Nat Turner was one of our first domestic terrorists. He killed innocent children in his Virginia uprising.
Good!
The majority of slaves would have had no reason to kill their owners. Go back and read Storeboughts post. That's pretty much where I stand.
You are a fool. But I suppose I could make use of you - drive up to Missouri and I'll chain you in the backyard, find something for you to do.
Why should many slaves have had reason to kill their owners? In exchange for their free labour, they received clothes, food and shelter, which in the context of the time was, arguably, somewhat preferable to surviving on a pittance and having to provide everything for themselves
I'd never in a million years condone slavery per se but at least the plantocracy, as a whole, were conciously aware of their moral obligations to care and provide for their slaves and did so. I'm not saying heinous acts of violence were not comitted against slaves but I'd say they were the exception rather than the norm
The pre-Civil War South was primarily a benevolent paternalistic society, where slavery suited the demands of the primarily agrarian economy
Getting back to the question, had my kin been slaughtered by slaves, I may not have been around. Thinking about it like that, along with all else I have said, I'd say slaves were not justified in killing their owners
Dave
Poll
