Journal #3: To Secure Freedom, Did Slaves Have the Right to Kill?
A life in slavery must have surely seemed hopeless, and the thought of freedom would have caused desperation in most slaves. The notion that it is wrong to kill that is universally shared would be severely altered since the slave would have feel as though the master has taken away their life. Killing their master might have seemed like a reasonable way to secure freedom, but it could also have disastrous consequences that limit what small freedoms a slave might have.
The founding principles of this country should not just apply when there are good times, but in bad times too. One of this country’s founding principles is the right to life, and although a slave would definitely have had some people in society trying to take advantage of them (slave holders), that does not mean that a slave has the right to deprive the master or anybody else of their life without a credible threat to theirs. It is the rule of law that governs man in this country, not the feelings of one man at one moment.
Since I believe that the institution of slavery was wrongful and deprived the enslaved persons of liberty, I would have encouraged them to run away. In that case, there may have been people looking to kill them, and in the event someone was about to cause harm to or kill a slave, I would not see any problem with deadly force in self-defense. In the case of self-defense, any man should and does have the right to kill someone else, so the slave would be morally just by saying since their liberty was being deprived, they ran, and since their life was threatened , they had to use deadly force. The notion though that a slave had the right to kill the master without a threat to their life, I disagree with. The masters often did not intend to harm or kill the slaves, as keeping them alive would be a much better investment.
To conclude, although the slaves were in a desperate situation, there are laws that prohibit the deprivation of life, so there would need to be an immediate threat present in order for a slave to justifiably kill their master in order to obtain freedom.
Grade: B While I appreciate the simplicity and lack of wordiness of your stated response, it is an underdeveloped journal response. There are so many other variables, issues, questions, that went unexamined--it makes for a somewhat invalid response to the question. Is self-defense a valid argument when you have your "property" escaping or attempting to violate your freedom of ownership of property?? Aren't slave owners justified in trying to claim or capture runaway "property." The slaves are violating the law, so how is killing by slaves justified when they are the ones in violation of actual law? Is killing circumstantial? Is killing right or wrong? In the future, try to develop your ideas with more context, depth, and consideration of points or points of view less ubiquitous.
ReplyDelete