etc can sometimes be considered excessive, however since they are non-lethal they can be seen as reasonable use of force.  These are uses of force in regards to law enforcement.\n\nFrom any other perspective, use of force, is using force to get what you want, to move something, open something, etc.
526073
There are none.  The idea of pre-emptive strike is totally illogical.  If I thought that a police officer was going to engage in unjust brutality against me, should I be allowed to preemptively shoot him to prevent this?\n\nSimilarly, war based on nothing more that a hunch is foolish.
1184596
I don't need justification to protect me and mine.  If some a-hole is the key to the safety of my loved ones, not all the police in the world are enough to protect him from me.  You may disagree, but I have no problem killing you over it.  NEVER forget that.
552175
I look at things this way, if I KNOW in my heart that this man or woman will kill me if I don't do something...yes, and without any hesitation.\n\nWhile I am currently single, that same ideal applies to when I do have a wife and children.\n\nLife is God given, as is the right to defend that life. This is the sole reason I've trained in combat arts for so long, not for ego or competition, but for that 'what if' situation....and it's saved my hide before.\n\nTo be honest, I'd most likely maim before killing...even in that situation. I know how to use a knife or my hands more than well enough to disable and/or hospitalize before killing. Though, if I had no other alternatives, then I would kill in self-defense w/ no doubts or second thoughts. \n\nAfter that, then you have to deal w/ judicial judgement in criminal and civil courts...money paid out to lawyers and all that junk...\n\nBut, you're still breathing and that's what's really important.\n\nAlso, as a side note : I would REALLY study the bylaws of your particular state and/or nation before killing.\n\nAs the English fella said above, there are statutes of limitations predetermining what is considered self-defense, and what is simply considered murder.\n\nIf he has no weapons (for example) : I WOULD NOT put a double tap into him from 3+ yards...nor would I intentionally stab him in a lethal spot that has a huge propensity of death by bleed-out or heart/brain damage by arterial axphixiation.\n\nSee, here's the rub...so many folks know what their instincts tell them to do..as is natural. BUT, they don't know that those acts can sometimes work out the wrong way for them.\n\nThere are laws people, study and understand them....don't be like most Americans and ignorant of your world beyond the TV or local pub.\n\nSorry for the public service announcement, if you will, but truth is truth.
701660
the only way I would kill someone is if someone was trying to hurt a family member or any child. It would be fast I assure you. but hopefully I will not ever have to think of an answer like this again.
199583
technically it's only a crime if they threaten death. at least in california. threat of death is called terrorist threat. threats of other violence is cause for a restraining order but not grounds for an arrest.
485318
Ahem... No.\n\nIt is called assult with a deadly weapon - and drunk or not, it is illegal and not OK.
1068330
It varies by the state for the specific language, but they are all the same in idea.\n\njustifiable homicide is the taking of another's life when that individual is about to commit a felony or is in the act of commiting a felony.  A defender must take reasonable precaution not to take another's life.  For instance, a defender has a gun, an attacker a knife and there is 100 feet between them (run first).  A homicide is not justifiable when a felony has been committed at an earlier time and no immediate danger exists (someone breaks an entering, then leaves the property, the homeowner chases him down the street and shoots him).  The requirements for defense against the crimes of manslaughter/murder and the civil tort of wrongful death are different because of the hurdle of reasonable doubt for the criminal case.\n\nKeep in mind that police have special protection and a crime against a police officer may be a felony, while the same action against an ordinary citizen may not be (punching, menacing).\n\nAny time that a police officer slays another human being, there is an investigation to determine if the cop acted within the law.\n\nGrand theft auto, and eluding arrest are felonies, which is why police can be seen drawing their weapons while apprehending suspects in the act of these crimes.\n\nThe freedom of information act entitles you to obtain a copy of your specific jurisdiction's rules.
1025465
It's illegal to kill anyone in the UK.\nBut if you killed someone accidentally during a struggle while trying to protect life I doubt if you would go to prison. (The term is to use reasonable force)\n\nIf a burglar breaks into your home the last thing you should worry about is YOUR legal rights.\nYou should take him upstairs to the bedroom and throw him out the window, which would probably kill him.\nPhone the police and say he died trying to flee.\n\nThe farmer that shot the two burglars a few years ago made the mistake of not killing both burglars.
146761
This should be a personal choice addressed by every adult with a trusted loved one who will follow the wishes of the person with terminal disease.  I am not saying the loved one should kill the person, just support the decision of the person to continue life no matter what or to be allowed to die with no extra measures or....in Oregon...with assistance.  You decide what is right for you and give that right to decide to those you love and respect even if you don't agree.  For any other than yourself....it is NOT your choice.  We have laws to allow our animals....and criminals to have as humane a death as possible, but we somehow believe it is wrong to allow the same for ourselves and our loved ones.  There is something wrong with this .....
105462
You are not guilty as long as you can demonstrate that you have used the minimum necessary force to stop a criminal from causing serious bodily harm or death to another.  The affirmative defense is called "defense of others" and it can, under the conditions I have presented here, be a complete or partial defense to assault, battery, attempted murder, manslaughter, murder and other related such crimes.
483234
Yes, being electrocuted sounds like good punishment.  Besides law enforcement should be given every tool availible to protect themselves and other citizens.  Would you prefer that they just shoot instead?