16 ms·
A trial is required to execute someone (or imprison them, but I don't think anyone's talking about imprisoning anyone here) for allegedly consuming illegal subs
by amalcon 17y ago
A trial is required to execute someone (or imprison them, but I don't think anyone's talking about imprisoning anyone here) for allegedly consuming illegal substances (just like it is for anything else, including brandishing a weapon). The police officer is not executing the weapon-brandishing subject, he's defending himself and the public. Death is a likely consequence here, but it's not an execution. Likewise, the government wasn't executing people for drinking alcohol; they were making death a likely consequence of drinking alcohol, but they were not performing executions.
- anamax 17y ago> Likewise, the government wasn't executing people for drinking alcohol; they were making death a likely consequence of drinking alcohol, but they were not performing executions. It all depends on what you think is important, life or what the death certificate says. If I engage in an act likely to result in someone's death, I'my guilty of manslaughter (or murder) except in certain circumstances. That's true whether or not I'm ever brought up on charges.
- fexl 17y agoRight, you'd be guilty of murder. It wouldn't matter if anyone caught you, or whether you targeted specific individuals or random ones. For example, I'm old enough to remember the Tylenol murders of 1982: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Tylenol_murders http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Tylenol_murders In that case, the murderer was never positively identified.