Robert Ian Smit robian at
Fri Jun 14 14:05:22 PDT 2002

On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 03:46:36PM -0500, Archaic wrote:
> 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.

Revenge it is then. 

You either take a life based on your assumption or after the fact in
which case it would be revenge. 

Both are understandable reactions, but in both cases I feel your
actions should be subjected to scrutiny by some form of authority.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the lfs-chat mailing list