See, there's a difference between Self Defence and Overkill. (Litterally) If someone has a gun pointed to your kids head or a knife to their throat, you don't wave your gun at them. If someone is charging at you with a knife you don't shoot them in the head, you'd shoot them in the leg or something. You don't TRY to kill, but you have EVERY RIGHT to defend yourself however necessary from someone attacking you.
in america it's fine if you kill them though, but if they find like 30 stab wounds you will be taken to jail
in america it's fine if you kill them though, but if they find like 30 stab wounds you will be taken to jail
See...how is 30 stab wounds necessary? I could see one or two in defending yourself before they gave up or tried to get away...but 30? You'd most likely be stabbing them even after they were dead.
if someone breaks into your house and tries to murder your children.
should you be allowed to kill them to save the children?
(btw the law sais no but what do u think)
I don't know where you live, but here in America you can defend someone else, or yourself, with lethal force so long as you can justify a legitimate fear for the safety of the one you are protecting. It's perfectly legal. And yes, if someone broke into my home and so much as threatened me or my family they would be leaving it in a body bag.
Give me proof that British law makes killing self-defense illegal.
Well, if I need to exert lethal force I will. Of course it isn't ideal to shoot and kill every single person that intrudes, but if someone needs to die someone will.
British law does not say it is illegal. If someone enters your house and performs a criminal act, you are allowed to defend yourself. This does include using weapons, and the level of violence permitted does extend to killing the intruder. HOWEVER, there are some important rules:
-If an attacker is running away after commiting a crime on your property, you cannot use violence against him, as he is no longer posing a threat. -If you manage to wound someone to the point where they are not moving, or knock them unconscious, any further acts of violence towards them are NOT permitted. -If a person sets a trap for an intruder, or tries to lure the intruder into the home, the situation could have been avoided and the person was using premeditated violence, which is not permitted.
Personally, I am in total agreement with these laws and think they are perfectly reasonable.
It's all about reasonable force, as long as the intruder poses a viable threat to the home-owner and/or his property he has every right to defend himself and/or his property. However, if the person who was attacked continues striking the original attacker, even after he poses no viable threat it's considered excessive force. Nonetheless the police and the public prosecutors are usually pretty lenient in such cases (except if he stabs the intruder like thirty times).
How much of it, however, V6Y? The other posts in here are content with "force to an extent". There's a limit to what you can to do an intruder, in terms of self-defense, that crosses the lines of ethical and lawful boundaries. Stopping an intruder to the point where he/she no longer poses a threat/no longer is able to cause damage/harm is the wall where you cannot barge through, for it would cross into illegality.
I realize that, and that's what I'm talking about. You are legally allowed to use said force, but if it comes to the point where it is needless, then it can turn illegal if too much force is given.
i dont like hurting anyone but of course i think its ok. and i cant believe the law doesnt allow it i was really surprised. i... really dont know what to say about that. its just... ugh it iritates me
soo... if the guy has a gun and hes trying to KILL you the children...
id say you should.. well if he hasent started attacking yet maybe warn them... if they are immediately offensive then i say its great to attack him... the thing is.. its not every day you attack somebody.. so how do you know how much to hurt him, not killing him yet rendering him unable to fight? its hard to tell, so most people would probably rather be on the safe side.. and it seems unfair if someone would get in trouble for wanting to be safe..
so basically its OK to kill them just try not to kill them when you dont need to.
it really depends on how the scenario is going. if he has a knife or gun and shoots u, u have the right to disable him. its even in religious cases. apparently in the bible it says:
