archaic at comcast.net
Fri Jun 14 13:46:36 PDT 2002
On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 10:34:26PM +0200, Robert Ian Smit wrote:
> No, I was referring to your intend to kill anyone who you decided
> was in anyway potentially harmful to you or your family.
> If you tell me that I completely misread the meaning of your words,
> I'd be in fact very glad.
Well you can be glad, then. :) Take out potentially harmful. I was
talking in the context of someone trying to kill my family. I claim I
have a right to defend my family by killing that person during that act.
I differentiate that from planning and hunting someone down after the
fact. My reasoning was due to instinct being a more powerful force than
logic at that point at that I would defend the right of anyone to act
the same in the same situation. There is no perceived, only actual, harm
in the example.
"Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty
when the government's purposes are beneficient...The greatest dangers to
liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well meaning but
- Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-chat' in the subject header of the message
More information about the lfs-chat