More or less yes, especially if instructed not to.
Now that is assuming they are using something other then a gun(or ranged device)...
If a gun in is hand(or within reach)that would be instant forfeiture of their life.
OK so for you, it's when they come towards you?
More or less yes, especially if instructed not to.
Now that is assuming they are using something other then a gun(or ranged device)...
If a gun in is hand(or within reach)that would be instant forfeiture of their life.
Why at that point?
It's the potential of all life, if you don't know what that person offers, how they contribute then they have unknown potential.
Here's my premise: Once you break into my house, at night, then all moral and legal rights given to you have been forfieted. You aren't there to make friends or ask for a cup of sugar. Doubly so if you are wielding a weapon. If I present a weapon and you aren't running to the door you will be shot, as many times as necessary to bring you down.
Thankfully it's one legal right my otherwise liberal state supports.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_doctrine#Illinois
If I come home from lunch and you are breaking in during the day that's a different story. But at night when my family is sleeping all bets are off.
Why just night? You should have no moral or legal obligation to behave any differently during the day than at night.
Two reasons. One, the nature of the criminal breaking in during the day is much different than night. And two, even though IL has castle laws, I wouldn't want to test my luck with a daytime B&E vs. nighttime one.
It has been brought screaming to my attention that I am in the extreme minority when it comes to my views on killing in self defence, which is making me question that perhaps I'm wrong to hold the view that I do. I'm more than happy to be wrong, but I won't accept that I am wrong without a reasoned argument to the contrary, or a superior argument to the one I make. So, here is my argument, the belief I hold with regards to killing a person in self defence.
Premise: Human life is the most valuable thing on the planet, it deserves respect, as human life has created some of the greatest and most terrible things the world has ever known, before that life is over we are unable to determine what potential each life has, whether they are a potential Ghandi or a potential Hitler is unknown, until their life has been lived, it is this potential that is unique to human beings, this potential is what gives a strangers life value, and that value requires respect.
Premise 2: As human life has value and requires respect taking a human beings life should only be done in cases where something of greater value would be lost or taken if no action is taken. I.e. If a person of known value will die, rather than unknown value, if multiple people will die rather than a single person, or if a person who has more potential or a more valuable contribution to the world will die if a person of lesser potential or value does not die. I.e. an 80 year old man has to die to save a 5 year old. Or Hitler has to die to save Ghandi.
Conclusion: In a home invasion scenario the invader should not be killed until it is absolutely clear that he/ she poses a very real an definite undeniable threat to the life or lives of others.
Please feel free to pick it apart, explaining what is wrong with it, how you feel contrary to it, and how I should feel.
Please do not just hurl insults and abuse, it benefits no one.
I am including in this thread a poll, that gives you the chance to say where you draw the line, where you think that killing an assailant in a hypothetical situation is acceptable. The situation is as follows.
A Man has broken into your home, while you are home, and while your family sleeps. You are woken by the noise, you are armed with a loaded handgun. The poll options are different points in this hypothetical at which you can choose to take the mans life, as the situation develops, please choose a poll option, then explain why you feel that way in the thread.
Please note, I won't reply to everyone, I imagine a lot of people will post.
To hurt you?
A Man has broken into your home, while you are home, and while your family sleeps. You are woken by the noise, you are armed with a loaded handgun. The poll options are different points in this hypothetical at which you can choose to take the mans life, as the situation develops, please choose a poll option, then explain why you feel that way in the thread.
And one other comment is that should this actually come to be a reality for most of us, I highly doubt that any bit of logic is going to be applied to the situation. You'll have so much adrenaline rushing through you that you'll be operating on instinct and emotion. Logic takes a back door.