When is killing OK?

[Grinchilla]

Is killing only OK when the mob says it is?
Is killing never OK?
Is killing only OK when the person being killed murdered someone who is not a murderer?

Is killing only OK when the killed won't be mourned?
- because killing isn't harmful to the one who's killed, only the people that love them.
This is why killing animals is OK... they don't mourn the deaths of their fellow species.
This is why abortion is OK... no one wants the baby. No one mourns it's death.

When is killing OK?

[Sage]

Is killing only OK when the mob says it is?

Mobs can be right, mobs can be wrong.

Is killing never OK? With this I disagree.

Is killing only OK when the person being killed murdered someone who is not a murderer?

That's a really specific scenario.

Is killing only OK when the killed won't be mourned?

No, but this makes it a lot easier to get away with it.

- because killing isn't harmful to the one who's killed, only the people that love them.

I would consider moving from a state of being alive to a state of being dead as a rock is a bit harmful.

This is why killing animals is OK... they don't mourn the deaths of their fellow species.

Many animals do mourn. It's called sentience.

This is why abortion is OK... no one wants the baby. No one mourns it's death.

That's different- Society can continue to function when someone who has not yet contributed to it disappears.

When is killing OK?

When there is no other way to remove someone harmful to society, and I would greatly prefer it if the government were not the executioner.

[Grinchilla]

Everrrry single biiiiitch should be killed than?

:P

Nice logic.

[Sage]

Everrrry single biiiiitch should be killed than?

:P

Nice logic.

That makes no sense. Explain yourself.

[Grinchilla]

I suck at communication. :p
" Everrrry single biiiiitch should be killed than?" was a reply to this "When there is no other way to remove someone harmful to society, and I would greatly prefer it if the government were not the executioner." Because such people are generally not enjoyable to be around... it was a joke. yah. heh.



" Nice logic. " is a legit complement; I wasn't being sarcastic. You used logic instead of just stating society's morals with no logic to back them up.

Sorry

[Sage]

I suck at communication. :p
" Everrrry single biiiiitch should be killed than?" was a reply to this "When there is no other way to remove someone harmful to society, and I would greatly prefer it if the government were not the executioner." Because such people are generally not enjoyable to be around... it was a joke. yah. heh.



" Nice logic. " is a legit complement; I wasn't being sarcastic. You used logic instead of just stating society's morals with no logic to back them up.

Sorry

Oh, I see. Fair enough. :P

[ShatteredWings]

Killing is murder if it's not in self defense, or for food

[Rainstorm]

Unless for self defense, never. And I don't even condone self defense. Just injure them so they can't fight back

[XxHaViiK]

Self defense only. That's it.

[Sapphire]

Killing another is never right - no matter what they have done with their lives.

Abortion is different since, IMO, a life doesn't begin until after 24 weeks into pregnancy.

[Sage]

;708018']Killing is murder if it's not in self defense, or for food

I kill you for meat.

Killing another is never right - no matter what they have done with their lives.

I concur, we'd all be better off without some people.

[Wonder.]

;708018']Killing is murder if it's not in self defense, or for food

Unless it's spam.


I don't think killing is ever okay. I do agree without some people the world would be better but they have the right to live even if it is in jail.

[Perseus]

Unless for self defense, never. And I don't even condone self defense. Just injure them so they can't fight back

Self defense doesn't mean kill them...

I think killing is only "ok" when it happens when someone is in self defense, and the person attacking happens to die. And war, and the whole war thing is a way different topic. And I'm talking about human killing here.

[Sage]

Self defense doesn't mean kill them...

I think killing is only "ok" when it happens when someone is in self defense, and the person attacking happens to die.

That's exactly what people mean by killing for self-defense, Jake. ._.

[theOperaGhost]

For self defense and survival. If the situation is "kill or be killed" I will choose kill. This can go for both self defense and survival.

Self defense: You are facing an armed robber or someone like that. Not every robbery is "kill or be killed" but there is that chance. I would choose to kill, if I had the proper means to do so. If I am completely unarmed and have no chance of turning the gun on the gunman himself, I obviously can't kill.

Survival: You are stranded with no food. You've got to kill some animal (or if extremely desperate, some human) to survive. It is literally "kill or be killed."

[Perseus]

That's exactly what people mean by killing for self-defense, Jake. ._.

I know... I put that other part in so I don't look like a jackass who only takes parts of posts and responds to them.. Oh well..

[Aves]

I would say only in self defense and to save someone else.

[Rutherford The Brave]

No, all life is important. Killing for food, is not an issue but killing any other way is bad.

[AllThatIsLeft]

I believe murder, as premeditated killing is never okay.

But I don't consider the law of survival, murder. it is all very conditional tho... Self-defense doesn't have to mean "Kill the other person" ... Incapacitate them... Only if ever put in the extreme situation and there is no way out that alive, should anyone kill another person...

I'm even against the death penalty, to me that's the easy way out,
and one life =/= another's...

The punishment for taking another's life should be a life time of misery, and make sure they're guilt eats away at their conscience for the rest of their lives.

Very sadistic, but I want murderers to be punished, not brought out a gateway, because I believe death is escaping the consequences of your actions.


Also, animal killing isn't killing really. The predator always has a place aabove the prey in cycle of life.
Now mere slaughtering, for the joy of killing totally different, and that person needs to be put in a mental hospital ASAP.

[obiwan94]

yeah, only time that killing a person is ok is if your own life is threatened. Vengeance is such a crude emotion and there is always the chance of an innocent person being executed.

[IowaBoy]

NEVER kill unless you are going to be killed.

[INFERNO]

Is killing only OK when the mob says it is?

Mobs are not necessarily correct simply because a bunch of people within the mob support something. Instead of having 1 person being wrong you now have 50 people being wrong. 50 wrongs don't make a right.


Is killing only OK when the person being killed murdered someone who is not a murderer?

This is a pretty specific example but I'd say if it was killing not due to self-defense or means of survival, then no.


Is killing only OK when the killed won't be mourned?

No because this is simply from the view of the killer. Every living person in the world is known by at least one person and that one person may mourn. It's more of a judgement call because you probably don't know the person that well to know every detail of their life.


- because killing isn't harmful to the one who's killed, only the people that love them.

Killing isn't harmful to the victim? Well that's probably the biggest killing myth there is.


This is why killing animals is OK... they don't mourn the deaths of their fellow species.

Animals do mourn, it's very well-known although their procedures may be different than ours. Some animals may be more primitive but they are going to mourn.


This is why abortion is OK... no one wants the baby. No one mourns it's death.

There's a difference between not wanting it and not mourning it. If a mother cannot support the child and she knows that, she may still mourn it.


When is killing OK?

In self-defense, to put a dying animal out of its misery (i.e. hit it by a car accidentally), if it's a matter of survival without any other option other than imminent death.

Killing someone because of a previous action I think is completely amoral. I'll support killing of animals however, it depends on how the animal was killed and why it was killed. If you kill the animal for food but do it in the most sadistic way possible, then that's wrong to me. If you kill the animal because you felt like it and aren't going to do anything with it other than leave it lying there, then hopefully someone or another animal takes it.

[Whisper]

In self defense
In defense of those you love

[Triceratops]

Intentional killing is never okay.
Killing for punishment is also just as morally wrong since none of us are worthy enough to hold the right of taking someone's life away.
BUT I will make an exception for self defense or protecting loved ones.

I wouldn't necessarily consider the killing of an animal for food as murder because our bodies are naturally designed to eat meat, although killing an animal out of delibrate cruelty or for the sake of it is just as disgusting and unacceptable as the murder of a human being would be.

[drumir93]

Why is everybody only saying self defense?
I would imagine it being acceptable in general defense.
I don't know about you, but if I saw Osama Bin Laden heading towards my friend with a large knife, and I just Oh-so-conveniently had a sniper rifle on me, that sob is going down.
That being said, killing should be avoided at all costs, injure someone if you need, but I wouldn't take the issue of robbing someone of the most valuable thing in the world lightly. Even if it is just.

[The Joker]

Unless for self defense, never. And I don't even condone self defense. Just injure them so they can't fight back

Injuring them is fighting back. :?

[trouble]

killing is never ok..for the abortion question: I ask you this, what if you were the baby being killed, no one would mourn you. If u are christian<god says that we all desreve the right to live, why musta certain person die for the dislike of another person, no one is better than the other. we all deserve to live!!

[INFERNO]

Why is everybody only saying self defense?
I would imagine it being acceptable in general defense.
I don't know about you, but if I saw Osama Bin Laden heading towards my friend with a large knife, and I just Oh-so-conveniently had a sniper rifle on me, that sob is going down.
That being said, killing should be avoided at all costs, injure someone if you need, but I wouldn't take the issue of robbing someone of the most valuable thing in the world lightly. Even if it is just.

If I saw one of my friends in possible physical danger, such as in the process of being attacked by a knife, then depending on the conditions, I'd try to help them or at least just scare the attacker off. Then again, if the person had a gun and I had, well, nothing then I may be as good as dead also, and so instead of getting involved because I may get shot and killed, I'd at least try to take a picture of the incident and then call 911.

[Sapphire]

I concur, we'd all be better off without some people.
No, you misread my post.
I said that killing another person is never ok - regardless of what they have done with their lives (good or bad).

[Sage]

No, you misread my post.
I said that killing another person is never ok - regardless of what they have done with their lives (good or bad).

And I said we'd be better off without some people. Your point?

[Sapphire]

And I said we'd be better off without some people. Your point?
You said that you concur with what I had said, went on to say that we'd be better off without some people and then in the thread on guns you were saying in no uncertain terms that some people should have the right to kill.
So when I considered the earnestness with which you have been debating this point in the guns thread, I took it as you having misread my post here.

[deadpie]

Is killing never OK?

You could just say, is killing bad instead of using some nailbomb sentence structure that you have to analyze understand what the OP is even talking about.
Killing really doesn't prove anything. Just like how the death penalty in texas hasn't made the crimes rapidly go lower for murder.

Is killing only OK when the person being killed murdered someone who is not a murderer?

No. I don't think it should be the laws opinion on who gets to die or who doesn't.

"A raped woman got executed, and was used for books and movies and shit" - Aileen Wuornos


This is why killing animals is OK... - Oh, so sacrificing animals is awwwriight!!!!!

This is why abortion is OK... no one wants the baby. No one mourns it's death. - Some people want the baby but can't have it for some type of problem with the baby or the female herself. Some people want children so bad, and when they loose it, you wouldn't even know the pain people go threw over that.

[todd sanfilippo]

Olmy In Self defince

[nick]

I find most of the answers here too simplistic. Anyone who's read my posts in threads about abortion and capital punishment will know that I believe that both the unborn and the born deserve to live and that, except in the most extreme circumstances, no other person has the right to take that life away from them.

For me, capital punishment is never right, I can not see any possible circumstance under which it is right, whatever that person has done. Killing is wrong, to be avoided at all costs. This is avoidable killing, you have them under lock and key, no possible risk to society. Demonstrate that killing is wrong by not killing.

But only Jake has raised the issue of war. Now not all wars are equal, given recent and current international affairs, but take WWII as an example, from my perspective that was a just war, a war that had to be fought, because the evil of Hitler's regime had to be opposed. And it could not be opposed without killing. I cant imagine pulling the trigger to shoot another person, I don't know if I could do it. But I dont think I could have been a concientious objector in WWII.

On abortion I believe in a womans right to choose. That is the right to choose to be on the pill, to make the guy wear a condom, to keep her fucking legs together. Not the right to choose to kill an innocent unborn baby. So if that right has been denied her through rape I would allow that exception, or if her own life and/or the survival of the baby are seriously in doubt through physical inability to bear the child, but thats about it.