Poll: Could You Pull the Trigger?

[engineermk2004]

it is not fun killing, but, if i was pushed hard enough, theres no telling what could happen. but, since im going into the marines in 2 years, id better make my desicion soon.

Easier than you think.

 

[Brad Shepard]

It all depends.
If its for me, then yes
If its for one of my friends, yes again
If its for my girlfriend, without another thought, and i wouldent feel bad about it either.

other then that, like a bank robbery or somthing, i just dont know.

 

[Always_Remain]

Q: Do You think you could take a life to defend your own.

Yes. It's all about fight or flight and I choose fight. It's just how I react to things. I don't like running away.

Q: The BadGuy is threatening not just your life, but your family's. Does this alter your reaction?

That would make it worst for the Bad Guy. You don't threaten someone I love and just get away with it.

Q: Would the difference between the up-close kill, and the point and click of a ranged weapon have a difference on you?

No. I would want to look at my enemy in the face. I like things Up-Close and Personal.

Q: Would having a stranger's life on the line with yours make you change your reaction?

Of course it would. It would add motivation. Just seeing someone getting hurt makes me react in their defense. Is it supposed to be normal to let people get hurt? To walk away when someone is suffering? Fuck that.

Yeah I like taking action as opposed to just sitting there and observing. Killing each other is a filthy thing but if I think it is right or in self defense I will do so without a second thought.

Shocked at the amount of responses of "In a heartbeat I could care less about anyone else" quite disturbing. Acting like every threat is a legitimate excuse to maim and kill.

This is the threat of you dying. It is natural instinct for humans to fight to live. It's them or you. Would you die and let the person kill again? Do you think that's right?

 

[Codeman90]

Interesting to see the amount of people convinced it would be them doing the killing rather then them being killed for trying to "be a hero" not everyone with a gun is a mindless incompetent thug.

Oh well, I suppose that isn't the question asked in this thread.

 

[Caliostro]

Q: Do You think you could take a life to defend your own.

Yes. Not much of a doubt to be honest. I'm not emotional about killing, I have no issue with it. I wouldn't kill an innocent simply because I don't think it would be right. My amusement should not top someone's right to live. If they attack me then, I have a reason.

Q: The BadGuy is threatening not just your life, but your family's. Does this alter your reaction?

Then it's no longer a matter of IF, just how. Even if they dropped the gun/bat/whatever, they signed their own death sentence.

Q: Would the difference between the up-close kill, and the point and click of a ranged weapon have a difference on you?

I'd enjoy more "physical" means more. But objectively both would do.

Q: Would having a stranger's life on the line with yours make you change your reaction?


No. Not unless I had reason to think they had a relevant "back history". It's still threatening an innocent. From the point where you threaten an innocent person's life for your own profit or amusement, you give up your own.

I don't get the whole ordeal about taking a life. I've though long and hard about it. I'm fully aware of the consequences, and I'm not some religious nut who'd rather ignore the reality of consequences (i.e.: Death. The end of existence.) in lieu of some soothing fantasy. I'm extremely aware I'd be ending a life forever, I'd be destroying a universe of possibilities... I've thought of every possibly horrifying detail. Of the blood, of the guts, of the despair and extreme decadence of it all... And I don't care. In fact I want to do it, for years I've been wanting it. I want to see the blood, and the life going away, and the result of all those synapses just shutting down. I just never had a reason.

I live by a code of logic. Logically, my amusement should not outrank someone's life. Nothing should outrank someone's life. Once you take an innocent life, you're implicitly accepting that kind of behavior as acceptable, you're accepting that it's all free game, you're giving up your own life.

 

[sheogoraththemad]

, not a lot of people carry crossbows these days.

I have a working medieval crossbow,

OT:
Q: Do You think you could take a life to defend your own.
A: yes, in a dead/live situation I do everything.
Q: The BadGuy is threatening not just your life, but your family's. Does this alter your reaction?
A: hell yes, now I not only "pull the trigger" now I'm going to make it a painful dead, my family is everything for me.
Q: Would the difference between the up-close kill, and the point and click of a ranged weapon have a difference on you?
A: no, the close kill will probably be more painful
Q: Would having a stranger's life on the line with yours make you change your reaction?
A: no

 

[Caliostro]

Shocked at the amount of responses of "In a heartbeat I could care less about anyone else" quite disturbing. Acting like every threat is a legitimate excuse to maim and kill.

You'd be surprised that we're all horribly little monsters capable of the most astoundingly horrifying things in the right circumstances. No exceptions. It's just a matter of being pushed in the right direction, some are just easier to "stimulate" than others.

 

[Estocavio]

1: Yes i could, and i would.
2: Not really. Dont take that the wrong way.
3: Id prefer close up, however a ranged weapon provides safety and virtually guarantees success.
4: No. I wouldnt care about the stranger all that much.

 

[Codeman90]

Shocked at the amount of responses of "In a heartbeat I could care less about anyone else" quite disturbing. Acting like every threat is a legitimate excuse to maim and kill.

You'd be surprised that we're all horribly little monsters capable of the most astoundingly horrifying things in the right circumstances. No exceptions. It's just a matter of being pushed in the right direction, some are just easier to "stimulate" than others.

Makes sense, some just seem a bit to "eager" using self defense as a get out of jail free card to kill someone. I guess they would be easier to "stimulate" then =p

 

[MattyDienhoff]

Q: Do You think you could take a life to defend your own.

Yes. I can only guess how I'd feel about it in retrospect, having to kill someone isn't the kind of thing you take lightly or forget, but I would do it if I had to.

Q: Would having a friend or family member's life on the line with yours make you change your reaction?

No.

Q: Would the difference between the up-close kill, and the point and click of a ranged weapon have a difference on you?

No.

Q: Would having a stranger's life on the line with yours make you change your reaction?

No.

To those who say they would make an effort to only injure/incapacitate their attacker, not kill them, I have something to say:

If, as the OP's question suggests, the situation has degenerated to the point where your life is in danger and your only option is force, you're asking to be killed if you "go easy" on the attacker and use anything less than lethal force to stop them. If you shoot someone in a "non-vital" area, there's no guarantee that it will incapacitate them right away, just as there's no guarantee it won't kill them a few minutes later, after they've shot back and killed you. There are good reasons police don't "shoot people in the leg just to stop them".

1: There is no safe place to shoot someone. Shoot someone in the shoulder in real life and it's unlikely that it'll just incapacitate them for a while, and they'll be up and about the next day with their arm in a sling like in the movies. Depending on where it hits, the bullet could destroy the ball-and-socket joint in the shoulder, leaving the subject's arm useless, or it could ricochet off of the scapula and end up in the chest cavity, or it could nick a major blood vessel. In any case you could still kill the person.

2: It's easy to miss. A bullet is a small thing and it's very easy to miss your target, especially in an adrenaline-charged, "kill or be killed" kind of scenario. Soldiers and law enforcement officers are trained to aim for center of mass (i.e. the torso) for a reason, it gives the highest chance of hitting and incapacitating the target.

You might try to shoot an attacker in the leg, hoping to just incapacitate them. Assuming you don't miss, the bullet may sever the femoral artery. That gives your attacker a few minutes to live, in which time they may retaliate and fire back. Result: You're both dead.

 

[Angerwing]

I would kill someone in self-defence. If there was no other easy way to do it, and there was a serious risk of me dying, I would kill the person. If it is unnecessary to kill them, I likely wouldn't, but if push came to shove, I could do it.

I've decided that in the future, if someone molested my hypothetical child, I would murder them. Sometimes things need to be done. I'm not being the classic edgy, detached 'badass' that so many on these forums try to be. I'm quite the humanitarian, but I can honestly say that I would do it.

 

[AgDr_ODST]

Q: Do You think you could take a life to defend your own.
Yes. Though that doesn't mean it would neccessarily be easy for me to do or that I wouldn't feel some amount of regret afterward.
Q: Would having a friend or family member's life on the line with yours make you change your reaction?
This changes things if it wasn't just me and the others on the line were friends/family. I'd kill the fucker in a heartbeat and be far less likely to feel any remorse.
Q: Would the difference between the up-close kill, and the point and click of a ranged weapon have a difference on you?
only in that I'd be likely to get sick to my stomach afterwards if the damage done to the newly deceased was obvious(ie lot of blood on the ground or blatantly visible damage to the persons face or where ever the bullet struck)
Q: Would having a stranger's life on the line with yours make you change your reaction?
horrible as this may sound it might depending on age and or noticeable things about the persons outward appearance

 

[GamingAwesome1]

If someone's trying to kill me, I will do everything in my power to ensure I live, including killing the dude trying to kill me.

I call it irony.

 

[Vern]

Try to avoid it, but to defend myself I think I would. I've thought about it quite a bit, and I've thought that I would hesitate because I really wouldn't want to take another humans life. Then I realize that if I'm in a situation where someone has threatened my life, and odds are it would startle me quite a bit if they did, it would be the fight or flight reaction. If it happened in my home, flight wouldn't be viable, and the trigger would be pulled rather quickly. As an aside, if someone decides to break into a house, they are basically accepting that they might be breaking into a house of an armed person, so they are already accepting the fact that they might have someone prepared to use deadly force. So they have given their go-ahead.
To defend my own life, I'm sure I would, the only life to lose would be my own, but it would be lost if I didn't try.
If a family members life was on the line, AKA the person had a gun to their head, I would try to shoot anyway if I had a gun. Unarmed distance is a factor, at close range lunge and grab the gun and point it somewhere where if it hit someone it wouldn't be fatal. Try to wrestle it away, if it fails, at least there's someone else there that can help. Same with a stranger.
As far as close and ranged, I would be more comfortable with close range. At least then
they're a direct threat, as opposed to something you can avoid. I'd have an easier time pulling a trigger if the person was coming straight at me than walking down a road 200 yards away. At least assuming this is a criminal attack, as opposed to a military engagement.
But honestly, if someone is creating a direct threat to your life, your family, or other people while committing a crime, I have no moral quandary in ending their life if no other solution is viable.

 

[Robert0288]

Q: Do You think you could take a life to defend your own.
A: Yes, part of job now... but even before I would have done it

Q: The BadGuy is threatening not just your life, but your family's. Does this alter your reaction?
A: No, my life, lives of loved ones, or the life of a total stranger. You threaten it you forfit your own

Q: Would the difference between the up-close kill, and the point and click of a ranged weapon have a difference on you?
A: None, Close or far; if you do something which means the forfiture of your own life, so be it. The tool which you use has no effect on the outcome

Q: Would having a stranger's life on the line with yours make you change your reaction?
A: Nope

 

[Bealzibob]

well, yes I believe I could. I plan to at least once in my life to defend myself or not, logically nearer to the end of my life-span.

However, I think I'd prefer up close with a knife if possible as thats personal but not to drawn out. I prefer it to be personal cause I feel that if you take someones life it better be personal, whether it's scarring or not.

Then again, when it comes down to real life I probably wouldn't =[

 

[Caliostro]

Makes sense, some just seem a bit to "eager" using self defense as a get out of jail free card to kill someone. I guess they would be easier to "stimulate" then =p

Can you blame us? We live in a horrible and emotionless world where, to quote Yahtzee, "an iPhone has a networth significantly higher than a human life".

Besides, it's a survival instinct.

 

[Codeman90]

Makes sense, some just seem a bit to "eager" using self defense as a get out of jail free card to kill someone. I guess they would be easier to "stimulate" then =p

Can you blame us? We live in a horrible and emotionless world where, to quote Yahtzee, "an iPhone has a networth significantly higher than a human life".

Besides, it's a survival instinct.

On instinct I'd kill to save my life myself. I hunt and I've used handguns and rifles for target practice so I'm a decent shot. Problem is I'd have a heck of a guilt trip afterwards. Incapacitating would be the best case scenario, but if it seems like the guy wouldn't give up or might hunt me down later, I'd have to make a tough decision.

The world really isn't that bad, besides quoting the biggest pessimist on the planet on a show he knows he needs to keep people entertained on to earn income is a bit suspicious. Not to say that I don't think yahtzee is awesome, but hey, its the world we live in, gotta make the best of it.

 

[Codeman90]

Q: Do You think you could take a life to defend your own.
Easily, I have no tolerance nor pity for scum who refrain to stealing/killing/etc.
Q: The BadGuy is threatening not just your life, but your family's. Does this alter your reaction?
Not at all.
Q: Would the difference between the up-close kill, and the point and click of a ranged weapon have a difference on you?
The only difference would be how much blood splatters on me, I guess from a closer range it would be a little more disgusting.
Q: Would having a stranger's life on the line with yours make you change your reaction?
Probably not.

Why is there no 'If I had a gun I'd be cleaning up the streets right now' option for the poll? It automatically assumes killing people is hard and emotionally scarring for everyone.

Because the gun control fanatics don't need anything else to get worked up about. Having the "mowing down everyone in the streets" option does not help make the case that gun owners are for the most part responsible people. If killing another human being isn't emotionally scarring, then there's an issue, maybe if your life is on the line I can understand. But not just random genocides.

 

[Agayek]

Q: Do You think you could take a life to defend your own.
Q: The BadGuy is threatening not just your life, but your family's. Does this alter your reaction?
Q: Would the difference between the up-close kill, and the point and click of a ranged weapon have a difference on you?
Q: Would having a stranger's life on the line with yours make you change your reaction?

1) Absolutely. If someone were attacking me, I would have no qualms beating them to death with their own spine, if need be. I refuse to start the conflict, but as soon as it turns physical, I will end it as quickly and permanently as I know how.

2) Not at all. If anything, I'd be more vicious defending those I care for.

3) I'm not sure. I believe that it would garner roughly the same effect from me, but I cannot state with absolute certainty.

4) Not really. The only time my reaction would change was if it was someone I didn't know being attacked and I stumbled across it. I would break up the fight as quickly as possible, but refrain from lethal force, until/unless I knew what was going on.

The basic rationale behind each of these answers is fairly simple: The initiation of violence is inherently invalid (also known as the non-aggression axiom). Essentially, anyone who attacks another, regardless of reason, surrenders any and all rights to mercy or leniency from those they attack. The victim can and should respond with as much force as they can bring to bear as quickly as possible.

I am very firm in my principles, and I refuse to back down on them, regardless of what it costs (thus far, I can't honestly say I would stick to it through torture or what have you).