Call me crazy, but I don't think "we" have a right to kill anyone.

[Taverner]

Flame away....

[Stinky The Clown]

1. I gave you a rec

Watch it go away in a cloud of Outrage Dust.

You and I seem to be alone on this one, huh?

[Mnemosyne]

23. I got it up to one. n/t

[Blue_In_AK]

2. K&R

[Tansy_Gold]

3. No flames from me, just another K&R n/t

[bigtree]

4. even in defense of others?

History says otherwise.

[Taverner]

7. Did said persons ask for their defense?

And who were said persons?

[pintobean]

11. Maybe there wouldn't be so many questions

if there was some context in the OP.

[Taverner]

12. OK - Context: The USA

[pintobean]

14. You're right. We shouldn't kill the USA.

[Posteritatis]

18. People upset that Uganda wants help dealing with Joseph Kony. (nt)

[Mimosa]

25. Another villain will pop up in Africa.

It always happens...doesn't it?

[Posteritatis]

26. Deciding the whole continent's a lost cause probably contributes to that

And Kony's pretty hard to top as far as the Vile Motherfucker Sweepstakes go. There aren't many people on the planet, never mind the continent, who can hold a candle to him. If he dies or is captured either result is a huge net plus for civilization.

[bigtree]

13. hey, it's your premise

rather incomplete, at that.

[Kennah]

5. Even in self defense?

[LeftyMom]

6. Comment implying that your opposition is based in insufficient loyalty to Obama

insinuation that you're secretly somewhere to the right of the brothers Koch

[teddy51]

8. You have my vote... n/t

[ProgressiveProfessor]

9. Self defense certainly is a right

Since you were quite nebulous about "we" and "right to kill", it is pretty clear you have not thought this out to any level of depth.

[Taverner]

10. Fine. Kill away.

Because I didn't cross my ts and dot my is I deserve this whoppin'

[Stuart G]

15. Don't take it personal...please..

Here, if you do not cross your ts, or dot your I, then,also, and especially.... if you show some logical inconsistency..
They whoppin you..
They have done it to me, and many others.
You and I are not alone...it is ok...

They are very strict logical types here. I am not but many are. but...
When I got mine..I took it personal for about...10 minutes..but...don't worry..
you will get another chance to bring em on as they say..
.........................and that is OK....
..........................they don't take away your membership for a whoppin...
...........................you can post to your delight....and good night..and ...........good luck.....

[ProgressiveProfessor]

16. At least provide some boundaries and context

[saras]

17. Killing in self-defense is often rejected by religious leaders.

Depending on where you get your notion of "right" from...

Of course, others say we have the right to do anything, along with the obligation to suffer whatever consequences we can't avoid.

And OBVIOUSLY "we" don't have a right to kill. I can't go kill people in any country we're at war against, I have to do it in the name of, and in the service of, our military. I can't go into a bad neighborhood and just shoot everyone who tries to jump me - after the second one, if not before, the police would expect me to leave the area instead of carrying on.

And just to make things more complicated, we may NOT always have a "right" to do what we need to do to survive. Life is like that.

[Taverner]

21. Push and run is my philosophy nt

[polly7]

19. Far from crazy. Rec'd. nt.

[malthaussen]

20. Always Gets Tricky When You Talk About Rights

Since rights are a human invention, and therefore require definition. (This is assuming one does not base one's concept of rights on revelation, in which case there is little point to discussion)

Individual acts are committed by individuals, and those individuals are responsible for them. However, society has developed a concept of collective action, and hence collective responsibility, for acts that are held to benefit the collective. It is under this formula that a soldier is justified in killing another soldier. That's a formulation you either believe, or ya don't.

As Prof de la Paz puts it (I find myself so often referring to The Moon is a Harsh Mistress), "when is it moral for a group to do what it is not moral for an individual of the group to do?" He suggests this is a key question: I agree with him (even if he is a character in a novel).

This is of course conflating "morality" and "rights," which may not be agreeable to some people, who believe rights are a matter of law and not morality. In that case, if we were to substitute in "legal" for "moral," no problem arises: the answer is "when the law says so."

At any rate, I see no reason to call you crazy. I happen to disagree, but that is hardly a touchstone of my sanity or yours.

-- Mal

[Taverner]

22. +10000

[snot]

24. I'm with you.

Even under the common law of self-defense, one is permitted no more than to use that degree of force which is necessary in order to prevent present, imminent harm.

Killing someone because you suspect they might be conspiring to kill you is murder.

And I oppose the death penalty even for those proven through due process of law already to have committed the most heinous crimes.

[alittlelark]

27. Me neither.

KnR