Why Is General Zaroff Justified

812 Words4 Pages
Murder is the premeditated killing of one human being by another. Premeditated means think out or plan (an action, especially a crime) beforehand. Now do you think that the killing of General Zaroff was justified? In the story “The most dangerous game” Rainsford stated “I’m not a murder” but can self-defense be perceived as murder? In regards to the Rainsford vs. Zaroff situation, it is my belief that Rainsford killing General Zaroff, was not justified. I believe Rainsford was not justified because, General Zaroff never stated what he was going to do to Rainsford, General Zaroff was just lonely because the only person he could talk to was Ivan and he is deaf so he had no one to play with he, also he could have stayed hidden and then General Zaroff wouldn’t hunt him anymore after three days. Also, he went back into the house to kill general Zaroff when he didn’t have to go back in and kill him since the hunting was over already. It wasn’t justified because he didn’t have to kill general Zaroff to survive he had successfully stayed hidden…show more content…
Rainsford could have stayed hidden for the three days and general Zaroff wouldn’t have hunted him after the three days. In the story General Zaroff stated “if I do not find you by midnight on the third day my sloop will place you on the mainland near a town”. If the general said this why would he have to kill him if he was going to place him on the mainland? It was basically a deal that they made that Rainsford didn’t come through on. Rainsford thought that if he got caught by General Zaroff that he was going to get killed, but General Zaroff never said what was going to happen if he got caught. This is why I believe that the killing of general Zaroff by Rainsford was not justifiable because he could have simply came through on the deal. All he had to do stay hidden the three days and General Zaroff would have simply placed him on the mainland near a
Open Document