It’s only self-defense if the threat is legitimate and not already neutralized. Even if a murderer has expressed their intent to escape and kill again, if they are already captured and constrained executing them is wrong.
Some deaths in the process of neutralizing threats may be unavoidable and just. That could include resistance or revolution. But, no, you don’t get to justly kill anyone based on their mere willingness to kill you.
then please accept my condolences for the unjust, cruel murder of the poor UnitedHealth CEO, i really hope the same won’t happen to every IOF soldier who’s very humanely playing a game of shooting children in the genitals for fun today, because shooting off limbs day was yesterday.
I certainly think it is possible to argue neither of those threats were/are neutralized. But that may say more about me than I really want to impose on anyone else.
My argument is that self-defense is more narrow than your definition. At the point in the conversation when we were exchanging definitions of that term, no specific acts had been mentioned in the thread/post.
The threat of that particular CEO has now been neutralized. It was arguably legitimate at the time he was shot, tho.
It’s only self-defense if the threat is legitimate and not already neutralized. Even if a murderer has expressed their intent to escape and kill again, if they are already captured and constrained executing them is wrong.
Some deaths in the process of neutralizing threats may be unavoidable and just. That could include resistance or revolution. But, no, you don’t get to justly kill anyone based on their mere willingness to kill you.
then please accept my condolences for the unjust, cruel murder of the poor UnitedHealth CEO, i really hope the same won’t happen to every IOF soldier who’s very humanely playing a game of shooting children in the genitals for fun today, because shooting off limbs day was yesterday.
I certainly think it is possible to argue neither of those threats were/are neutralized. But that may say more about me than I really want to impose on anyone else.
“No War But Class War” ?
then i don’t know what you’re arguing here, which threat i mentioned was neutralized?
My argument is that self-defense is more narrow than your definition. At the point in the conversation when we were exchanging definitions of that term, no specific acts had been mentioned in the thread/post.
The threat of that particular CEO has now been neutralized. It was arguably legitimate at the time he was shot, tho.