what if we abstract this a bit though? 1. suppose it is not your life being threatened, but someone else's. is it acceptable to save one person's life to save another? 2. if this acceptable, suppose then that this person is not going to directly cause one death, but indirectly cause many others. for instance, suppose someone will be a dictator who uses his powers to deprive a few million people of access to food. they will not personally kill any individual, but their policies will be responsible for millions of unnecessary deaths. is it okay to kill the next stalin? 3. if this is also acceptable, suppose the individual is merely one policy maker among many. he will necessarily cause the death of millions, but if his life is ended, he will be replaced with someone else who will do the same. taking his life is a necessary but insufficient step in saving millions of lives. is this still acceptable?
United States