Would killing someone who tried to forcefully inject you with drugs be excessive force?
Iâd consider the Scarlet Crusadeâs vulnerability to demonic hijacking and subsequent results, a fair amount of blowback.
Also the Light itself uplifted nothing⊠it was the Human agents who employed it that did the heavy lifting along with the flat out warriors.
Excessive force usually depends on the level of threat - was the person who was shot dead actively a threat or retreating?
If someone breaks into your home, sees you with a gun and then retreats - the criminal runs out the door, down the street, and then you shoot them in the back - that is likely excessive force.
Xera did not show any sign of retreat or stepping back. No.
Xera is akin to someone who broke in to your home, saw you with a gun, and said âI do what I want! Gimme what I want and I ainât taking no for an answer!â
Such a circumstance would likely be justified self defense.
Exactly. She created and led the Army of the Light. And her foes are literally demons who want to destroy the universe.
Right or wrong, Xeâraâs actions benefitted the fight against the Burning Legion, Illidan killing her did not (if anything, it did the opposite).
While I see what youâre getting at, the analogy of forcing an unwanted medical procedure or trying to force-feed someone medicine (or a vaccine) fits rather than drugs, as the intent and effects are clearly beneficial. In which case Iâm still not sure as she died as a result of Illidanâs response.
Plus, they met face-to-face aboard the Vindicaar, which didnât belong to either, so the âhome invasionâ analogy falls flat.
My reply to Doness addresses most of that (see above), except Iâll add that Illidan had broken free of her attempt to Lightforge him before he killed her, so Iâd say closer to retreating.
Did I miss the point and be disingenuous by agreeing with you about Sylvanas being done dirty by the writers?
Breaking free from a forced action does not signal a retreat - it means she was not strong enough to force herself upon him.
She did not relent - she was halted.
Iâd still compare it more to force-feeding someone medicine or a vaccine, and she still died as a result of his reaction (the main thrust of the excessive force argument).
And like I said, since they met in a location belonging to neither, the âhome invasionâ analogy (or the kidnapping one) doesnât work.
No. The main thrust of excessive force is not the result - the main thrust of excessive force is whether the force used was required to neutralize a threat, and if it is in the name of self defense.
Many self defense cases are about death - death itself does not constitute excessive force. And often times, excessive force is brought up without death being involved - non fatal police beatings, as an example.
Death and excessive force are not tied together. Both can go without the other.
You can have self defense that leads to death, justifiably. You can have excessive force that doesnât lead to death.
1 Like
Did you read that link about excessive force I posted? Claiming self-defense is not the Get Out Of Jail Free Card or license to kill that some think it is. To use an Australian example I saw online;
https://stacklaw.com.au/news/criminal-law/excessive-self-defence-and-use-of-force-to-protect-yourself-against-an-intruder/
Those cases of self-defense resulting in death you cited usually involved armed attackers and clear intent from the attackers (like the circumstances that absolved Kyle Rittenhouse where they swarmed him while armed, followed him and one outright said they were going to kill him before raising their weapon).
And you can also have excessive force that leads to death where they both go together; which is relevant since she was killed.
No one is saying self defense is a get out of jail free card. It should go without saying that self defense is a ⊠wait for itâŠ
defense
A defense so as things are adjudicated, justice can be meted out.
No - just saying âself defenseâ is not a get out of jail free card. You are making a Strawman argument. But a person can use self defense as a defense in court, and have the circumstances be adjudicated.
Illidan certainly would have that defense, since Xera would not stop herself - she had to be stopped. Illidan tried reasoning with her, he gave her all sorts of responses to stay her lust - but she would not be denied. And he defended himself.
1 Like
Why is law even being applied to the situation involving Illidanâs forced lightforging? He was surrounded by supposed âgood guysâ who might as well be substituted for law enforcement in the metaphorical situation but proceeded to do absolutely nothing to aid Illidan when he was clearly in distress and being put in a situation that could easily be construed as life threatening.
If some obsessed stranger tries to force some unknown medicine down my throat claiming that it will make me stronger and that it was my destiny, Iâd killâem too.
There was no âlawâ in that room. It was just Illidan being forced into a situation he did not ask for and Xâera not really giving a crap about what he wanted. It might as well be a life or death situation and whether it breaks a law or not, one should defend themselves to protect their life regardless of contrived societal rules.
Calm down, I wasnât making a strawman. I said that to point out merely claiming self-defense doesnât automatically justify his actions.
His attempts to âreason with herâ werenât that; his words amounted to âno thanksâ and âthis looks like something elseâ. He wasnât trying to reason with her at all. And your use of sexual language is creepy and suspicious (focus on facts, not emotions).
Construed as life-threatening how? As he successfully put Akama through worse, one could say poetic justice.
Yes, you were. You flat out pretended that people think Self Defense is a Get out of jail free card.
No one said it was⊠except you. It is an argument you built out of the hay you you made, just to tear it down.
A straw man.
Does the lore about Xeâra make you feel sexual?
That sounds like a Xera thread you could make that would be at least a bit different than the rest of your Xera threadsâŠ
Xera forced herself on Illidan, and he rejected her. He defended himself against her unwanted embrace. She would not be denied, so he put her down. She would not respect ânoâ as an answer, she lacked the power to successfully force herself on her victim.
If you find Xeraâs actions sexual⊠well, we all have our kinks.
2 Likes
Youâre quote-mining again, stop it. People can go and see what I actually typed.
Wrong. I explained what I actually meant. You get this like when you start to lose an argument.
Now youâre just protecting. You literally used the words âher lustâ.
Youâre trying to get an emotional response to manipulate other peopleâs emotions so they side with you, and in this case strawman me. This type of emotional argument has my personal contempt. Go back to using facts, it does more for your case.
Xera lusted after Illidan - the term can be sexual but it also means any great desire.
If your mind goes to sex when ever you consider Xeraâs lust for Illidan, well⊠we see why you make so many threads about it.
2 Likes
Lusting after a lusty windchime.
Curse, youâre killing me here!!
4 Likes
Youâre manipulating emotions again, which is why you chose the word âlustâ instead of a fitting word like âzealâ (which has no meaning you can exploit). Youâre losing the argument, so youâre using emotional manipulation.
If I used your approach I could accuse you of being attracted and hiding it behind projection since you used the word lust.
Since Curse is the one who used the word lust, maybe heâs projecting to hide his own attraction.
Thereâs nothing wrong with their word choice of using âlust,â itâs fine.
1 Like
How is it fine when âzealâ fits better and âlustâ can be misinterpreted? as you see above.
Zeal can work. But because you misinterpreted a sexual meaning doesnât mean the term doesnât fit or shouldnât be used.
They cleared up what they meant, so trying to portray it anyway else is a non-point lol.
1 Like
Zeal still fits better. And can you clarify, because it sounds like you approve of their attempt to misrepresent me?