Suppose a knife-wielding thug breaks down your door and convincingly announces that he will kill you and your family. You grab a gun and kill the intruder as he lunges at you. A couple of rounds hit him in the chest and he collapses dead at your feet. Later, someone complains about your 'excessive' use of force:
The man had a knife; you fired multiple 9 mm rounds into him; you didn't use proportionate force; you should have parried his attack with a knife. That would have been a fair fight. What's more, you killed him, but he merely tried to kill you, etc.
This little complaint expresses the sort of preternatural moral obtuseness found on the Left. It leaves out the crucial fact: the aggressor is wholly in the wrong, and the defender wholly in the right. The defender is perfectly morally justified in a situation like this in using deadly force to stop a deadly attack.
2006-07-21
18:48:41
·
6 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Current Events