Is Killing Ever Justified

I believe that George, in no way should be punished for killing Lennie. He did it for the right reasons and it was best for Lennie in that situation. The closure George and Lennie hot from this ordeal was better, and easier this way for both of them. This is a little bit of information on way I believe George was justified in killing Lennie.

George and Lennie were best friends for a long time, more like brothers. Lennie is about as bright as a 2 watt bulb, so George couldn’t really get mad at him when he accidently killed Curley’s wife while feeling the softness of her hair. “…’I ain’t mad. I never been mad, an’ I ain’t now. That’s a thing I want ya to know’”. The two had planned a future together—a future in their own dream ranch, a ranch where no trouble would ever bother them. “’You…an’ me. Ever’body gonna be nice to you. Ain’t gonna be no more trouble. Nobody gonna hurt nobody nor steal from ‘em’”. Then after he tells him about the rabbits that Lennie is so fond of, he shoots him in the back of the head where he knows it will not hurt him, and Lennie will not know what hit him. This is the peaceful alternative to what Curley had in store for him. Curley's exact words were "shoot the bastard right in the guts." George's euthanizing of Lennie makes the mentally incompetent Lennie die with dignity. Had Curley gotten to Lennie first, Lennie would have suffered. This shows you how much George cares for Lennie, no matter what he does or the crimes he commits. He’d always be there to help Lennie get right back up to his feet, make him forget all his worries, and move on like nothing happened. I strongly believe George was the right person to kill Lennie, and made the right decision in doing so, rather than to let him suffer in the hands of Curley.

One of the main reasons why George was actually justified for the killing is because Lennie had hurt others in the past and would most likely continue to do so. When they were in Salinas, Lennie got into very similar trouble when he wouldn’t let go of a girl’s dress. When George was asked by Slim what had happened in Weed he explained, “Well that girl rabbits in an’ tells the law she been raped. The guys in Weed start a party out to lynch Lennie. So we sit in a irrigation ditch under water all the rest of that day. An’ at night we scrammed outta there” (42). This shows us that Lennie is trouble, brings it wherever he goes, and this is why they moved to Salinas. When at the ranch Lennie not only kills his puppy, he also breaks Curley’s hand, showing that the trouble that follows Lennie happens quite often. Lennie smiled with this bruised mouth. “I didn't want no trouble," he said. He walked toward the door, but just before he came to it,

It has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt at this point, Lennie's innocence is not very accepted with the world because of his size, age, etc. He can’t really learn to change his ways due to his disabilities. Lennie can’t even understand why the bad things he has done are bad. Also, the fate he would meet at Curley's mutilated hands is enough to convince George that his only real option is to make Lennie's death as quick and painless as possible. Lennie would have died at the hands of Curly anyways, which would have been a much more painful and dehumanizing death for Lennie. He couldn't be taken to a mental hospital and in the depression, these were basically non-existent and spending a life in jail would be even more torture for a mentally ill person than death itself. George did what was right because he prevented Lennie from doing anything this terrible again, he stopped Lennie from a more painful death, and he really didn't have any other responsible

George promises Lennie many things once they get their own farm, “’O.K. Someday- we’re gonna get the jack together… ‘Specially if you remember as good as that.’”(15-16). So George killing Lennie was for his own benefit and it was a very immoral thing to do.

The legitimacy of the use of capital punishment has been tarnished by its widespread misuse , which has clouded our judgment regarding the justifiability of the death penalty as a punitive measure. However, the problems with capital punishment, such as the “potential error, irreversibility, arbitrariness and racial skew" , are not a basis for its abolition, as the world of homicide suffer from these problems more acutely. To tackle this question, one must disregard the currently blemished universal status quo and purely assess the advantages and disadvantages of the death penalty as a punitive measure. Through unprejudiced examination of the death penalty and its consequential impacts, it is evident that it is a punishment that effectively serves its retributive, denunciatory, deterrent, and incapacitative goals.

Lennie needed to be punished, but at the same time it needed to fit the crime; no torture or humiliation that he would not understand that George with Lennie , I believe George should of killed

Is George guilty of murder? George was protecting Lennie by killing him if George had not killed Lennie, Lennie would have been torchered by the lynch mob. Lennie would have been confused and scared. He might even have have fought back and hurt someone else. If you were in the same position then you would have to weigh all your options. In the end George chose protection over fear.

George shouldn’t be put in jail for killing Lennie because if your killing somebody or a animal that is usually not legal to kill and you don’t want to see the animal or person suffer then you should take it out of its misery.

First and foremost, George has to constantly continue to repeat rules to Lennie because Lennie is undisciplined. Like, after Slim gives Lennie a puppy Lennie brings the puppy into the bunkhouse with him even though George told him he was not supposed to. For example, after Lennie comes into the bunkhouse John Steinbeck writes that George " reached down and picked up the tiny puppy from where Lennie had been concealing it against his stomach." (Steinbeck) In this quote it shows that Lennie disobeyed the rules that George has set with him so he could get the puppy this means that Lennie is undisciplined because he broke the rules even though he knew that there were specific rules that were not supposed to be broken. consequently, George has to repeat himself many times and treat Lennie like a child by fixing the things that Lennie messes up and disobeyes the rules. So George was justified in his decision to kill

George should have killed Lennie because he hasn’t been able to save a lot of money because of Lennie, Lennie always gets in trouble, and he has killed Curley's wife. One reason why George isn’t able to save his money because he has to watch Lennie. George once said, “ If I was alone I could live so easy. I could get a job and work, and no trouble. No mess at all”.

In the story Of Mice and Men, George killed Lennie. I think George should have killed Lennie. When Lennie was in the barn petting his puppy Curley’s wife came in and talked to him about soft things and let him touch her hair . When she thought he touched it enough she tugged her head back and Lennie grabbed onto her and shook her until her neck broke.

Should someone get punished for something that was already going to happen. Well when Lennie killed that girl that was curly wife he would have gotten hung back then but they were all angry so he wouldn’t have made it that far because he would have killed Lennie for killing his property. Then yes curly could have gotten hung unless he played someone to fix it or make it look like it didn’t happen or blame George. Since George is practically family he should have the right to end Lennie’s “suffering” as they would have called it back then. If Lennie’s family wanted to they could have done that a long time ago when he was born or when he was a kid.

Is it right to kill? This ethical question has been asked throughout time, I believe there is no straight forward answer for it, and this a debateable question as it can change according to the situation. Many people have different opinions and views on if killing is right or wrong. In this essay I will be explaining whether I believe if killing is right.

What is killing? Well the dictionary definition is: to cause death/the act of causing death. But is that enough? I s there another type of killing? A type that is justifiable. For example if a person steals or puts you in mortal danger is it acceptable to take their life in return? But more importantly is it morally right?