Talk:justifiable homicide
Latest comment: 7 months ago by BD2412 in topic RFD discussion: August 2023–April 2024
The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process (permalink).
It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.
I created this apparently, but it now appears SOP to me. Why single this particular crime out? Compare justifiable crime, justifiable theft, etc. If we must, let's simply add a legal sense at justifiable. PUC – 08:24, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. —Al-Muqanna المقنع (talk) 08:26, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- Keep. It's a legal term of art for a particular legal defense. Imetsia (talk (more)) 21:28, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- The term of art should probably be a sense at justifiable unless I'm missing something specific to homicide? —Al-Muqanna المقنع (talk) 22:11, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- There is the proper legal defense of w:justifiable homicide, but there isn't anything similar for "justified robbery," "justified arson," etc. In addition, justifiable homicide generally refers to homicide committed in the attempt to protect one's life; not homicide that is otherwise "justifiable" on other philosophical grounds, for example. Black's Law Dictionary distinguishes, moreover, between "excusable homicide," "innocent homicide," and "justifiable homicide" as three separate entries with distinct legal criteria for each one. Imetsia (talk (more)) 23:02, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- But there is "justifiable force"/"justifiable use of force", "justifiable discipline" (corporal punishment), and even "justifiable battery" (see this case). The SOP argument isn't about being "justifiable" in a general philosophical sense, it's that "justifiable" is a legal term with specific application that extends beyond homicide (as is "excusable"): cf. the wp article on justification and excuse. "Innocent homicide" is simply homicide without criminal guilt, which can be either excused or justifiable. —Al-Muqanna المقنع (talk) 23:34, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- There is the proper legal defense of w:justifiable homicide, but there isn't anything similar for "justified robbery," "justified arson," etc. In addition, justifiable homicide generally refers to homicide committed in the attempt to protect one's life; not homicide that is otherwise "justifiable" on other philosophical grounds, for example. Black's Law Dictionary distinguishes, moreover, between "excusable homicide," "innocent homicide," and "justifiable homicide" as three separate entries with distinct legal criteria for each one. Imetsia (talk (more)) 23:02, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- The term of art should probably be a sense at justifiable unless I'm missing something specific to homicide? —Al-Muqanna المقنع (talk) 22:11, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- Keep per Imetsia, and as a lemming of Black's Law Dictionary. To be clear, a "homicide" that is "justifiable" is not necessary a "justifiable homicide". If you come out of your house and see a hooligan smashing your car windows with a crowbar, and you shoot him dead, you can articulate a justification for the shooting and call it "justifiable", but that does not meet the legal definition of the phrase. bd2412 T 17:28, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- Note: I have corrected the definition to specify homicide committed "because it is necessary to prevent death or serious bodily harm". bd2412 T 17:32, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hmm, but would the court say "the defendant's homicide of the hooligan was justifiable"? I don't think so; AFAICT, for a given context (e.g. laws about deaths), the definition of "justifiable" resides in "justifiable", i.e. I would expect that the range of things that can be called "justifiable homicide" and that which can be called "homicide which was/is justifiable" is the same. Is there evidence to the contrary? It also seems like the range of homicides which could be called "justifiable" (or "justifiable homicides") is likely to vary by jurisdiction (it wouldn't surprise me if some jurisdictions have considered "honor killings" justifiable homicides / a justifiable type of homicide, for example). I am leaning towards delete per Al-Muqanna. - -sche (discuss) 18:16, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- @-sche: Good point. I have restored the previous sense and converted this discussion into an RfD-sense for the original (now first) sense. If there is a question as to whether the second sense exists beyond the existing citation to Black's Law Dictionary Sixth (which defines "Justifiable homicide" as "Killing of another in self-defense when danger of death or serious bodily harm exists"), this would be an RfV issue. bd2412 T 21:56, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- @-sche, bd2412: I don't think those senses should have been introduced. The core definition of "justifiable homicide" is simply homicide that is justified according to the law. What sorts of homicide are justified have varied according to time and place, and the specific content of the laws pertaining to it shouldn't be considered definitional. Antebellum sources comment, for example, on the killing of a master by a slave in self-defence being "justifiable homicide" in England but murder in Georgia. Recent histories of law describe the evolution of "justifiable homicide" in England; for example, the killing of felons engaged in arson was apparently rendered "justifiable homicide" in the 14th century. Here are three other sources on contemporary context beyond the two sentences in Black's Law Dictionary:
- Gardner and Anderson, Criminal Law 13th ed. (2018): "Justifiable homicide is defined in the common law as an intentional homicide committed under circumstances of necessity or duty without any evil intent and without any fault or blame on the person who commits the homicide. Justifiable homicide includes state executions, homicides by police officers in the performance of their legal duty, and self-defense […] "
- Partial Defences to Murder (2004 report by the Law Commission of England and Wales): "Historically English law distinguished justifiable homicide from excusable homicide […] In modern scholarship a good deal has been written about the concepts of justificatory and excusatory defences. Essentially, justificatory defences are those which recognise that the conduct was legitimate in the circumstances e.g. self-defence."
- Oxford Dictionary of Law 8th ed. (2015): Lawful homicide (sometimes termed justifiable homicide) occurs when somebody uses reasonable force in preventing a crime or arresting an offender, in self-defence or defence of others, or (possibly) in defence of his property." —Al-Muqanna المقنع (talk) 22:54, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- @-sche, bd2412: I don't think those senses should have been introduced. The core definition of "justifiable homicide" is simply homicide that is justified according to the law. What sorts of homicide are justified have varied according to time and place, and the specific content of the laws pertaining to it shouldn't be considered definitional. Antebellum sources comment, for example, on the killing of a master by a slave in self-defence being "justifiable homicide" in England but murder in Georgia. Recent histories of law describe the evolution of "justifiable homicide" in England; for example, the killing of felons engaged in arson was apparently rendered "justifiable homicide" in the 14th century. Here are three other sources on contemporary context beyond the two sentences in Black's Law Dictionary:
- @-sche: Good point. I have restored the previous sense and converted this discussion into an RfD-sense for the original (now first) sense. If there is a question as to whether the second sense exists beyond the existing citation to Black's Law Dictionary Sixth (which defines "Justifiable homicide" as "Killing of another in self-defense when danger of death or serious bodily harm exists"), this would be an RfV issue. bd2412 T 21:56, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- Yeah, adding two separate senses for two of the types of homicides that are considered justifiable only highlights that the only meaning of the term is "homicide that's considered justifiable by the relevant jurisdiction"; rather than adding a few dozen more senses for everything every era and region has considered justifiable (honor killing, killing someone who sexually harassed you in ancient Iceland, 'standing your ground' and going over to attack and then shoot someone who's Black in Florida, etc), I think it makes more sense to recognize that it's SOP and delete the entry. (This reminds me of the discussion over having 'legal standard' definitions of things like 'mayonnaise', 'margarine' and 'murder', where I raised the same issue, that we'd have dozens of senses that just amounted to "mayonnaise, but when it conforms to US law 3702561", "mayonnaise, but when it confirms to Irish law 9234567"... compare this revision of murder—readable version here— with various jurisdictions' different criteria spelled out...) - -sche (discuss) 01:11, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
- I still don't think that gets you around the issue of homicides that would be considered justifiable by some person (e.g., shooting a con man who is on the phone with your grandmother and about to get her to transmit her life savings), but which would clearly not fall within any legal definition of the term. Honor killings, for example, are not deemed "justifiable homicide" in any jurisdiction, nor is homicide committed pursuant to "stand your ground" laws within the definition of "justifiable homicide", even though it is legally excused. In short, your rationale is misinformation. bd2412 T 03:51, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
- Some person who considers a homicide "justifiable" also considers it a "justifiable homicide"; some court which considers something to not be a "justifiable homicide" also considers it to not be "justifiable"; AFAICT, for any given context/speaker, the use of the collocation "justifiable homicide" and the use of the word "justifiable" is consistent, because each one's use of "justifiable homicide" just means a homicide which they consider justifiable. The restrictions on what is or isn't "justifibable homicide" reside in "justifiable", in what the person considers is or isn't justifiable (and conceivably to some extent also in what the speaker considers is or isn't "homicide").
I initially reconverted the conversion of the RFD to an RFD-sense back to an RFD, but I wonder if we should have a separate RFD (since this one is getting input from only a few people) about merging the two just-added senses... there are many things which some person would (or conversely would not) consider murder (or theft, or justifiable homicide, or justifiable use of force, etc) which a court in Vermont would not (or conversely would) consider murder (etc), and then there are different things which a court in El Salvador would or would not consider murder, but obviously listing each one on a separate sense-line like we did for a while was not the right approach, and likewise taking "some jurisdictions consider murder by police or in self-defense justifiable" and turning it into three senses does not strike me as the right approach. - -sche (discuss) 16:07, 13 September 2023 (UTC)- I disagree with the contention that a person who considers a homicide "justifiable" also considers it a "justifiable homicide"; firstly, this is a convention about how a specific phrase is used (and note, a set phrase, as "justified homicide" or "justifiable murder" would both be incorrect). Can you provide citations showing use of the phrase "justifiable homicide" to generically mean any homicide that is considered "justified" by a given person? Secondly, compare grand theft auto. It could theoretically generically mean any theft that was "grand" in the general sense of something being grand and "auto" in the sense of being automatic, but if someone steals your automatic typewriter and you as they run away you yell, "stop! That's a grand theft auto", does your use of the phrase indicate that the theft meets the definition of "grand theft auto"? bd2412 T 01:55, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
- Some person who considers a homicide "justifiable" also considers it a "justifiable homicide"; some court which considers something to not be a "justifiable homicide" also considers it to not be "justifiable"; AFAICT, for any given context/speaker, the use of the collocation "justifiable homicide" and the use of the word "justifiable" is consistent, because each one's use of "justifiable homicide" just means a homicide which they consider justifiable. The restrictions on what is or isn't "justifibable homicide" reside in "justifiable", in what the person considers is or isn't justifiable (and conceivably to some extent also in what the speaker considers is or isn't "homicide").
- I still don't think that gets you around the issue of homicides that would be considered justifiable by some person (e.g., shooting a con man who is on the phone with your grandmother and about to get her to transmit her life savings), but which would clearly not fall within any legal definition of the term. Honor killings, for example, are not deemed "justifiable homicide" in any jurisdiction, nor is homicide committed pursuant to "stand your ground" laws within the definition of "justifiable homicide", even though it is legally excused. In short, your rationale is misinformation. bd2412 T 03:51, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
- Yeah, adding two separate senses for two of the types of homicides that are considered justifiable only highlights that the only meaning of the term is "homicide that's considered justifiable by the relevant jurisdiction"; rather than adding a few dozen more senses for everything every era and region has considered justifiable (honor killing, killing someone who sexually harassed you in ancient Iceland, 'standing your ground' and going over to attack and then shoot someone who's Black in Florida, etc), I think it makes more sense to recognize that it's SOP and delete the entry. (This reminds me of the discussion over having 'legal standard' definitions of things like 'mayonnaise', 'margarine' and 'murder', where I raised the same issue, that we'd have dozens of senses that just amounted to "mayonnaise, but when it conforms to US law 3702561", "mayonnaise, but when it confirms to Irish law 9234567"... compare this revision of murder—readable version here— with various jurisdictions' different criteria spelled out...) - -sche (discuss) 01:11, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
- Three senses now? It looks even sillier. PUC – 10:05, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
- The first of the three senses can be deleted, as it is not attested. The other two reflect distinct legal meanings of the phrase, as a set phrase, over distinct periods in time. bd2412 T 20:01, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
- Keep, as a term with a specific legal meaning. P Aculeius (talk) 05:46, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
Sense 1 deleted, kept as to the other two. bd2412 T 16:50, 16 April 2024 (UTC)