If that was the first opening I saw, quite possibly. I don't fight for
sport. If I'm in a fight, I want to stop the fight at first
opportunity. If the first opportunity he gives me is a chance to
chop him in the throat, so be it. He started it. In most places I'd
plea self defense. In Texas, I'd plea "He needed killin'." Either
way I'd be found not guilty, if it even went as far as a trial.
> Burn down his house?
Not likely in a bar fight. If I've got the time to do that, I've got
the time to call the police and let them deal with it. There are
no police to call in this case.
If I lived somewhere without police protection and my neighbor got
mad after an argument with me and came to my property and burned
down my barn, hell yes, I'd burn down his house. Hopefully with him
in it. Argumentative neighbors I can live with, violent neighbors
are not tolerable.
> Cut off his arm.
Probably not. I'd either kill him, or make sure he's long gone.
> Rape his wife?
Nope. Not something I'd enjoy. Kill her? Maybe, if she was going to be
as much of a problem as her late husband.
> Remember also that in most countries, the law frowns upon using more force
> than necessary. Especially when it is done intentionally. I fondly hope
> that here in Olympia we too can establish reasonable limits to
> retaliation. If not, we're courting anarchy.
Some might say that the ghazi was using more force than necessary.
If you start using force, don't whine when your enemy escalates.
It's the chance you take.
In war, you don't get to set your opponents' rules of engagement. You
can only set your own, and either hope that your opponent will follow
your lead (and take your chances if he doesn't), or else make damn
sure that your opponent isn't capable of escalating.
Keith