At What Point is Using Lethal Force Towards the Government Justified?Submitted by sleightofhand80 on Mon, 11/04/2013 - 02:07
Last week’s tragic incident unfortunately left one dead and others wounded at LAX, not something you want to read about the morning after while sipping coffee. As much disdain as I have for the cruel TSA I don’t believe an agent deserved to murdered. And if the reports were even slightly reliable coming from the mainstream media, unfortunately that’s exactly what happened – murder.
Let’s talk about cruel government employees in a larger context, however.
I asked a friend the other day - During World War 2 should the German citizens have possessed the right to kill members of the Gestapo if their lives were in danger? What if an arrest was about to take place, potentially leading to indefinite incarceration of an innocent individual? Then is using defensive lethal force justified?
It’s easy for us given the things we know to look back on the acts of the Gestapo and say “Yes!” we would have proudly pulled the trigger on Nazis. But citizens in Germany (and Russia) at the time didn’t necessarily have the knowledge we do now about the atrocities that were taking place –the gulags, the prison camps, the medical experiments and the endless torture.
Although I don’t believe the TSA (or any other U.S. agency) works in the same capacity as the Nazi secret police, I don’t doubt the U.S. is heading in that direction.
And that leads to this question: at what point are citizens justified in using lethal defensive force against the government?
Once again, I am NOT condoning the murder of the TSA agent at LAX this past week or any other government agents in general, just attempting to gain an understanding of the point at which we have a moral obligation to defend ourselves using lethal force.