(April 15, 2015 at 10:09 am)Napoléon Wrote: ...
I'd be very surprised if anyone would say no, and surprised further still if those who did would actually sit by and watch their loved ones be harmed in the scenario in the OP.
...
A devout Quaker or other pacifist would tell you that they would not (or, at least, should not) kill someone in such a scenario.
As for what people would actually do, the only way to be sure about that would be to put them in the situation in question. People are often bad about predicting their conduct in stressful situations.
For the OP, I think I would be willing to kill someone to prevent the person from seriously harming someone else. And I think I would be willing to use whatever means were at my disposal; a gun, knife, baseball bat, etc.
I am an American, and I have owned a gun, though I do not presently keep one. Although I did not officially give it to a brother, I have effectively done so, as it is at his house, in his possession. I do not feel the need to have a gun, and so I do not have one. I learned to use a gun, and fired several guns, before I learned how to drive. Frankly, if I felt the need to have a gun where I presently live, I would move rather than get a gun. But I know how to use one, and know how to select one that would be suitable for killing people; different ones for different situations.
"A wise man ... proportions his belief to the evidence."
— David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section X, Part I.
