I live in the UK, so it's actually not legal for us to carry guns here. However I am in the opinion that if someone literally tried to attack someone on the street, I think the person should be allowed to defend them self by any means necessary. So if someone is literally trying to attack someone, and they feel in such danger, yes I do think the person should be allowed to pull out a gun and shoot the person who is trying to attack them, and if they die from it I think the person should get off with it. I think a person should be allowed to stab someone if a person is trying to attack them and they feel in such danger. I think a person should be allowed to smash a weapon over someone's head full force if the person is trying to attack them and they feel in such danger. What's your thoughts on this? I was somewhat arguing with someone about this earlier on, and they were saying how sometimes people do certain things that are so wrong to someone that they actually deserve hit. So they have done something really wrong to someone, then naturally the person gets really angry, loses it and decides to hit the person. This is what the person I was arguing with was saying, and he thought it would be really messed up if someone done something so wrong where the other person lost it, and did hit them, and then all of a sudden this person dies for it, because the other person defends them self to such an extent.
I don't think anyone could disagree with the concept of defending yourself. What else would one do, get their ass kicked (or worse) instead? However, were it me and I had a gun, I would prefer to avoid killing the person. A shot in the leg is enough to incapacitate and assuming they survive, leave them crippled for years. But if I knew someone that killed in self-defense, I wouldn't blame them at all. When someone is attacking you, you don't fully know if they mean to kill you or not, so you have to make a decision in the moment on what's the best thing to do. For example, if they came at you unarmed, the most likely scenario is probably to just kick your ass, but there is the chance they'd try to strangle you/knock you out and take you somewhere. Were it with a knife, then that's more obviously dangerous. If you're a woman and a man is attacking you, he might be trying to rape you. Point is, you don't know what the intentions of your attacker are. Or at least, I wouldn't blame her if that thought had crossed her mind in that scenario. There's always going to be "yeah buts" or "what ifs" in this question, but in a scenario where a stranger is attacking you, it's them or you and their life is forfeit as yours comes first. I would prefer to avoid taking it as I don't know if I could deal with the guilt of having killed someone, even if I were justified in doing it, but I wouldn't blame someone at all if they took it, though I think they should try to avoid it if they can. Anyways, that's my opinion, such is the nature of the subject.
Of course I believe in self defense. However, I think there should be wisdom used in self defense. Not every attack necessitates killing in response. If you can get out of the situation without shooting someone, I think that's always a better choice. But there are definitely times when it is necessary to use lethal force. Or at the very least, to use everything in your arsenal, which might end up resulting in lethal force. I mean, I have no desire to kill anyone, but if someone was actively trying to rape me or something and I had a gun, I'm absolutely going to shoot them, and if they live, that's fine, and if they die, that's also fine. If you're a skilled enough fighter or shooter to take someone down without killing them, then I don't think you should go overboard. I think some people, particularly some Americans, really make light of shooting someone. Like they act like if anyone sets foot on their property, it's shoot first, ask questions later. That's crazy to me, and extremely unnecessary. I think people need to have a healthy respect for human life and if they have an alternative that would work, killing should be a last resort. But of course, you don't always have an alternative, so in those cases, I think it's fine to do what you have to do. The Bible talks about this a little bit, in the Old Testament laws. Exodus 22:2-3 “If a thief is caught in the act of breaking into a house and is struck and killed in the process, the person who killed the thief is not guilty of murder. But if it happens in daylight, the one who killed the thief is guilty of murder.” I think the point of this verse seems to be that killing in self defense is acceptable when your life is potentially in danger, but that if it's not necessary to kill, then it is still wrong. The theif who breaks in in the night might be there to harm you, not to just steal from you, and you are more vulnerable and might not have as many options as you have during the day to ensure that you're safe.
