300 Yard Self Defense

Submitted by Bill St. Clair on Sat, 21 Sep 2013 21:05:13 GMT  <== RKBA ==> 

Kerodin explains what he means by "300 yard self defense", for those who don't think shooting someone with a .308 at 300 yards is self defense. Well, he thinks it can be. I tend to agree. Make it known that you intend to harm me or mine, and anything I do to you is self defense, independent of the fancy uniform, funny hat, or shiny badge you happen to be wearing. Archived at billstclair.com/300-yard-self-defense.html.

What of the man who declares his intent to lay hands upon you, but has not yet done so? This is where a portion of my readers part ways with my personal philosophy. Many readers believe that until that man makes a direct, physical move to lay-on hands, I am morally restrained from taking action. I say this with absolute respect for those of you who take that position: I reject it.

If I know a man means me harm and has the potential to accomplish his attack, I believe I remain firmly on the Moral High Ground of Self Defense to go find him and hit him firstest with the mostest with everything I've got until that threat is eliminated - forever. I may get him to change his mind by simply using my words. I may have to dismiss words and have a more direct conversation. He may be the sort who will simply heal up and then come at me again - I have no moral obligation to let that happen. So, if I think the only solution is to ensure he simply cannot ever lay hands upon me is to break his arms in a dozen places - each arm - so that they will never heal into a useful threat, I reserve the Right, under Natural Law, to do so. I may use my own hands to do the damage, or I may use a claw hammer. If I think the only way to eliminate the threat of harm this man has stated he intends to inflict upon me is to make him disappear - I reserve that Right. I have no moral obligation to wait if I believe his threat is legitimate. I have no moral obligation to wait until he tries to put me on a cattle car toward the re-education camp. I can take the initiative and go to his place, or surprise him at Starbucks, and go to work, and I maintain that this remains in the realm of Self Defense.

Add comment Edit post Add post

Comments (3):

Not self defense

Submitted by MamaLiberty on Sun, 22 Sep 2013 16:41:49 GMT

"I have no moral obligation to wait if I believe his threat is legitimate."

I take great exception here. This places lethal force against others on a terribly thin pretxt line. If he doesn't even have to wait until he believes the threat is legitimate... that pretty much says he feels justified in killing anyone, anywhere, whenever the urge strikes him.

Obviously, he can do that anyway, but he can't call it self defense and get me to agree with it.

Edit comment

As you quoted, he said

Submitted by Bill St. Clair on Sun, 22 Sep 2013 17:17:17 GMT

As you quoted, he said "if I believe his threat is legitimate." If somebody sends me an email saying that he's going to kill me, and if I have reasonable evidence that he's capable and likely willing to carry out that threat, then he is the agressor. I don't see why I should wait until he actually shows up at my house to defend myself.

Edit comment

Not the same thing!

Submitted by MamaLiberty on Wed, 25 Sep 2013 19:57:23 GMT

Bill, that's NOT the same thing! You said that if you thought the threat WAS legitimate, you'd do something about it. Of course! Absolutely. With an email threat, one would simply take extra precautions to defend yourself, I'd think. I serously doubt you'd plan to show up at his door, kick it down and execute him for this threat.

Kerodin, and others like him, SEEM to be saying that they are not going to wait to determine if the threat is LEGITIMATE, but plan to act instead. That is open season on anyone they decide they don't like - or who looks at them crosseyed.

There is a fine line sometimes between a legitimate threat and one that is not, and nobody can make that determination for someone else - especially on the spot and when seconds might count.

But we can all seriously THINK about it, and consider the difference between aggression and self defense. We can make serious plans, and outline to ourselves the signals and clues that will help us make those difficult decisions where necessary.

The key remains to defend ourselves vigorously, without becoming the aggressor, the initiator of force.

Edit comment