LogFAQs > #882470194

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, Database 1 ( 03.09.2017-09.16.2017 ), DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Politics Containment Topic 110: Cleveland Steamer
Wanglicious 07/07/17 12:16:49 AM #74:	LordoftheMorons posted... I've tried to shift the conversation several times to no avail! i mean it's not like i've been silent on other subjects. haven't really reacted much to yours because they're just kinda "meh, yeah" topics. StealThisSheen posted... "Right" and "reasonable" don't have static definitions for every situation, though. If something is "reasonable" for a crazy person to do, then it's justified, even if it's NOT "just." That's why things like mental state and emotions factor into crimes. That's why there's such a thing as a crime of passion. Killing somebody isn't just... But if it can be explained as an action brought about by severe emotion in the moment, then it is considered justified for that situation and it can change the charge. That doesn't make it morally right, but it does make it "reasonable" for the situation. This is fairly common in law. If a crazy person kills somebody, but it's proven that they're crazy, then being crazy becomes the justification and not just an excuse, and that changes things... Even though it's not saying the killing itself was right or just. surprisingly no, if you start to argue the difference between the two in legal terms the difference between justification and excuse is actually really important and more pronounced than the common usage we've been talking about. in criminal law, justification is when you basically say yes you broke the law but if you hadn't something more wrong/illegal would've been done. like yeah you trespassed but you were being chased by a guy trying to kill you. or self defense for the commonly used one. legally, when you're justified you get away with it. you committed something technically illegal but it protected a greater wrong. excuses are different. this would include insanity and changes to mental state. these things would still need to have some reasonable basis and are not guaranteed to have you go free though it can lessen the charge. for your example, a crazy person killing someone due to their insanity would not be considered a legal justification, it would be considered a legal excuse. that does change things from murder (which requires mental state), though they'd still be hit with manslaughter. if they were justified though, they'd walk. but these two are very different legally. this is neither here nor there to the rest of the convo, but just mostly trivia. --- "Maybe it's a tentacle, molesting the planet itself. - Aschen Brodel. <cite>Wanglicious posted [p:882470194] in Politics C... [t:75538117]...</cite> <quote><cite>LordoftheMorons posted...</cite> <quote>I've tried to shift the conversation several times to no avail!</quote> i mean it's not like i've been silent on other subjects. haven't really reacted much to yours because they're just kinda "meh, yeah" topics. <cite>StealThisSheen posted...</cite> <quote> "Right" and "reasonable" don't have static definitions for every situation, though. If something is "reasonable" for a crazy person to do, then it's justified, even if it's NOT "just." That's why things like mental state and emotions factor into crimes. That's why there's such a thing as a crime of passion. Killing somebody isn't just... But if it can be explained as an action brought about by severe emotion in the moment, then it is considered justified for that situation and it can change the charge. That doesn't make it morally right, but it does make it "reasonable" for the situation. This is fairly common in law. If a crazy person kills somebody, but it's proven that they're crazy, then being crazy becomes the justification and not just an excuse, and that changes things... Even though it's not saying the killing itself was right or just.</quote> surprisingly no, if you start to argue the difference between the two in legal terms the difference between justification and excuse is actually really important and more pronounced than the common usage we've been talking about. in criminal law, justification is when you basically say yes you broke the law but if you hadn't something more wrong/illegal would've been done. like yeah you trespassed but you were being chased by a guy trying to kill you. or self defense for the commonly used one. legally, when you're justified you get away with it. you committed something technically illegal but it protected a greater wrong. excuses are different. this would include insanity and changes to mental state. these things would still need to have some reasonable basis and are not guaranteed to have you go free though it can lessen the charge. for your example, a crazy person killing someone due to their insanity would not be considered a legal justification, it would be considered a legal excuse. that does change things from murder (which requires mental state), though they'd still be hit with manslaughter. if they were justified though, they'd walk. but these two are very different legally. this is neither here nor there to the rest of the convo, but just mostly trivia. --- "Maybe it's a tentacle, molesting the planet itself. - Aschen Brodel.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1