DEGREES OF HOMICIDE VS DEGREES OF LYING (Discussion between Curt and Greg Hamilt

DEGREES OF HOMICIDE VS DEGREES OF LYING

(Discussion between Curt and Greg Hamilton)

Degree of failure of due diligence determines severity.

Example:

… Murder > Homicide > ???

… Lying > Deceiving > ???

We don’t have via negativa terms for crimes, but P-law is a via negativa logic.

So, in P, we call a failure of due diligence “Lying”, because we can’t determine intentions only whether you in fact did the due diligence, and whether you stated a falsehood, or irreciprocity.

Lying by intent and Lying by failures of due diligence.

This definition mirrors “Truth”:

Truth means satisfying the demand for infallibility.

We satisfy the demand for infallibility by due diligence.

So, is it correct to use Falsehood(error) or Lying(failure of due diligence)? Well, how do we know the difference? 😉

DEGREES OF HOMICIDE

Murder first and second

-vs-

Voluntary, Constructive, and Involuntary manslaughter

-vs-

Negligent Homicide (esp. vehicular)

-vs-

Excusable Homicide: by accident and misfortune, or in doing any other lawful act by lawful means, with usual and ordinary caution, and without any unlawful intent.”

-vs-

Justifiable Homicide (self or other defense)

-vs-

State Licensed Homicide (military, law enforcement)

The key phrase being “with usual and ordinary caution”

Again, I am (we are) stating that in public, to public, in matters public, one must use ordinary caution. We are are increasing the requirements for ordinary caution.

We are increasing the burden on public speech such that by failure of due diligence you do not guard against the spreading of falsehood (lying) because we cannot judge your intent, we can only determine whether or not you enaged in due diligence.

It works just fine. We do it every day in courts around the globe.