Taking a life in a Self Defense Situation

[Byron Quick]

I personally accept the definition of duty proposed by Robert A. Heinlein:"a duty is an obligation voluntarily assumed."

And it is possible to have both a duty and a right that are concurrent. I have a right to self defense and I have a duty to defend myself. I have a right to defend my family, my friends, and my country. I also have those duties. Now the duty to defend my country is currently on hold but if I am ever called, I'll answer. I hope that never happens because if it ever gets to the point that the country is calling on me; we'll be in a hell of a mess. They're calling on 54 year old half cripples? That must mean that all the young healthy guys are gone. OOPS!

 

[mcdonl]

Understood. And personally, I feel the same duty to myself and my family. When you add voluntarily assumed it add's up.

Leroy

 

[Bakeneko]

If you feel guilty about taking a life when the time comes it might be yours that gets taken.

Not if you have something worth living for greater than yourself.

Trust me, you can beat yourself up over things that might have gone differently. Even being told that you did the right thing time and time again does not stop the little voices or the dreams. That really kind of shows that you care about people. Not everyone thinks or acts the same way, so there is no one answer as to how people will react.

But it does not matter how much you might beat yourself up over killing even the worst scum in the world if you have something you need to live for. If you have kids that might have to grow up without their father, then no matter how many sleepless nights you are going to face you will do what you need to in order to survive.

If you are in the wrong, if you are doing something just so that other people won't think you are a sissy, then you will not have this courage to fall back on. But if you have no choice but to kill or die, you will take action. Afterwards you might play 'what if' games with yourself, but you will still be alive to do so.

 

[viperstarbuck]

I've never shot or killed anyone, however, i have been in other high stress situations. My belief is if you did what you HAD to do, no other choice or option was available, then you have nothing to feel guilty about. I also believe you should immediately seek some form of professional mental health counsel as soon as possible, even if you only go once, just go, and have them look you once over. It may save you some very serious mental health and stress problems later on. There is valid reason that most Police Departments require an officer to take some time off and see a counselor following a shooting, I don't see why a civilian or military mind is different. To kill is to Kill.

 

[ls0n3]

threefeathers: "Unless you can take a life you should not carry. That is a decision we all must make for ourselves. "

In regards to the home invasion, carrying doesnt really come into play here. Also simply owning a gun, doesn't mean someone has made that mental commitment to be prepared to take a human life.

Those of us who carry, I completely agree with you. If you carry you need to make that mental commitment and soul searching to prepare yourself for the worst case imagineable: Where you have to put your ccw to use to save a life.

For those of you here who have had to do it. I am just thankful you are here to share your experiences with those of us fortunate enough to not have had to walk in your shoes yet.

 

[expvideo]

The other thread was closed so I started a new relevant topic....

If you have made the choice to defend yourself I think it is important to understand why you would do it in the first place.

Preserving one's life, and those around you from someone who intends to kill you is the chief reason to do so. (IMO)

The same is true for war. Politics does not exist when someone is shooting at you. Just like during a home defense situation there is no lawyer there to walk you through the process of defending yourself and your family from an intruder.

At some point your own morals are going to have to take over, and for myself I would not have a shred of guilt defending myself and my family.

The memory may be unpleasant, but it has been said that man is refined by pain.

You are wrong. It is obvious that you have never been in a position to have to kill someone. It doesn't matter how justified it is, or how clearly right you were, there is still a sense of second guessing, wondering what would have happened if things hadn't gone differently, and yes, even guilt.

I was in a situation where I should have shot someone and I didn't. A guy pointed a machine pistol at a crowd of people and threatened them. I had the drop on him from behind cover, but everything wasn't perfect and I might have gotten some people killed if I engaged him. Regardless of that, I still should have taken the shot. Maybe not. I don't know. But that incident haunts me to this day. If I had shot him, it would haunt me even more. I had to face the moment of truth and come that close to killing another person, and even that is hard to get past. It would have been the most righteous shoot in the history of righteous shoots, but I still get cold shivers thinking about it. If I had shot him, I am confident that I would feel even worse about it. You haven't faced a situation where you had to make a choice about whether another human being lived or died, so you don't know how it feels to make that decision. Right or wrong, I chose not to shoot him and I have to live with that. If I had shot him, I would have to live with that choice too. It was a tough position to be in, and you can't tell me that you know how you would react when you haven't been there.

If the decision is as clear as day like you seem to think it would be, then you are too late. There is never absolute clarity in a situation like that, because you can't see 5 seconds into the future. You will spend the rest of your life wondering what that 5 seconds would have looked like if you had acted differently.

I could have saved several people and I should have shot the guy. As it turns out, my 5 seconds in the future were a lot better than I was afraid they would have been. It could have gone in a much different direction, but I was lucky.

If you kill somebody, you can't ever find out what would have happened if you didn't. And even in a situation as clear as night and day, you will wonder if you really had to take that life. And yes, you will feel guilty. It's part of being a human being. But it's better to have to deal with those feelings of guilt than to deal with the loss of a family member. It's the price you pay to survive. Nobody likes shooting people and nobody is indifferent, no matter how much they want to act like they are. Maybe that's part of coping. But if you kill someone and don't feel bad about it, you're missing something that is supposed to be built in. Don't think you can go through this life doing what is necessary without feeling bad about it. You can be 100% in the right and it could be you or them, but that doesn't mean you aren't going to feel some compassion for the dead bad guy. You can't take something like that from someone without it burning you, no matter how necessary it is.

Unless you can take a life you should not carry. That is a decision we all must make for ourselves.

Being able to take a life is one thing. Being able to take a life and not feel guilty about it is another.

 

[rhoggman]

You are wrong. It is obvious that you have never been in a position to have to kill someone. It doesn't matter how justified it is, or how clearly right you were, there is still a sense of second guessing, wondering what would have happened if things hadn't gone differently, and yes, even guilt.


There is never absolute clarity in a situation like that, because you can't see 5 seconds into the future. You will spend the rest of your life wondering what that 5 seconds would have looked like if you had acted differently.

I could have saved several people and I should have shot the guy.

If you kill somebody, you can't ever find out what would have happened if you didn't.

Don't think you can go through this life doing what is necessary without feeling bad about it.

Look I respect you, and your thoughts, but I want to make a few things clear here.

I DO NOT EQUATE GUILT WITH "FEELING BAD". I feel bad that you spent a long time telling me how I should feel, but it is not my fault you don't understand the difference between the two emotions; therefore, I am not guilty for your misunderstanding.

Guilt has a special connotation or extra emotion attached to it. Guilt includes wrongdoing. Guilt happens when you condemn yourself, are condemned by others, or by a set of values.

I never once argued that a "SELF DEFENSE" shooting would be clear as day. Or that I would react instaneously without discretion. Even with a lot of training people hesitate, but it can get you in trouble. The goal would be to be clear minded as possible.

I have been put in many deadly situations, and I refuse to grandstand on those situations or use them for arguments sake; however, I will tell you I never once contemplated wether someone was a father, son, or brother. That's just ridiculous. I might think about things like that if I were Jon Lee Malvo, and I were hiding in the back of a van shooting at innocent people. Sure people have lives and families, but that doesn't make evil men good, and it doesn't make me guilty of anything. Would you feel bad after the fact.... Of course unless you are a SOCIOPATH. Im I going to sit around and condem myself because some AK-47 toting moron American hater has kids... NO

You are lecturing me about how I should be guilt stricken, and yet you give an example of where you didn't shoot, but really should have. Then you go on to basically explain that what you did was wrong. You blame yourself for the way this incident played out.

Look I have never had to shoot in to a crowd of innocent people. I cannot say what I would do. That is tough. In most situations including police shootings more rounds don't hit the target than do. Very rarely do other innocent people get hurt.

Contrary to popular belief law enforcement does not use hollow points to prevent bullets from going through people. Somewhere around 80% of the rounds never hit the target in the first place.

I would say your situation was extremely tough "mentally", and it would have been for a trained professional as well. Knowing that you are more than likely going to hurt innocent people changes a lot IMO. Don't beat yourself up.

 

[rhoggman]

In regards to the home invasion, carrying doesnt really come into play here. Also simply owning a gun, doesn't mean someone has made that mental commitment to be prepared to take a human life.

Those of us who carry, I completely agree with you. If you carry you need to make that mental commitment and soul searching to prepare yourself for the worst case imagineable: Where you have to put your ccw to use to save a life.

This is important. This is the point of the thread.

Why would you defend yourself/ others?
Can you do it?

 

[rhoggman]

I would also like to make a comment about DUTY.

I read back into the thread and some people were talking about the "duty" to to defend yourself and wether or not that idea was valid.

My opinion is that "duty" in the traditional sense is just an obligation to uphold a set of standards or morals. Some people may feel a sense of "duty" when it comes to self defense, but I would agree that they are not obligated like someone who has sworn alleigance to a cause. That does not take away from what they feel inside themselves when it comes to their loved ones and protecting them. To me someone who has sworn alleigance has vowed to lay down their life at someone else's command for the public good. This takes "duty" to a whole new level.

One more note on self defense. Preservation of life IMO is an inborn "duty". Humans naturally are selfish in the sense that they would prefer to live than to be killed. In this regard you could make some pretty strong arguments about the benefit of arming yourself for a worst case scenario. In reality having weapons has been key to human progress and societal evolution. Self-defense is a NATURAL REACTION. It is expected, and therefore in a rough way a "duty" to oneself.

Altruism on the other hand is a philosophy and is conditioned into people.

 

[Davionmaximus]

I used mine just this weekend. Came within a millimeter of drawing my weapon on a guy who tailed my wife and I out of a store. (see my post "CCW when would you draw")
Self defense situations will come at you fast. Some will be "grey" areas. Just simply raising my shirt to begin the draw process will get you to think about life after it is done.
For any of you who have had to take a life in defense of yourself or others I pray for peace in you. It is the mark of humanity if it haunts you to kill others.

 

[rhoggman]

In regards to the home invasion, carrying doesnt really come into play here. Also simply owning a gun, doesn't mean someone has made that mental commitment to be prepared to take a human life.

Those of us who carry, I completely agree with you. If you carry you need to make that mental commitment and soul searching to prepare yourself for the worst case imagineable: Where you have to put your ccw to use to save a life.

Anytime something like this happens you will think about it a million times; hopefully, after it actually happens, and not when you need to react.

Traumatic experiences will be relived time and time again. Playing in your head like a broken record.

What I would like to distinguish here is that Davionmaximus reacted in a way that may have saved his life. He was ready to do what had to be done, or at least someone else thought so.

His mind and his conscience was "clear" enough to know what was happening. Sounds to me like he was morally willing to side with his and his wife's life over someone who potetially had bad intentions.

Does this mean that if he actually had to shoot, and the person who was shot died that he would be guily... No. Might he feel bad... probably... Would he also feel goo... proabably...

Wether or not people are able to overcome something traumatic is really at the individual level. Huanted is a strong word IMO.

 

[mljdeckard]

I reflect to "The Untouchables", When Ness is forced to put a bad guy down with a shotgun whe he ignored repeated warnings, and he's frustrated over the man's stupidity. He tells Malone, Connery's character;

"I had to kill that man."

"Yes, he's as dead as Julius Caesar. Would you rather it was you?"

No, I would not."

"Then go home and sleep well."

Everyone must decide that they would rather continue seeing their families, even when they do see the dead guy every day for the rest of their lives.

 

[Duke of Doubt]

Classic scene, Deckard.

And the one which immediately followed ("What's the matter? Can't you talk with a gun in your mouth?") shocked even my ex, a fairly jaded movie consumer, into gales of nervous laughter.

That movie is among my all time favorites (saw it in the theater twice on first release), and while most of the action scenes are not historical, they are based on or amalgamated from actual situations and statements by actual persons. The ethical dilemmas presented are rather complicated for a DeNiro/Connery/Costner/Garcia/Cruz-Smith flick.

 

[mljdeckard]

It's true, there is no historical paperwork that definitively shows that Ness ever actually met Capone face to face.

 

[expvideo]

Look I respect you, and your thoughts, but I want to make a few things clear here.

I DO NOT EQUATE GUILT WITH "FEELING BAD". I feel bad that you spent a long time telling me how I should feel, but it is not my fault you don't understand the difference between the two emotions; therefore, I am not guilty for your misunderstanding.

This is where we disagree. To me, I feel bad when I pass the scene of a fatality accident. I feel bad when I read about a family slaughtered on christmas eve by a derranged inlaw. I would feel guilty if I had to take another life in self defense. It wouldn't be the same kind of guilt as if I had done something wrong, but it would be guilt. Maybe that varies from person to person, or I guess in this case we might just have a different definition of guilt.

Guilt has a special connotation or extra emotion attached to it. Guilt includes wrongdoing. Guilt happens when you condemn yourself, are condemned by others, or by a set of values.

Guilt can also be a feeling of doubting your actions and wondering if you did something wrong. Wondering how those 5 seconds in the future would have looked if you had acted differently, if the bad guy had acted differently, or if something else had happened. Just because what you did was right doesn't mean that you won't spend the rest of your life wondering if it really was necessary.

I never once argued that a "SELF DEFENSE" shooting would be clear as day. Or that I would react instaneously without discretion. Even with a lot of training people hesitate, but it can get you in trouble. The goal would be to be clear minded as possible.

Absolutely. I have done a lot of personal training to overcome hesitation since that event.

I have been put in many deadly situations, and I refuse to grandstand on those situations or use them for arguments sake; however, I will tell you I never once contemplated wether someone was a father, son, or brother. That's just ridiculous. I might think about things like that if I were Jon Lee Malvo, and I were hiding in the back of a van shooting at innocent people. Sure people have lives and families, but that doesn't make evil men good, and it doesn't make me guilty of anything. Would you feel bad after the fact.... Of course unless you are a SOCIOPATH. Im I going to sit around and condem myself because some AK-47 toting moron American hater has kids... NO

Hey, I'm not grandstanding or trying to win an arguement. I am just trying to show some perspective, and I think that my experience is useful to others so that they can learn from it too, and so that I can get their perspective, which would help me to learn more from it. I'm not trying to showboat that I had to pull a gun on someone, or try to sound like Jack Bauer. I just wanted to give a little perspective from an experience that someone might be able to take something away from.

As for wondering about what the bad guy means to other people, that never really concerned me too much. Maybe it would if I had shot him. I don't know.

You are lecturing me about how I should be guilt stricken, and yet you give an example of where you didn't shoot, but really should have. Then you go on to basically explain that what you did was wrong. You blame yourself for the way this incident played out.

That's true. I do blame myself for hesitating. I'm probably puting too much blame on myself, since I probably did the right thing, but like I said.. it haunts me. But I'm not trying to tell you how you should feel.

Look I have never had to shoot in to a crowd of innocent people. I cannot say what I would do. That is tough. In most situations including police shootings more rounds don't hit the target than do. Very rarely do other innocent people get hurt.

Contrary to popular belief law enforcement does not use hollow points to prevent bullets from going through people. Somewhere around 80% of the rounds never hit the target in the first place.

I would say your situation was extremely tough "mentally", and it would have been for a trained professional as well. Knowing that you are more than likely going to hurt innocent people changes a lot IMO. Don't beat yourself up.

Thank you for the advice. I mean that sincerely. I'll try to take it to heart.

 

[GlockMan86]

I have heard that there is a certain percentage of the population that can take a human life in SELF DEFENSE (this apparently doesn't include serial killers and whatnot) and feel no negative effects. I never really knew how I would feel until it happened. Their rounds missed and mine didn't (God bless EOTechs and XM193) and thats all there was to it.

Being in law enforcement, I even got a few months paid vacation. All for getting some gangbangers of the planet. Of course, when I had to talk the the shrink, I told her what she wanted to hear. "Of course, it bothers me sometimes, but it was something that I had to do, ma'am."

For me, it was NO BIG DEAL. I fall in that small percent of people, i guess. You just never know, guys.

 

[GlockMan86]

I feel that I should also add that THERE WAS NO SECOND GUESSING on my part. Once my thumb disengaged the safety on that AR....it was a done deal. The ONLY, repeat ONLY thing that was going through my mind was breath support, trigger control, sight picture and that stuff.

I didn't start thinking about my family or anything. I didn't start thinking, "Oh, crap...i'm going to get sued by their families and loose everything." It was just "Breath, sight picture, squeeze...and repeat."

 

[expvideo]

For me, it was NO BIG DEAL. I fall in that small percent of people, i guess. You just never know, guys.

The most true statement in this thread. Until you see another human being on the end of your sights, you will never know how well you can handle pulling the trigger. It could be a simple action, like it was in your case, or you could hesitate like I did. The best thing to try to counter this is training. Like you stated, focus on breath support, trigger control, sight picture, and so on. Hopefully training will take over when the SHTF. But no matter how much you train, you simply won't know how you will react in a situation like this until it happens.

 

[rhoggman]

I would tend to believe that LEOs or Military personnel in the line of duty have already established mental "reasons" for what they are doing. They are trained in the use of lethal force, and they have a common duty to "protect and defend".

I bet the percentage of the population that takes out a bad guy, and doesn't "feel real bad" about it is larger than you think. Sure alot of people talk a big game, but even when it comes to scum bags almost everyone is one the same page.

 

[mercop]

Believing you "know" what your response will be is wishful thinking. You hope that you will but the truth is you never really know until it does happen.

When it comes to police officers who have killed in the LOD I have seen too types- those that it affected and they realized it did and dealt with it, and those it affected and they refused to deal with it and it was obvious to everyone except them that they had been affected. YMMV- George

 

[rduckwor]

I have to say that I feel this is a most useful and informative thread. There are a number of philosophical views each well expressed.

So much more useful than the usual: "Oh s7!t, I shot him! Now what do I say to the cops?" threads.

I think that it is very difficult for any one person to know how he/she would feel after being forced to utilize deadly force in self/family defense.

Thank you all for sharing your perceptions with the rest of us.

RMD

 

[Marcus5aurelius]

I feel that I would always carry guilt from that type of situation. Not for what I did but rather what I could have done differently to prevent that particular situation from ever happening.

 

[BullfrogKen]

Duty -

I think perhaps we have a failure to communicate surrounding the concept of duty.


A duty as Jeff referenced earlier is a legal concept. A parent has a duty to his child - to provide a reasonable standard of care and protection. To not perform that duty is not only immoral, in the United States it is also unlawful. A parent who does not perform that duty to his/her child can lose him, as well as be convicted of a crime.

An officer of the law has a duty to uphold. He must carry out the functions of his office, which include bringing suspects charged with violations of the law into the custody of the state so they may be put through the justice system. He cannot ignore or abandon that duty because he doesn't like it.

An attorney has a duty to his client. A doctor has a duty to his patient.


Now while we may feel morally compelled to perform a duty - like put our children through college, witness for Jesus Christ, or be the best we can be at our jobs - those duties are not required by law.

We have no lawful duties as armed citizens, besides the duty to not act recklessly or endanger others with our firearms. And I guess for those of us in Right-to-Carry states that require us to notify an officer if we are armed or have a license to carry, then I guess you have a duty to notify.

Beyond those limited circumstances, or unless the militia gets called up - and that hasn't happened in over 200 years - armed citizens have no duty to perform.

Morally compelled is a different concept than duty. The problem we encounter when these conversations go this route is a misunderstanding between the legal concept of a duty - which contain punishments if we do not perform it - and a moral compulsion - which do not.

 

[expvideo]

Morally compelled is a different concept than duty. The problem we encounter when these conversations go this route is a misunderstanding between the legal concept of a duty - which contain punishments if we do not perform it - and a moral compulsion - which do not.

I agree completely. A lot of people confuse moral obligation to duty. They think that they are morally superior for not feeling as though they have a choice, as if to say "I'm so righteous that I don't even have a choice but to do the right thing". To me, it seems that knowing that you have a choice and still doing the right thing is far superior. To do something right because it's right takes more courage and character than to do something right because you "have to". In the sense of non-LEOs anyway.