Quote:
Originally Posted by SigUp
I'm not naive. I know fully well that governments don't care when it's about "national security". Just look at what NSA, CIA are doing in the name of anti-terrorism. But it doesn't change the fact that it is unlawful. The government can't turn on or turn off the law as it desires. Only, nobody is going to put them to trial. It's like in a dictatorship. There in theory the law is also above the government. Only nobody's in a position to enforce this.
|
If you want to argue if something is against the law, you need to present law texts that clearly state "Action 'X' is against the law", which makes it quite easy in most cases. If this is applied, then you can call it "unlawful". I guess the action of deliberatly causing another's life to end is defined as "murder" (depending on method and context, the word may be different). This even applies to U.S. Soldiers killing Osama Bin Laden (unless you go with the local laws of his death place, which may be different).
But of course this is all pure theory and does not hold up to reality. In reality you must find sufficient proof that someone actually DID commit the murder and even then there are some cases, where the consequences of a sufficiently proven murder are ommited, for example if it is the thing that represents the law, that wants the murder to happen, i.e. the government.