fallstuff
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2009
- Messages
- 9,441
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
We will keep that in mind.
A claim must still be held against physical evidence.
Wrong...Absent a law, an act that is implicitly associated with that law is considered 'non-legal' or 'not legal'. But not 'illegal'. The word 'illegal' mean a law is in effect and punishment are associated with the violation of that law. The word 'theft' mean taking something that rightfully belong to someone else. There is an initial moral association with the word and the act. But if there is no law governing, meaning outlining the state response, to the act, then even though 'theft' is morally offensive, it is not 'illegal' but only 'non-legal'. A law can be explicit as well as implicit in its approval. If a law punishes the act of taking something that rightfully belong to someone else, then the law tacitly approve the behavior opposite of 'theft'.
If the boy threw the stone, in effect, assault the occupier, then regardless of age, weapon, or the efficacy thereof, he is a combatant then he falls under the rules governing combatants. A combatant can be 'legal' or 'illegal', but either way, killing him is a legal act under the laws of war the moment he became a combatant. Next would be the grey area of 'excessive' responsive force.
The act of John Doe going to a bank to withdraw money is a lawful act. This act however is not written or defined in any state or federal criminal code, constitution or for that matter even in UCC ( Unified Commercial Code). It is considered a lawful act as long as that someone withdrawing money from his/her account or acting as an assigned agent to withdraw. It is not possible to define every lawful act.
However, it is possible to define unlawful acts.
Someone else trying to rob John Doe is an unlawful act. Robbery in any form is defined as a criminal act in state and federal penal codes.
Throwing stones have been discussed in different venues. Palestanians have no avenues for justice against the Israelis in the occupied west bank. Israel is ultimately responsible for creating an atmosohere that set off a chain of events leading to throwing stones.