Murder is an offensive act. The term cannot be applied legitimately to any defensive act.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Under well-settled legal principles, lethal force against a valid military objective, in an armed conflict, is consistent with the law of war and does not, by definition, constitute an 'assassination.'
Legitimate use of violence can only be that which is required in self-defense.
It's like an act of murder; you play with intent to commit something.
Let me say this as clearly as I can: No matter how sharp a grievance or how deep a hurt, there is no justification for killing innocents.
The state calls its own violence law, but that of the individual crime.
When you shoot someone who is fleeing, it's not self-defense. It's an execution.
I'm not sure whay I've been drawn to this subject, except that murder is a subject that has always drawn people for as long as people have been telling stories.
It is my conviction that killing under the cloak of war is nothing but an act of murder.
Murder is not the crime of criminals, but that of law-abiding citizens.
And capital punishment, however ineffective it may be and through whatever ignorance it may be resorted to, is a strictly defensive act, - at least in theory.