Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AuraSeer" data-source="post: 1566813" data-attributes="member: 1331">You're making a big assumption with that word "justifiable." In most places, for lethal defensive force to be legal, it must be apparent that there is no alternative.The paladin didn't need to use lethal force, because he so obviously overpowered the commoner. He could very easily have struck with the flat of his blade, incapacitating the opponent but not killing him. Even striking with bare hands would have done the job. In a modern analogue he might very well find himself arrested for manslaughter, because his use of force was so far in excess of what was necessary.  (It might be legal to shoot a mugger, but probably not if you're also carrying a tazer.)</blockquote>