Today I Learned
What did you learn today? Share it with us!
We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.
** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**
Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.
If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.
Partnered Communities
You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.
Community Moderation
For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.
view the rest of the comments
Murder is illegal federally. So no.
That's not likely why they wouldn't walk away. Murder is illegal federally, but that'll only come into play if e.g. they crossed state lines in perpetrating the murder.
In all likelihood, the person would be tried in Missouri's courts – charged with first-degree murder. No judge or jury is going to buy that they actually, in good faith, believed it was their duty to enforce an obscure, long-neglected, controversial executive order from 1838 which directed the military (and not the general public) to exterminate Mormons in the state. If they seriously did (and their lawyer would have to show some very robust evidence), they might get the exceedingly rare insanity plea and go to a psychiatric institution instead. Or, if they were somehow that plain stupid, there's always ignorance of the law not being an excuse; their intent was still to kill somebody in cold blood. But otherwise, raising this issue as if it's a loophole is going to piss off the judge and/or make them way less sympathetic to the jury – and possibly even solidify premeditation which first-degree murder requires.
So the law would kind of be fighting itself? One old, obscure law says do it, the more commonsense law says don't. But both are legal.
Well no, not at all. Please read the order itself (bottom of the linked Wikipedia article). It's specifically ordering the state's militia to do this. And it's not even a generic order to the militia; it directs specific, named officers to raise X number of troops under their command for the extermination. The governor is vesting this authority in specific people who died long, long ago. By 1976, the order wouldn't have been actionable by anybody even as written (let alone by actual legal standards under which anyone would definitely be convicted); rescinding it was purely a ceremonial act of goodwill.
It definitely still would not hold water if it were telling citizens (or even generic militia members) they could freely kill Mormons, but it's not even that murky. The loophole not only doesn't exist in practice, but it doesn't exist even in writing.
Not familiar with Mormons I guess.