To be free of other people means ultimately to kill them. Everyone is irreducible to other individuals as regards his mind. When he feels endangered or bothered by them, it is threatened his existence in the world among them, not his inner existence. Therefore, the price of freedom should be the elimination of other people’s existence.
The political movements for freedom seem to know this and often use to massacre a lot of undesirable people.
In the private lives, the killing is not a common solution, and not only because the laws would punish it. The peaceful elimination of other people from our existence by letting them to live provides the advantage of feeding permanently our freedom with a sense of superiority. Those who were moved out from others’ existence seem to live for this reason a life which is inferior to that belonging to those who banished them.
Anyway, the freedom which needs to be confirmed as a superior state is not a real freedom, since it depends on somebody else.
On the other side, the killing does not provide by itself a superior state of freedom. On the contrary, it is an atrocity which downgrades the life of the killer, even if there were many who praised notorious criminals for their seeming superiority.
A middle solution for a superior freedom would be to let other people to live and still to forget them as if they were killed. However, it is not a peaceful state of mind: sometimes you may feel guilty of an unknown murder, sometimes you may feel in need of those forgotten people.