71
submitted 10 months ago by ReallyKinda@kbin.social to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

Self defense? Only on the battlefield? Only to achieve a ‘noble’ end?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 months ago

There are situations where people have created a situation where you don't have total knowledge of the future, but acting in defense seems justified.

I think we can quibble over the specifics about what's reasonable, but you don't have to wait until you're bleeding out to defend yourself.

[-] Tamo@programming.dev 2 points 10 months ago

For me personally, the answer to the original question would be "only once no other non-violent means are available".

Does this resonate, or would you consider it different to your perspective? I see them as similar.

[-] PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 months ago

Personally, I'd prefer non-violent over violent means for myself. If other people are involved it would depend - I won't risk someone else's life if I can avoid it. I tell my niece that she's allowed to stab dudes that don't respond to "no".

this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2023
71 points (98.6% liked)

Asklemmy

43402 readers
2287 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS