Cavaliere, if you recall, I did say I would not balk at taking a life if circumstances were such that it was vitally necessary...but there is nothing at all romantic about it.
Most elegantly put, Sir William.
If I have no recourse, and must kill, so be it. If someone breaks into my home, threatens me with deadly intent, or if I *personally see them* in the act of doing so to another, they have played their card and will be subject to the consequences of their actions.
If I hear about somebody that did something? No, I won't act on it. I may *want* to act upon it, I may *say* I would act upon it, but at the core of it, with a world full of liars, con artists and thieves, one person's word is not enough to convince me to take matters into my own hands after the event. I *will* get outside help if necessary, but that is it. Without seeing something myself, there's too much at stake for fault (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrongful_execution), which has been proven many times.
In war, death happens. It's unavoidable. If you're lucky, you never have to take anyone's life, and you walk away with yours. If you do have to take someone's life, it is, hopefully, because you are both engaged in active combat, and as such, the likely result of a "kill or be killed" situation. And if you ask the majority of people who have taken a life, it stays with them for the rest of their life (such as
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posttraumatic_stress_disorder).
It seems to me that the taking of a life, when justified, should be exalted since the only reason to do so would be to maintain and fight for an ideal, and ideals are generally worth dying for.
Is the ideal worth
killing for, or worth
dying for?
I think the point I am trying to make is that if one was to take another life in defense of an ideal then you should not grieve for the taking of that life, because the fact of the matter is you live for those ideals, and if you feel bad for defending them then why do you live for them in the first place?
If the situation arises that you must take a life, it should be for something more than an ideal. An ideal is a concept. No man, woman or child should die over a concept. Someone can hate me all they want, or disagree completely with what I think; and I'll not harm them for the thought. If someone thinks molesting a child is okay, I'll disagree with that beyond words, but I won't assault them over the thought; when they cross the line and *I see them start to molest a child*, things will get ugly. But I won't kill them if I can avoid it.
The guy who defended his own 5 year old daughter against a man he saw molesting her has stated himself, that he regrets and did not wish to kill the molester. (See
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/20/us/father-not-charged-in-killing-of-man-molesting-his-daughter-5.html). And in fact, he did his best to get emergency services to SAVE the life of the man he just fought. Does that seem "romantic" in some way?
If the molester dies in the process of someone defending the child, then, such is the end of their path they have chosen to walk (as happened recently). In that situation, would I feel bad? No. Would I think it romantic, or the act of killing worthy of praise? No, not in the least. It is simply something that was done, and would be best forgotten about by all.
There is absolutely, positively, *nothing* "romantic" at all about taking a life. It is something I would take no joy in, I would have no celebration of, and I would avoid as much as possible. If you think the opposite, I respectfully suggest that you visit a Veteran of Foreign Wars (VFW) local group, and ask the people there if they have killed anyone, and if they thought it was romantic ... or if they suffer through effects of it that some of us wouldn't wish on our worst enemies....
