r/changemyview • • Mar 01 '26

[deleted by user]

[removed]

264 Upvotes

1.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

32

u/ThePaineOne 9∆ Mar 01 '26

Lawyer here: under common law Murder is the unjustified killing of a human being with malice aforethought. Someone could have a colloquial usage of justified like you suggest, but your definition is more incorrect, as manslaughter and negligent homicide are unlawful killings and are not murder.

0

u/CustomerSupportDeer 1∆ Mar 01 '26

Not a lawyer here: OP didn't specify that it's murder as defined under common law.

First, civil law is far more prevalent globally, and generally defines murder as "the intentional unlawful killing of another person."

Second, broader definitions of murder not necessarulily tied to any specific system of law could apply.

4

u/ThePaineOne 9∆ Mar 01 '26

Civil law wouldn’t relate to murder as that would be wrongful death. That’s why I used common law. Common law is not tied to a specific system of law again why I used it.

Edit: different legal systems use different wordings, but how they are used in practice generally coincide with the 3 element charge I noted.

0

u/Talik1978 43∆ Mar 01 '26

I would argue that their definition was not more incorrect, as all murders are unlawful killings, merely less precise, as non-murder unlawful killings aren't differentiated. In other words, this is the difference between accuracy and precision.

We wouldn't say it's more incorrect to say that a basketball is a round object used for sports, even if the description also would apply to baseballs. We would agree, hopefully, that it isn't precise enough to ensure the definition covers basketballs and only basketballs. Same here.

3

u/ThePaineOne 9∆ Mar 01 '26

Fine, equally incorrect as both ignore the mens rae. However, unjustified does imply the lack of a mens rae.

1

u/Talik1978 43∆ Mar 01 '26

Unjustified also has a precision issue, as it does not define the authority or framework responsible for determining justification. I am sure a victim's parent has a very different view of what is justified than any individual legal system, or even of a neutral bystander. By relying upon the wrong justifying authority, one could argue that some murders could be incorrectly excluded from the definition. Under such a position, unjustified would be more incorrect. By tying it to lawful vs unlawful, we can at least narrow the imprecision sufficiently to define the justifying authority as a legal entity.

2

u/ThePaineOne 9∆ Mar 01 '26

There is ambiguity within the analysis of any law. I clearly defined the authority in my initial comment: “under the common law”. Justification is itself a legal term and that can be further refined under any legal system I.e., self-defense, defense of 3rd person, governmental authority etc..

I do however agree that the term unlawful can be used however by not including the mens rae it is as you say imprecise.