Why Rainsford Should Not Have Killed Zaroff

What would you do if you were stuck on an island with a man-hunter? Everyone agrees Rainsford killed Zaroff, but some believe Rainsford should have killed Zaroff and some believe he should not have killed Zaroff. Rainsford should have killed Zaroff for three reasons: Zaroff is insane, he had no intention of letting Rainsford leave, and the Bible does not forbid killing it forbids murder. The first reason Rainsford should have killed Zaroff is because Zaroff is insane. Zaroff should be imprisoned in Russia for this reason. Zaroff inflicts pain on innocent people for amusement. He intentionally shipwrecks people then later hunts them. Zaroff has no respect for human life, he has no morality, and he has no awareness of the difference between man and beast.
Zaroff was not going to risk people finding out about his “game”. Evil, mischievous, vile, and cruel, Zaroff represents them all. Zaroff played unfairly. He had a gun, dogs, Ivan, etc. Rainsford only had a knife, clothes, and some food. While Zaroff is deceitful, Rainsford is noble. Zaroff had impressive weapons, but lacked integrity. The third reason Rainsford should have killed Zaroff is because the Bible does not forbid killing it forbids murder. You can kill in a situation where self-defense is necessary. Zaroff, a deranged, man-hunter, planned on feeding Rainsford to the dogs in the end. Rainsford is as fearless as a lion. Rainsford had no guilt because he knew he did nothing wrong. Some say Rainsford should not have killed Zaroff. Zaroff said Rainsford could leave if he won. He won, so there was no reason to kill him. Rainsford should have believed Zaroff and trusted that he would let him go. The Bible says not to repay evil with evil. However, this is not true. Rainsford knew Zaroff was not going to risk Rainsford telling people about his evildoings, so he had to protect