April 15, 2009

• Deadly Force

  When is the use of deadly force justified? is the question currently asked at Socrates Cafe.

  Some thought brings to mind several circumstances when a moral person might , however reluctantly, take the life of another human:
  a. When it's his life or mine - most of us feel self-protection justifies killing another.
  b. To protect my loved ones - another case where tradition justifies such killing.
  c. It's my patriotic duty - a member of the armed forces must obey a lawful order to use deadly force.
  d. To protect society - A policeman or deputized citizen is authorized to use such force under certain circumstances.
  e. The "Rabid Dog" concept - A sort of sub-set of (a.) above. The person killed is so dangerous they must be killed.
  f. The idea of shooting to protect property after warning the trespasser - This, in the American legal system, only applies if the home-owner feels they are in imminent danger.
  g. Another area of this question is the definition of "life". Can a person who is not alive be killed?
  h. Yet another is the expansion of "deadly force" to include action against non-humans. Should humans be allowed to kill other species? Under what conditions other than those mentioned above?

  Should the use of deadly force be further limited - if so which of those conditions mentioned above would you limit?

  • 11:18 am
  • 2 Comments