When is murder justified by self-defense?

[vivster]

aLkaLiNE said:

vivster said:

It was a double bait and switch. Because that's actually my real opinion.

As someone who suffered enough at the hands of idiots and brutes I do believe that people out to destroy other lives have no right to breath the same air as me. If I was the ones making laws we would not have lifetime prisoners or death rows. Instant bullet to the head is so much cheaper than spending my hard earned money to support disfunct subjects who actively work against society. Too bad our society jerks off to the thought that murderers and voilent criminals deserve a better life than their victims.

This goes under the premise that people can't change though... Your view is pessimistic which, I understand because I disdain society as a whole but that doesn't mean we can't change. We are all to varying degrees products of society. I think that there are other social structures we should examine before deciding that a violent individual needs to die. Or, for instance, what if someone made a regrettably violent act out of love? Such as a love triangle? That doesn't necessarily define who they are entirely as a person. It is but one aspect. Or what about someone that actively hates humanity but loves this planet and it's creatures? I'm not going to pretend to know your story Vivster, as we all come from different walks of life. But meeting violence with violence will only perpetuate more violence. If that weren't so then the world wouldn't forever be at war with itself. And that's why and where things need to change.

The problem is that we already have laws destroying their lives. What difference does it make incarcerating someone over decades? What good is their change of heart when they leave prison and are no longer of any use to society let alone put in any work to atone for their irreparable crimes? The good feeling of of somehow being better than murderers by not killing them is not enough of a win for humanity compared to overfilled prisons and ridiculous costs for "humane" executions.

Violence does not equal violence. When one is to destroy society and the other is to save society from harmful subjects. That's why you are allowed to torch a family of cockroaches and not a family of innocent humans.

Teeqoz said:

vivster said:

It was a double bait and switch. Because that's actually my real opinion.

As someone who suffered enough at the hands of idiots and brutes I do believe that people out to destroy other lives have no right to breath the same air as me. If I was the ones making laws we would not have lifetime prisoners or death rows. Instant bullet to the head is so much cheaper than spending my hard earned money to support disfunct subjects who actively work against society. Too bad our society jerks off to the thought that murderers and voilent criminals deserve a better life than their victims.

In that case... what the fuck.  KK m8 death penalty for stealing a 50 cent chocolate bar seems pretty fair... Or do you think that's too extreme? Hard to tell what *is* too extreme for you when your opinions are that extreme.

We already have laws in place to decide what is extreme and what not. It's called "life long" sentence. I see no reason to keep those people alive when they're proven to be extremely harmful to other people.

 

I realize that my "extreme" opinion requires a flawless judicial system as to not kill off innocent bystanders. Well, no system that depends on human decisions is perfect.