Talk:Murder: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Protected "Talk:Murder": persistent disruption from Foundation-banned editor ([Edit=Require autoconfirmed or confirmed access] (expires 08:08, 23 November 2021 (UTC)) [Move=Require autoconfirmed or confirmed access] (expires 08:08, 23 November 2021 (UTC)))
→‎Murder versus "the unlawful taking": Defending a moral use of the term unrelated to law
Line 31: Line 31:
The above is a basic fault of relying on legal definitions alone. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Howardpearce|Howardpearce]] ([[User talk:Howardpearce#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Howardpearce|contribs]]) 16:00, 30 May 2021 (UTC)</span>
The above is a basic fault of relying on legal definitions alone. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Howardpearce|Howardpearce]] ([[User talk:Howardpearce#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Howardpearce|contribs]]) 16:00, 30 May 2021 (UTC)</span>
:It's not simply a legal but also dictionary definition that it's an unlawful killing. If a country's law legalizes '''killings''' of some kind than a killing under that law cannot be murder. You're making the mistake of giving your own personal definition of murder. Moreover, war is a very special circumstance during which different laws apply. Perpetrators of the ghastly crimes you mentioned are still liable to be found guilty of serious war crimes by an international tribunal.[[User:Tvx1|T]][[User Talk:Tvx1|v]][[Special:Contributions/Tvx1|x]]1 16:47, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
:It's not simply a legal but also dictionary definition that it's an unlawful killing. If a country's law legalizes '''killings''' of some kind than a killing under that law cannot be murder. You're making the mistake of giving your own personal definition of murder. Moreover, war is a very special circumstance during which different laws apply. Perpetrators of the ghastly crimes you mentioned are still liable to be found guilty of serious war crimes by an international tribunal.[[User:Tvx1|T]][[User Talk:Tvx1|v]][[Special:Contributions/Tvx1|x]]1 16:47, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

:'Murder' sometimes means 'wrongful killing'. (One way that the OED defines it: "to kill (a person) wickedly, inhumanly, or barbarously".) When a vegetarian says, "killing animals is murder," this does not mean "it is illegal to kill animals for food" but "it is morally wrong to kill animals for food." Another example: "In imposing the death penalty, the government murdered an innocent man" - here the term means "wrongfully killed" not "illegally killed". '''[[User:Omphaloscope|Omphaloscope]]''' ''[[User_talk:Omphaloscope|talk]]'' 11:47, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Revision as of 11:47, 26 February 2022

Template:Vital article

in the absence of malice?

According to the article, manslaughter is "killing committed in the absence of malice, brought about by reasonable provocation, or diminished capacity" But malice is a desire to harm somebody caused by a feeling of hate. Now, imagine that some crazy psychopath with a big knife is approaching your little child, and smiling saying that he will kill you all, just for the pleasure of killing. But first he will kill your child to see your misery and grief. The emotional response of your brain is immediate, but what exactly do you feel? No malice? Do you want to kill him to rescue your child, but don't you feel any hatred? Really? I don't think so. 85.193.228.103 (talk) 20:05, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is "malice" in a technical legal sense, not an emotional state. See malice (law). It probably would be useful to clarify that in the first sentence, maybe with an explanatory footnote (an underused mechanism in Wikipedia). --Trovatore (talk) 20:23, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Done. --Trovatore (talk) 20:30, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Perfect, thank you :-) 85.193.228.103 (talk) 20:52, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Murder versus "the unlawful taking"

According to the Wikipedia "definition" of murder as an "unlawful taking", then the legalization of the murder of Muslims or Jews would mean the taking of those lives would no longer be considered unlawful and hence not murder .

The above is a basic fault of relying on legal definitions alone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Howardpearce (talkcontribs) 16:00, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's not simply a legal but also dictionary definition that it's an unlawful killing. If a country's law legalizes killings of some kind than a killing under that law cannot be murder. You're making the mistake of giving your own personal definition of murder. Moreover, war is a very special circumstance during which different laws apply. Perpetrators of the ghastly crimes you mentioned are still liable to be found guilty of serious war crimes by an international tribunal.Tvx1 16:47, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
'Murder' sometimes means 'wrongful killing'. (One way that the OED defines it: "to kill (a person) wickedly, inhumanly, or barbarously".) When a vegetarian says, "killing animals is murder," this does not mean "it is illegal to kill animals for food" but "it is morally wrong to kill animals for food." Another example: "In imposing the death penalty, the government murdered an innocent man" - here the term means "wrongfully killed" not "illegally killed". Omphaloscope talk 11:47, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]