If you had no choice but to kill someone, what manner would you hope you’d have to do it?

Whatever way gets the job done.

Sit on their chest so I can watch their face as their ribs cave under my tremendous weight and they asphyxiate.

^^ Whatever way gets the job done.
Strangling him/her and watching their eyes roll back in their head as they gasp their last breath would have the same effect on you as if you set a booby trap for them and made them blow themselves up and you did not have to see the life ebb out of them?

Something effective, not risky, quick and painless. Of the offerings you listed, I would prefer the Monty Python brand 16-ton weight magically and unexpectedly appearing from above.

^ [.. magically and unexpectedly appearing from above.
Barring the fact a weight might not materialize out of nowhere to drop on your assailant’s head, but you had to it, you would choose to be up on the roof, rafters, or tall ladder and drop something on their head to cave their skull in? Because you figure it to be effective in killing them, maiming them to the point they can’t do any more damage, of because you do not have to see them or interact with them physically to vanquish them?

If I’m ever in a situation where I must kill someone I’m not going to sit there and contemplate what method might be most preferable to me, I’m going to do it by whatever method is on hand.

I’d pull out his heart plug.

I would chain them to a 1950’s school desk all limbs secured except one arm. I would place on the desk a WWII bayonette, and as I walked out of the room, I would hit play on a Boom Box that played a continuos loop of It“s a Small World Aft! er All.

Fully operational Deathstar. Destroy his entire world. Make him understand the full depth of his mistake.

Poison through food/drink. The most hassle-free way to ged rid of someone.

Yep, whatever method is at hand. I do not keep firearms but if I were attacked here on this property I would have no shortage of ranch and garden tools to use. Pitchforks, manure rakes, shovels, hoes. I could then fire up the backhoe and bury them as well. Being a creative type the methodology knows no bounds. maybe I’d just disable them with a blow to the head from a shovel then bind them up with hay twine, toss ‘em up on one of the horses and lynch them under a big oak tree. haha

@Hypocrisy_Central The idea, as you stated, is to kill them, not experience their agonized throes of death. If I had my choice of ways to kill that person, I would use a shotgun at point blank range. Very effective!! If I were to worry about the look on their face as I killed them, I would simply shoot them in the head with said shotgun.

Wow, @ragingloli , you are just so far out there!!

Level drain. Yes I know it’s not real.

^ [.. magically and unexpectedly appearing from above.
Barring the fact a weight might not materialize out of nowhere to drop on your assailant’s head, but you had to it, you would choose to be up on the roof, rafters, or tall ladder and drop something on their head to cave their skull in? Because you figure it to be effective in killing them, maiming them to the point they can’t do any more damage, of because you do not have to see them or interact with them physically to vanquish them?

As I mentioned, my selection criteria are mainly about being effective, not risky, quick and painless, generally in that order, and given your stipulations that I really have to kill them.

Of the options you mentioned, the weight seemed to best fit my criteria, especially in the form I selected. But of course I also chose it ironically, because the main point of the joke was how it was utterly effective yet also utterly improbable and unexpected.

My reason is wanting to be as effective as possible, which wouldn’t apply if for example there were a good chance to miss. I don’t want to avoid seeing and I only want reduced interaction because to me it strongly implies risk of failure and/or getting hurt or killed myself (or others nearby).

If you just want to know which experience I would prefer, given certainty of success, no risk to self or others, and no moral ambiguity that killing them is necessary, then hmm….

I think it depends very much also on whether I have some degree of anger or malice towards them (in which case I might not mind them suffering so much), as opposed to considering them possibly misguided to do violence, in which case I’d like it to be quick and painless for them.

So with malice, a huge weight also sounds really satisfying. So does casting them from a great height. A bludgeon could be good if it were something like a large medieval mace. If you’re willing to extend the knife to a large medieval sword, that would also suit me.

Without malice, we’re back to the huge weight if it’s big enough to kill them, or the very high fall, since I imagine those being the least painful.

This question doesn’t make sense.

If the homicide isn’t premeditated, you don’t really get a say in how it happens.

You can’t dig a punji pit and fill it with snakes in self-defense.

Now, worst case scenario, I have to jump up from where I’m laying right now and make a bitch dead, available options in reasonable reach include a couple of thin decorative swords for stabbings, and a heavy, skull-shaped vodka bottle for bludgeoning.

@Seek LOL I love you!.

@kritiper The idea, as you stated, is to kill them, not experience their agonized throes of death.
But to some, if they have to do so in an intimate manner would decide how they hoped to vanquish their assailant. Some would be OK if they could secure a vehicle and mow the attacker down while escaping but a little more hesitant if they had to sneak up on them and stab them in the back. Running someone over in a truck you do not actually have to feel the knife slide into their flesh, get their blood on you, or have then turn to look you in the eye. Same way for having to wrestle someone to the ground and choke them to death while they are thrashing and kicking about until they go limp, to some it would be better to loosen the gas line, and set a situation where they blow themselves up. Some vets I have spoken to that were in artillery said they knew they were killing people when they fired those cannons but it was less like killing than the grunt having to blast the enemy with a shoulder weapon at sometimes very close range. One the shell leaves and the kill is made, they never had to see the body(ies) of those they took out. Some not having to get that personal in the killing or death makes it easier to live with, some don’t care so long as it is quick, not only because they don’t have to know a person is writhing in agony but also less chance the person might somehow be still able to retaliate; still others like a combo of the two, quick but distant.

@Seek If the homicide isn’t premeditated, you don’t really get a say in how it happens.
You will actually elevate defending yourself with deadly force a homicide? We are talking about saving one’s hide and having no choice but to take out the attacker or, assailant. No one is saying how you will make it happen but what method you would hope to have available…..it is not that hard really.

Homicide literally means a person killing a person.

Suicide is homicide. Self-defense killing is homicide. A botched surgery is homicide.

That’s how words work.

@Hypocrisy_Central I think that is and would be quite obvious and would/could go without saying. After all, you can’t please all of the people all of the time just as you can’t answer or expect to answer all aspects of all questions all of the time.

^^ Then I guess we go back to the context of the OP, that the killing is necessary to escape or preserve life, it is not the form of homicide that counts as murder, for those who have a tough time getting up to speed or keeping up. But….I am sure some would try to spin that as well.

I would sign them up for several cake of the month club memberships.

Oh my. Me next.