If a child/kid was intentionally try to kill an adult,do you think that guy can kills the kid for self-defense?

If he has no other options then sure

@pipxeroth:

If he does have other options,and these options are all possibly won’t make both die or injure,yet he still choose to kill.

What do think about this guy?

Well if all else fails, then yeah sadly. But my first instinct, if the kid is swinging an axe with the intent to hurt or kill me, is make a run for it and call the police as soon as I'm a safe distance from the kid or in hiding.

I would kill the kid and then sit him down and explain to him why it's wrong to try and kill people. Then I would kill the kid.

If it's the only option for his survival then yes

Yes. Being a child is not a license to murder.

@mrmonster:

But if the adult has the strength to just stop the kid yet he choose to kill.

Doesn’t it makes him a murder?

Okay, in that case, yes the adult should show restraint. But I'd say that about another adult too.

No, if you're an adult, you should know how to disarm a child; there aren't any reasons to kill anyone, if you're not acting in something like an official law enforcement capacity or participating in a war. However, you might incidentally kill someone in a self defense scenario, where honestly and literally, you have no other maneuver but to act and it happens to kill the person; otherwise, it's premeditated, no matter how brief, and should constitute a murder. Thus, such most definitely goes, where there's child involved. And to that end, there are certainly crimes of passion. Just because one state says one thing (e.g. that stand your ground jazz) and another state thinks another thing, that still doesn't mean that a person didn't commit a murder; it just means that you have government sanctioned murder; but, there is still an account that you will have to give to God, when it's all said and done, and you wont get past that judgment.

Punch him dead in his chest and air him out. Call the police. Everyone's happy.

If the adult can easily apprehend the child, of course he should do that instead of killing the kid. However, if the kid has a gun pointed at him from afar and the dude only has his own firearm to protect himself, what else can he do?

For sure. Kill that little prick!

Although if they're young enough it may have just been out of ignorance & as far as they knew "a fun game" in that case just beat 'em up real bad.

If it's kill or be killed, yes.

Of course.

In that circumstance I'd just disarm the kid. If it was a circumstance involving a child soldier with a gun or something, then yes I would shoot first.

Yes. I don't really have a moral justification, other than the fact that we should be eliminating as stupid people as possible. The reality of the matter is if a kid attacks an adult that obviously has the capacity to kill him, then he's probably not very bright and we should let natural selection will take its course.

No wtf. The majority of this site are child killers? Oh my god. Don’t you know that it is your responsibility to raise your child right? Child is innocent and a next generation. I can’t believe people here are that cold blood and actually picked yes. Disarm the child and send him or her to police.

@dshipp17: Just because some one is an adult why would that mean they should 'KNOW' how to disarm a child? It the child is swinging an axe im pretty certain its not say a 3 year old even a 10 6ear old can be pretty big and is above thr age of criminal responsibility, if these a chance to safely resolve the situation then do that butbif there is a real threat to your life no matter what source it comes from you uave the right to proportionally defend yourself and if that means using deadly force then so be it

Who do I have a feeling that soon the Fourth Reich will be established by various prople and some users in this site are gonna join? People here have a very close if not exactly the same as Nazis.

Yes,but if the adult has a chance to disarm,they should do that.

child murderers do exist though.

I’d do it even if he wasn’t trying to kill me.

Well, lets take your points and apply them; you see a 5 year old boy intending to come after you with an axe, what can you do, other than trying to kill him? Now, you see a 30 year old man coming after you with an axe intending to kill you, what can you do other than planning on killing him? My move would be keeping away from both of them; I can keep away from the boy until he vents out his frustration, at which point, I'd just take the axe away from him and either get him help or just walk away; the 5 year would not even be able to handle the axe properly; he'd barely be able to lift it up, yet along lifting it up properly; in the case of the 30 year old man, I can elude him long enough to get out of his sight and then trail around on him and basically do what I want to him; and, that's the premeditated part I'm talking about; I would just cold cock him and call the police, but, I'd have to plan for what he might want to do, afterwards.

Well I'm certainly not gonna use my gosh darn God given second amendment right to talk this kid down peacefully am i right?

Yes, if he's trying to murder as a child just imagine what harm he'll cause when he grows up. The most moral decision is to take out the kid now so that he can do no further harm.

Ok, what is the purpose of this thread? The answer is obvious, almost intentionally so.

How can you say it's obvious when every options have voted?

If it comes down to me and them and there's absolutely no other way yeah I'm taking the brat out. They made the choice to attack, they can live with it, or die with it in this case.

Okay. Serious answer now: Use reasonable force.

You are, by law, allowed to use any amount of force necessary to prevent any amount of harm coming your way in reaction to assault. Obviously it is up to you to make the decision whether or not you can safely disarm the kid, or whether lethal force is safer. A 16 year old kid with a knife will mess most people up. Go to pick a highschool athlete, give him a red marker, and tell him you'll pay him 20$ for each mark he makes on you. Then take a long hard look at this video and decide how much risk you're willing to take.

@dshipp17: Wow you don't bt get what i mean, under NO circumstances is self defence (even if it results in a death) EVER considered premeditated murder thats just a ridiculous statment.

Well, lets take your points and apply them; you see a 5 year old boy intending to come after you with an axe, what can you do, other than trying to kill him?

I have NEVER said the only thing you can n do is kill the kid the OP is can the child b3 killed in self defence and the answer is emphatically YES you can meet a deadly force with deadlt for to protect yourself, thats just a fact

Now, you see a 30 year old man coming after you with an axe intending to kill you, what can you do other than planning on killing him?

Again what are you talking about PLANNING? no one said that you're r planning on killing, if an adult is trying to kill you then yes the best cpurse of action it to rin away absolutely, never try to fight if you don't have to but in a scenario where that option is not 5here to run, maybe you are in a room, then the option to use legally defined 'proportionate' force to defend yourself is there and tell me what is proportiate to deadly force? Yes thats right deadly force if you truly believe that you may die then you can protect your self at the expence pf the assailant

My move would be keeping away from both of them; I can keep away from the boy until he vents out his frustration, at which point, I'd just take the axe away from him and either get him help or just walk away; the 5 year would not even be able to handle the axe properly; he'd barely be able to lift it up, yet along lifting it up properly;

Wow you do live in a lovely peaceful fairy tale version of reality dont you,, thats the point though what if your in a room and cant keep away, maybe there is another weapon in the room, you have to do wgat you can to survive if it harms the child then so be it he made the choice . You have specifically engineered this situation to your own point, now its a 5 year old who can even hold the axe if thats the case then your own judgement should be used to determine if your life is in danger, and in that scenario it probably wouldnt be, bit the point that im making and so it the thread is that YES you can kill a child in self defence if your life is in immediate danger and theres no other option. It obviously shouldn't be the first option,. But its still an option

in the case of the 30 year old man, I can elude him long enough to get out of his sight and then trail around on him and basically do what I want to him; and, that's the premeditated part I'm talking about; I would just cold cock him and call the police, but, I'd have to plan for what he might want to do, afterwards.

Haha this is pretty funny, elude and trail around on him, who are you Solid snake rambo? Real life self defence doesnt work that way i have been practicing martial arts f9r over 18 years and have used then in real life situations, what you said wouldnt work unless your like special forces or military , in the movies and video games that you been playing that may work but if you have this super efficient and effective way planned out in your head, then when the time come and a guy with an axe is coming at you, you would be killed simple as that

Again i never said that killing is the best or first or only option i said it is an option in the most dire life threatening situations, hopefully nost if the time kids can be subdued instead of killed but the fact remains :

PROPORTIONATE FORCE TO DEADLY FORCE OR INTENT IS IN FACT ALSO DEADLY FORCE

Depends on the age of the kid. A competent kid in high school with an axe can almost certainly mess up anyone who is not trained, and with the help of the weapon, can probably take people who are semi-trained as well.

If you are HIGHLY confident you could disarm and restrain the kid then that is what should be done (especially if you don't know if they kid might try to kill the next person the kid sees). If you think it's too dangerous, get out of the situation and call, or run to the police.

One of two things has happened. The kid is mentally unstable/deranged and needs help, the kid is in a homicidal rage and needs space and time to calm down and still needs some SERIOUS consequences (talking some time in SOME sort of facility).

IF you're in some sort of situation (say you're in a smallish room and it's an older/larger kid) and you can't get away and you're not confident you can disarm the kid easily and can't get away then yes, use whatever force you think is necessary to end the threat. You probably won't have to kill the kid, but in defending yourself the kid might die. That would be tragic and horrible but you're also left with no choice.

Can that kinda crazy be rehabilitated or would he have to be institutionalized for the rest of his life?

That's the big question that's on the table currently. Can the mentally ill (to that degree) be treated to a point that they are no longer a threat to themselves or others or not. Experts disagree vastly on the answer. I suspect not, but I'm not an expert in the field. I just know when I was a corrections officer I met some people that I thought were legitimately mentally ill and a few that I believe were just plain evil. It can be hard to tell the difference sometimes.

Then you have kids like me and my brother who would throw ninja stars & throwing knives at each other for fun despite the multitude of injuries. We weren't being malicious just really stupid.

EDIT: Or swinging swords at each others legs to see if the other could jump over it. I think our parents maybe should've restricted our access to weapons.

I'll get back to you when I finish homicide in my criminal law class

lol Yes they probably should have. Still your intention wasn't to kill each other, but have each other dodge what y'all were doing. Bit of a difference ;)

Just catch the axe with your mouth and teeth. Now the kid is unarmed the situation is much simpler. They will pose no threat to you. Try and get the kid to calm down, now you have control of the situation.

Once their guard is down... or regardless, kneecap the lil ^%$^% with the axe. You want to take away their mobility, ^&%^ lil *%^$'s can be annoying lil &%&%*'s, but they can't run if they don't have ankles. So chop those off. You know what's annoying? ^%$&% kids, putting their muddy, germ soaked, candy encrusted, slimy hands on our nice pants and shoes. So chop off their hands too. Now it should be easy for you to look the lil ^%^$^ in the eyes and then spit at their face and chastise them for messing with you! You of all people! You don't play like that.

Then yes kill them, and as many of their lil ^%^$ friends as you can, you need to send a message, and this will also act as a deterrence to all lil kids with axes who attempt to murder adults. I bet once they read about this in the newspapers they will eat their veges and all that.

.

.

.

.

.

Please do not attempt to catch axes in your teeth and please do not hurt children if you can help it. Poes Law and everything.

Other thought

Depends on the situation.