Just a little friendly compromise, what could go wrong? - eviltoast
  • Jax@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    8 months ago

    🤷‍♂️ I’m not about to send the message that people can come to my house and take my shit.

    • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      8 months ago

      Yeah but it should be conditional imo. If they’re armed or you have suspicion they could be armed, then kill them. Otherwise, maybe aim for the leg or shoulder?

      • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        8 months ago

        If you’re shooting, shoot to kill. There’s not a non-lethal place to shoot a human being.

        But yeah, jumping straight to the gun might be a bit much for some guy rummaging through your living room drawer. Russia is more like a hardened criminal who’s been threatening you every night for the past month busting down your door and beating your kid to death.

        • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          Humans very regularly survive gunshots. About twice as many people are injured by gunshots as those who die from them each year in the USA, even when suicides are included. My philosophy is to minimize harm and suffering whenever possible, even at risk to myself.

          But yeh Fuck Russia.

            • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              8 months ago

              You were going to kill them regardless, why tf do you care if the other places you shoot them have a chance of fatality? Minimizing harm is all about reducing chances of undue death or suffering.