Are soldiers murderers?

Yes I am saying it was not murder. I am not saying nor implying, that it
was ever legal. I know it was not murder, yet. I don't know if it was or
was not legal but I suspect that it was both illegal and murder. I am
however not qualified to determine if it was or was not.

Capt. A. L.

 

Errm; OK I must've missed the "smart-arse" bit. (I'm really only skimming
the thread).
I don't know what historical context you're referring to (and I was assuming
we were talking about present day) but I can't understand how you could
imagine a killing could be a "murder" any other way!

 

It was mostly intended as tongue in cheek, but apparently not taken
that way.

My references are a bit vague, but I was particularly pointing to the
english derivation of the word murder (from the french, mordre), and
using wiki as a reference. The origin of the word being compensation
for an unjust killing.

In terms of historical context, I was thinking of recorded Summerian
law code (more than 4000 years old) which defines murder, of even
traditional Aboriginal law. You'd have to be stretching the point to
suggest that Aboriginal law fits in with the concept of a Court of
Law, yet clearly the concept of murder exists, as do sanctions for the
act.

Bill

 

They not a murderer until they're found guilty of murder. Until someone
has been convicted, with or without being caught as in tried in absentia
or even tried after death, the deceased has not been murdered. A court
may determine that a person has been killed unlawfully and thus murdered
without a killer being prosecuted. Murder is not an act it is a result
of being found guilty.

Nev..
'07 XB12X
'08 DL1000K8

 

Hah, you can't just go around yelling murder at a group of crows
Moike. Anyway, there are very few crows in Oz. Those black birds we
call crows are raven. Referring to a group[ of raven as a murder is an
unkindness.

Cheers
Theo

 

Very well put Nev. I couldn't have put it more clearly myself.
I'm glad you finally saw the light.

Capt. A. L.

 

You are right, I clearly can't read, since I could have sworn that my
question was directed at your argument, and therefore not a non sequitur,
and that you defined non sequitur as meaning "you're off topic dude".

I was obviously mistaken and shall slink away with my tail between my legs.

Pietro

What public record?

 

That depends upon if they were killed before or after it was against the
law to kill slaves (and what law it was against).

It was always an intensely immoral act however.


G-S

 

You can't say it *was* murder because the reason for the killing is
undetermined. It might have been negligent abuse, manslaughter, disease
or torture (or something else).


G-S

 

Where as I find it amazing that some people think themselves qualified
to pronounce jugement upon another human when they aren't a judge or
part of a jury by labeling them a murderer.

That's why the term alleged exists after all...


G-S

 

Eh?!!? You say yourself that murder's (historically) a concept in "law" and
then you can't understand why it's modern application requires action by a
court?!!?
Is there anywhere on earth at present that doesn't have courts making legal
decisions?

 

And now we've completed the arc and everyone is in agreement.

 

Hah, you can't just go around yelling murder at a group of crows
Moike. Anyway, there are very few crows in Oz. Those black birds we
call crows are raven. Referring to a group[ of raven as a murder is an
unkindness.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Is that true?!!?
I always though ours were crows and the Euro's were ravens!
Faaark!

 

LOL. Sure, if you think that makes sense...

Nev..
'07 XB12X
'08 DL1000K8

 

[shrug] Makes more sense than "all killing is murder unless a court decides
it's not murder...."

 

Nice one, my captain. But... Back to the subject o f this thread:
Are soldiers muderers:

Isn't it a bit of a Catch-22 when, in invading another country, we
trash the very legal system which would find us guilty of murder?

Sorta like al Qeida blowing up court houses and then saying "but we
haven't been found guilty in a court", wouldn't you say?

=================

Onya bike

Gerry

 

And they would and are indeed correct until they are actually found guilty
in a court - do you still not get it?

 

Our raven are a small variety of raven, crows are an even smaller
bird. We do have both in Oz but even ornithologists can't tell them
apart. It appears that if you two largish black birds in your locale,
the larger one will be called a raven and the smaller one a crow. Oz
Raven go ah-ah-ah-aaah (most common) or kor-kor-kor or kar-kar-kar or
uk-uk-uk-uk. Crows go nark-nark-nark. Anyway, you were supposed to
pick up that a flock of crows is a 'murder' and a flock of raven is an
'unkindness'.

Theo

 

[sigh] Pietro, this is not about the legal definition of murder, this
is about fucking with the courts so you can't get convicted. Some
people call that corruption or criminal activity. In this case, we
call it patriotism. "Patriotism: the last refuge of a scoundrel."

Get over yourself you, fucking great wanking buffoon.

=================

Onya bike

Gerry

 

Oh... and anopther thing Pietro... the fact that you failed to
correctly identify the main topic in my comment, and hence responded
to it in an off-topic manner, is called a non sequitur.

=================

Onya bike

Gerry