posted by
takyon
on Saturday June 20 2015, @11:30PM
An Anonymous Coward writes:
"At some point as a country, we have to reckon with what happens. It's not enough to express sympathy. You don't see this kind of murder, on this scale, with this kind of frequency in other advanced countries on earth." - President Obama.
Why not just say that no government is technically unlimited, then?
Because it's not true? Just because a government can kill people under certain legal situations doesn't mean that it can arbitrarily kill people. For example, is a government "technically unlimited" because its law enforcement can kill in self-defense?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 22 2015, @01:34AM
by Anonymous Coward
on Monday June 22 2015, @01:34AM (#199246)
Because it's not true? Just because a government can kill people under certain legal situations doesn't mean that it can arbitrarily kill people.
Defending yourself or others from imminent (not hypothetical) physical harm is the only situation I can see where killing is acceptable. Deciding that someone should die after they've already been captured is an example of big government, if you prefer that term.
Deciding that someone should die after they've already been captured is an example of big government, if you prefer that term.
That term is inappropriate too, because small governments can exercise that sort of power too. And it still depends on what sort of constraints legal and otherwise exist on the government officials.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 21 2015, @01:05PM
No it can't. For "local" is a constraint.
Why not just say that no government is technically unlimited, then? Big, unlimited... whatever you want to call it.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday June 21 2015, @08:25PM
Why not just say that no government is technically unlimited, then?
Because it's not true? Just because a government can kill people under certain legal situations doesn't mean that it can arbitrarily kill people. For example, is a government "technically unlimited" because its law enforcement can kill in self-defense?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 22 2015, @01:34AM
Because it's not true? Just because a government can kill people under certain legal situations doesn't mean that it can arbitrarily kill people.
Defending yourself or others from imminent (not hypothetical) physical harm is the only situation I can see where killing is acceptable. Deciding that someone should die after they've already been captured is an example of big government, if you prefer that term.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday June 22 2015, @02:09AM
Deciding that someone should die after they've already been captured is an example of big government, if you prefer that term.
That term is inappropriate too, because small governments can exercise that sort of power too. And it still depends on what sort of constraints legal and otherwise exist on the government officials.