It's a wonderful thing.
It's a horrible thing.
It's the one of our best "assets"
It's also our worst.
As others have said; it's unlikely that anyone can answer the question unless they've been in the situation.
Some interesting (to me, on a personal level) points have been raised and mentioned so far.
Although the original question was (I think) more about the protection of "loved ones" - comments about general killing have arisen, and in particular - during war/military service.
Kill to save a loved one ?
Easy. I will/would kill. or die; for me and mine.
Generally . .
I can remember an 'arguement' I had with someone on SH because we placed different levels of importance on "human life" - Mine was (and remains) rather cavalier - at best. We clearly had lead different lives.
Even the re-programmed, rigidly-reconstructed morality of the trained soldier has been found wanting at the point where the execution of his duty (the death of another) has not only been required but demanded / ordered.
I would always argue that it is the training or selection procedures that are at fault.
Despite all the training in the world, only when it comes to the actual crunch will you ever know for sure.
I agree.
I'd also say that there is a huge difference between "natural reaction/protection" and lets's call it "planned action"
could i kill?
yes!
without hesitation, no question, in less than a heartbeat, if it was my last available option?
Last available option. How would you know ? Could the argument be that by the time you realise it isyour last option - it's too late ?
In unexpected or unfamiliar highly stressful/terrifying situation it is not always those conscious/logical parts of the brain that take control…
The primitive brain will make one person run, one person fight and another freeze to the spot they are standing. It may kick in partially or fully. It may take control for a second or two or longer.
So until you have the confidence that you can control your primitive brain in such a situation, it is not really possible to say what you would actually do by using the logical bit.
Then there is the term ‘red mist’, often used in relation to road rage - where people find themselves doing something incredibly aggressive or even violent without fully realising what they are doing, until they are doing it or have done it.
That's where training, courage, strength of character (and a few other things) come into play.
It ispossible to have "red mist" wash over you, and to have the primitive brain and primeaval insticts come into play - but to remain in complete control of ones physical actions and aggressions. I think the term most frequently used, but rarely truly understood is "Controlled Aggression" what can be a little scarey is the level of aggresion that most of us are capable of.
Being able to kill is not the mark of a man. Being able to stand up for one's friends and justice is the mark of a man.
But if the taking of someone's life could be argued as righteous and just ? Providing the "killer" is prepared to stand chin proud and answer for their actions.
Some will kill "on behalf" of those that won't/can't. Whether by specific/indivual request or not. They are (generally/by and large) dark, unwanted people. Their actions, and even their very existance, sometimes denied in polite company. But they are still neccassary. And, I think, only truly understood and appreciated by their own peers - if at all.
An intersting thread almost in the week of Rememberance Day.
I've purposely left out the names of authors in quotes. My comments are general, and not aimed at the individuals.
