70
submitted 10 months ago by ReallyKinda@kbin.social to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

Self defense? Only on the battlefield? Only to achieve a ‘noble’ end?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] intensely_human@lemm.ee 27 points 10 months ago

Violence is justified when it’s needed to protect yourself or someone else from violence. That’s about it, honestly.

I am not a fan of pre-emptive violence.

[-] TheDarkKnight@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

What about post-emptive violence?

[-] Tamo@programming.dev 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Surely protecting is by definition preemptive since it means you are not allowing the violence against yourself or someone else to occur? Not saying your first point is wrong just doesn't seem consistent to me.

Only revenge/retribution would not be preemptive which imo is not better.

[-] snooggums@kbin.social 5 points 10 months ago

Preemptive is a different word from defending because they mean different things. Preemptive violence is violence that happens before a threat exists because of the possibility of a threat.

So shooting your neighbor on Tuesday because think he might be violent on Wednesday. If on Wednesday he shows up and makes verbal threats of imminent violence, responding to the threat of violence by being violent first would be self defense and not preemptive because the threat actually exists at the time. Timing and context matter, not who literally who gets off the first shot/punch/violent act.

[-] PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 months ago

There are situations where people have created a situation where you don't have total knowledge of the future, but acting in defense seems justified.

I think we can quibble over the specifics about what's reasonable, but you don't have to wait until you're bleeding out to defend yourself.

[-] Tamo@programming.dev 2 points 10 months ago

For me personally, the answer to the original question would be "only once no other non-violent means are available".

Does this resonate, or would you consider it different to your perspective? I see them as similar.

[-] PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 months ago

Personally, I'd prefer non-violent over violent means for myself. If other people are involved it would depend - I won't risk someone else's life if I can avoid it. I tell my niece that she's allowed to stab dudes that don't respond to "no".

this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2023
70 points (98.6% liked)

Asklemmy

43369 readers
1993 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS