> We sometimes have the legal grounds to use lethal force in defense of our safety or that of our property (rarely, but apparently in Texas), and we very rarely choose to actually use it.

That's not how it works in most first world places. You can't murder a person to protect property.

A man with with a crowbar breaks into your house at 2 AM. Do you feel obligated to figure out if he's after your property or your life, or would you justify killing him on sight?

A man stealing your cat converter infringes not just on your property, he's possibly making you unable to go to work tomorrow, unable to pay your rent next week and putting you to the streets. If I was in a situation where the livelihood of my family depended on a piece of property I would definitely kill to defend it.

By that logic you should be right to kill me if I outcompete you and steal your client away from you. Because that threatens your livelyhood.

Even if you compete illegally there is typically much less urgency in those matters. You can't quite send a cease-and-desist letter to a guy wrecking your car.

By definition, it isn't murder

In USA.

And by definition anyone in drone weapon blast radius is enemy combatant.

In USA.

It might be advisable to take their point in good faith by considering what they may be saying instead of resorting to mentioning something about US foreign policy.

Based on the definitions I can find of murder in various dictionaries, it seems almost universally defined as an unlawful act. If you choose to go by the commonly-accepted usage of the term, it would not be a murder if the killing is found to be lawful. There are other words, such as homicide, that could be used here [1, 2]. The CPS themselves (in the UK) have a whole page about this distinction.

[1] https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/homicide-murder-and-ma...

[2] https://murphylawoffice.org/john-murphy-law-office-blog/77-w...

I was just pointing out that definitions can be really flexible. Sure, murder is a crime of intentionally killing someone. So if something is not a crime then it's not a murder. But since criminal law is vast and varied same deed in one country might be a crime and in other it is not. I used the word "murder" in non-US definition of what crime is. And pointed out that such actions are not a murder specifically in USA. Implying that with respect to other countries laws they might be. And they are.

And calling indiscriminately killing people "a foreign policy" and legal is another can of USA made worms.

Check out how narratives created and pushed by evil people affected your moral sense.

I’d say this is a valid argument, because it shows how little someone else’s life means to many Americans.

and your comment shows, again, how little ability you have to comprehend what you're reading

It is still defense of life in robbery cases. Robbery is potentially lethal violence or the threat of violence to get what they want. That is what justifies self-defense.

When life or health is threatened it's understandable, but if just the property is threatened? In most first world country you are not allowed to go out of your way with intention to kill the offender.

The parent made this exact point.