. . . . .
|
So should you be charged with treason if you take a life (no matter the circumstances)? Treason is an assault on the state and killing someone lessens that state so treason? Even police officers, government officials ordering it, or citizens acting in self defence.
So in theory, if you kill everyone you reduce the state to Zero?
You might be on to something here.
-
Oh and to your question the answer is...
No
|
IT'S A TRAP!!![/Ackbar]
I assume this is going to be a bait and switch....after everyone says "how silly, that's just murder. Not treason!" we will be presented with some obscure story about how country X is doing this because Political Dude Y did some stuff and undermined the country....
Did I guess rightish?
So should you be charged with treason if you take a life (no matter the circumstances)? Treason is an assault on the state and killing someone lessens that state so treason? Even police officers, government officials ordering it, or citizens acting in self defence.
Um...no. I am though really shocked at the idea you would charge somebody with anything in a case of self-defense.
Though we in the US kinda of do that sometimes....though we make it a federal case and call it violating somebody's civil liberties.
Well if we're saying corporations are people, I guess there's no reason now that "the state" can't be a person too...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You know thinking about some more.....I have to add this.
Yellowdingoes thinking seem to be that we the people 'serve the state...thus a lost of anyone hurts the state.
Which I think of even as more wrong...as my view is that the state should serve the people...
though maybe I am just over thinking this...it is a a YD thread after all.
Which I think of even as more wrong...as my view is that the state should serve the people...
Oh, it does... but only a small percentage of the "right people".
So should you be charged with treason if you take a life (no matter the circumstances)? Treason is an assault on the state and killing someone lessens that state so treason? Even police officers, government officials ordering it, or citizens acting in self defence.
In the US this is Treason:
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.
So is killing levying war against the US, adhering to their enemies, or giving Aid and Comfort to the Enemy? That is all that is Treason in the US, note also that the person committing Treason either has to confess in court or have at least two witnesses to any act.
Fallacy of composition.
At one time, it was considered treason in Great Britain for a wife to kill her husband. I doubt allowances were made for abusive situations.
Taught by the powers that preach over me
I can hear their empty reasons
I wouldn't listen, I learned how to fight
I opened up my mind to treason
But just like the wounded, and when it's too late
They'll remember, they'll surrender
Never a care for the people who hate
Underestimate me now
Now, now... There were distinct lines between petty and high treason and in the modern world when someone says treason they invariably mean high treason since petty treason was pretty much just a special case of murder since the fourteenth century.
True, but it was still called treason. Also, much as it was also petty reason for a slave to kill their master, both of these types of murder go against the established order of power, and can therefore be seen as being particularly bad for the status quo (the British Empire in this specific case). Don't want to set any examples of fighting against oppression.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
such treason
so mango
wow
|
|
Taught by the powers that preach over me
I can hear their empty reasons
I wouldn't listen, I learned how to fight
I opened up my mind to treason
But just like the wounded, and when it's too late
They'll remember, they'll surrender
Never a care for the people who hate
Underestimate me now
But a shot in the dark
One step away from youJust a shot in the dark
Nothing that you can do
Just a shot in the dark
Always creeping up on you, alright!
Maybe you wouldn't have to shoot it if you didn't have a fear of the dark...
I have constant fear that something's always near
Fear of the dark,fear of the dark
I have a phobia that someone's always there
|
|
Maybe you wouldn't have to shoot it if you didn't have a fear of the dark...
I have constant fear that something's always near
Fear of the dark,fear of the dark
I have a phobia that someone's always there
You should ask yourself some questions to try to understand your phobia.
1.Have you run your fingers down the wall
2. And have you felt your neck skin crawl?
3. When you are searching for the light?
If you are asking philosophically, rather than from a defined legal standpoint - it's possible. It may even be argued that killing anyone can be considered monetary theft from the government if the person you killed was a taxpayer - the dead cannot pay taxes, therefore killing a taxpayer deprives the government of funds.
Thing is, our law describes treason as an act against the state - not necessarily an act against the lives of others. Killing is still murder in most circumstance (excluding war, execution, self-defense, accident, etc.). If you equate treason with murder, then there is no point in defining murder. Defining both as separate can bring clarity to a circumstance.
Yes, some murders can be defined as acts of treason as well (killing politicians, military commanding officers, etc.) Treason covers many other acts that are not killing, yet still acts against the state (espionage, spying, etc.). Murder covers criminal killings of any sort. We currently have no law preventing people from killing opposing soldiers during war, in self defense, or carrying out execution orders on death row prisoners at the legally appointed time. Law does not equal morality, it only serves as a means to impose order on society.
Your reasoning also does not take into account the killing of non-citizens.
So should you be charged with treason if you take a life (no matter the circumstances)? Treason is an assault on the state and killing someone lessens that state so treason? Even police officers, government officials ordering it, or citizens acting in self defence.
It depends. If 'The State' happens to be defined in the personage of a succubus, then of course some sort of retribution is required if anyone lessens said succubus' possessions against her will.
Otherwise it doesn't really matter. You may as well toss a coin over whether or not someone should be charged with treason (although most court-proceedings where succubi are not involved are mind-numbingly boring, and ought to just be skipped for an execution - preferably one carried out in as gruesomely tasteful a fashion as possible).|
|
Your reasoning also does not take into account the killing of non-citizens.
Actually, my failure to limit an assault on the state to the taking of a life of a citizen was deliberate. How are the taking of any life, citizen or not, not an assault on the right of the state to exist free of the uncivil.
Do you still believe the taking of a life is not an assault on the state and therefor treason?
Yellow.