Harry Smith wrote:
with regard to calling an act murder. The common definition of murder and the definition that appears in wikipedia is:
Murder is the crime of intentionally causing the death of another human being, without lawful excuse.
If we accept this definition, then we need to ask if the individuals that shot the boy had lawful excuse.
From the articles, the reason for the shooting is that
the boy and his family opposed the attempt to use the family's property/land. Does the family's refusal constitute lawful excuse for the shooting?
If its does not constitute lawful excuse, the act is murder per the first line of the wikipedia entry on murder.
My question is do we use the term murder for this shooting or do we change the wikipedia article on murder?
Perhaps we need to change the definition to add something like, "as determined by a duly constituted tribunal." The facts outlined above could very well result in a determination that there was a murder, but neither we nor our contributors are in a position to make the needed interrogations that will lead to the truth. It's not for us to decide.
seems to be a question of wikipedia using its own definitions for words at wikipedia.
is this type of internal consistency valuable?
Certainly, and I thank you for pointing out this inconsistency so that the definition can be repaired.
if it is not should we make that known?
is using the term murder according to the wikipedia definition POV?
Sincerely,
Lance6Wins
ps. perhaps the shooter meant to wound rather than kill. please repeat the above substituting manslaugter for murder.
The only difference between murder and attempted murder is the ability to shoot straight. :-)
Ec