• mar_k [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Yeah it honestly sounds vague and broad enough to be some kind of legal paradox

    any person has the right to defend the life of themselves or another, even by use of deadly force if necessary, from willful destruction by another person.

    So if I’m in public and witness John attempting to kill Jane, I now have the legal right to kill John to defend Jane’s life… but attempting to do so means John now has the legal right to kill me to defend his own life? And let’s say Jane has Stockholm Syndrome and is defensive of John, she would also have the right to kill me? Which would then mean John has the right to kill Jane to defend me?