# If Neil Armstrong would have murdered Buzz Aldrin **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [December 29, 2005, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-neil-armstrong-would-have-murdered-buzz-aldrin/337615 "2005-12-29T19:31:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![psychonaut](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/psychonaut/32/4655_2.png) [@psychonaut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/psychonaut)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-neil-armstrong-would-have-murdered-buzz-aldrin/337615/21 "2005-12-30T00:58:55Z")
> [@Duckster](#): > > … And his boss would radio to him that he was now illegally using government property. Armstrong might then be given a choice, … return aboard the LM and face theft charges or leave the LM immediately, sans his government spacesuit. They couldn’t charge him with theft if he complied with the order to return the property. Whether he whacks off Aldrin on his way back to the LM is irrelevant. Anyway, even if he were somehow charged with theft, that’s pretty minor compared to being charged with murder. ---
**Author:** ![psychonaut](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/psychonaut/32/4655_2.png) [@psychonaut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/psychonaut)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-neil-armstrong-would-have-murdered-buzz-aldrin/337615/22 "2005-12-30T01:09:58Z")
> [@pravnik](#): > > (6) Any vehicle used or designed for flight or navigation in space and on the registry of the United States pursuant to the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies and the Convention on Registration of Objects Launched into Outer Space, while that vehicle is in flight, which is from the moment when all external doors are closed on Earth following embarkation until the moment when one such door is opened on Earth for disembarkation or in the case of a forced landing, until the competent authorities take over the responsibility for the vehicle and for persons and property aboard. Seems like the US is essentially asserting is jurisdiction over the known universe, except for those portions of the Earth outside US territory, provided the vehicle used to reach that location is registered in the US. ---
**Author:** ![pravnik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8edcca/32.png) [@pravnik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pravnik)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-neil-armstrong-would-have-murdered-buzz-aldrin/337615/23 "2005-12-30T01:17:17Z")
> [@psychonaut](#): > > Seems like the US is essentially asserting is jurisdiction over the known universe, except for those portions of the Earth outside US territory, provided the vehicle used to reach that location is registered in the US. It may seem like overreaching now, but we’ll be thanking them when the space pirates attack. ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-neil-armstrong-would-have-murdered-buzz-aldrin/337615/24 "2005-12-30T02:07:01Z")
> [@Maus Magill](#): > > That would cover events occurring aboard the CM or the LM. What if Neil deliberately punctured Buzz’s suit during their EVA?? > [@](#): > > (7) Any place outside the jurisdiction of any nation with respect to an offense by or against a national of the United States. [http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc\_sec\_18\_00000007----000-.html](http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00000007----000-.html) > [@](#): > > Article VIII > > A State Party to the Treaty on whose registry an object launched into outer space is carried shall retain jurisdiction and control over such object, and over any personnel thereof, while in outer space or on a celestial body. Ownership of objects launched into outer space, including objects landed or constructed on a celestial body, and of their component parts, is not affected by their presence in outer space or on a celestial body or by their return to the Earth. Such objects or component parts found beyond the limits of the State Party to the Treaty on whose registry they are carried shall be returned to that State Party, which shall, upon request, furnish identifying data prior to their return. [http://www.oosa.unvienna.org/SpaceLaw/outersptxt.html](http://www.oosa.unvienna.org/SpaceLaw/outersptxt.html) ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 2:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-neil-armstrong-would-have-murdered-buzz-aldrin/337615/25 "2005-12-30T02:31:35Z")
> [@psychonaut](#): > > Seems like the US is essentially asserting is jurisdiction over the known universe, except for those portions of the Earth outside US territory, provided the vehicle used to reach that location is registered in the US. No … The US is asserting jurisdiction over a US-registered spacecraft wherever in the universe it might be. ---
**Author:** ![postcards](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8e8cbc/32.png) [@postcards](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/postcards)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 4:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-neil-armstrong-would-have-murdered-buzz-aldrin/337615/26 "2005-12-30T04:00:13Z")
> [@psychonaut](#): > > …Whether he whacks off Aldrin on his way back to the LM is irrelevant… > [@DanBlather](#): > > Talk about your “Buzz kill”. Hmmm… ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-neil-armstrong-would-have-murdered-buzz-aldrin/337615/27 "2005-12-30T04:10:14Z")
> [@pravnik](#): > > It may seem like overreaching now, but we’ll be thanking them when the space pirates attack. No, Canada is in charge of the Space Invader Early Warning Program. It was on the news a week or so back. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Duckster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/duckster/32/1244_2.png) [@Duckster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duckster)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 4:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-neil-armstrong-would-have-murdered-buzz-aldrin/337615/28 "2005-12-30T04:17:44Z")
> [@Polycarp](#): > > No, Canada is in charge of the Space Invader Early Warning Program. It was on the news a week or so back. 😉 Ah, you almost got it, **Poly**. The actual program title is Space Protection Early Warning Canadian Hightech Universal Navigational Killer Satellites, or **SPEW CHUNKS** for short. ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 6:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-neil-armstrong-would-have-murdered-buzz-aldrin/337615/29 "2005-12-30T06:17:30Z")
> [@ltfire](#): > > And, if he said ‘fuck it. I killed him and I ain’t coming back! Like a James Cagney moment…’TOP OF THE WORLD, MA!’. > How much supplies were on board? How many days could he survive? How long before the authorities could get up there in another module? And, where’s Collins in all this? “You’re on your own Neely…I’m outta here’. > Many questions. Armstrong would probably last at most a day before he ran out of air. He certainly would be out of food by that point. In theory, he could hack into the propellant tanks, find the one that held the oxygen, and hook it up, but then he’d starve to death, rather than die by slow carbon dioxide poisoning. As for Collins? Well, he trained to take the ship back home by himself, so it wouldn’t be much of a problem, but he certainly wouldn’t be happy about it. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 6:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-neil-armstrong-would-have-murdered-buzz-aldrin/337615/30 "2005-12-30T06:54:11Z")
> [@bouv](#): > > At any rate, Collins would still wonder where the heck Buzz was, and it wold still be hard for Armstrong to maintain the lie that his suit failed. Armstrong could just say Éamon de Valera got him. ---
**Author:** ![scotandrsn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a4c791/32.png) [@scotandrsn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scotandrsn)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 9:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-neil-armstrong-would-have-murdered-buzz-aldrin/337615/31 "2005-12-30T09:03:50Z")
> [@Bryan Ekers](#): > > Armstrong could just say Éamon de Valera got him. > [@DanBlather](#): > > Talk about your “Buzz kill”. I hereby sentence the two of you to be locked in a small, windowless room with nothing but two NERF bats. One of you will be released when the other is dead. ---
**Author:** ![scotandrsn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a4c791/32.png) [@scotandrsn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scotandrsn)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 9:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-neil-armstrong-would-have-murdered-buzz-aldrin/337615/32 "2005-12-30T09:13:40Z")
On a more relevant note, a recent article in Radar Magazine, regarding the alarmingly large number of unexplained disappearances that take pleace on cruise ships, stated that technically, a ship is bound by laws of its country of registration. Both the Eagle (the lander) and the Columbia (the command and service module where the astronauts would have spent the period of time mentioned in the OP) were United States vessels, so I would have to assume that, since the law of the sea is the only comparable precedent to , IMO, a court would have to give the US government jurisdiction. This conclusion is only enhanced by the the fact that all three men were government employees on a government mission at the time the murder would have occurred. ---
**Author:** ![sharkattack](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/76d3ee/32.png) [@sharkattack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sharkattack)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 9:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-neil-armstrong-would-have-murdered-buzz-aldrin/337615/33 "2005-12-30T09:37:15Z")
Well I would think if he was murdered today on the moon and not in the spacecraft he may be under some tough jurisdiction. If it was on a piece of land owned by someone from the Lunar Registry it would fall under the laws of this organization. They seem to be a very well organized and respected group of individuals so they may come down hard on him and break out the old wooden spoon. > **[Own Land On The Moon | The Lunar Registry | Buy Moon Property](https://lunarregistry.com/)** > > The Lunar Registry makes buying property on the Moon easy, fast and legal. Choose from twelve locations, A different strategy might be for Armstrong just to claim a piece of land, call himself King, and then pass a shoot to kill (ray-gun of course)trespassing law and take out Aldrin. It might be legal. Outerspace is the wild west and the people on the Earth might willingly agree that our laws here just dont fit the mold for the final frontier. Of course the U.S. would then need to decide if it wants to continue to offer transportation services back to the U.S. with a leader of a country who murders its inhabitants. I guess that would depend on if it was in America’s economic interest (possibly if Armstrong discovered oil during his few hours tour) or if there was a possiblity of a leak that CIA originally trained Armstrong to dispatch Aldrin if the @#$@ were ever to hit the fan. ---
**Author:** ![psychonaut](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/psychonaut/32/4655_2.png) [@psychonaut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/psychonaut)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-neil-armstrong-would-have-murdered-buzz-aldrin/337615/34 "2005-12-30T14:08:34Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > No … The US is asserting jurisdiction over a US-registered spacecraft wherever in the universe it might be. No it isn’t. The law claims jurisdiction over in-flight US spacecraft, but then defines “in flight” as “the moment when all external doors are closed on Earth following embarkation until the moment when one such door is opened on Earth”. Therefore US jurisdiction applies _everywhere_ the craft travels, including extravehicular activity in space or on celestial bodies. US jurisdiction does not possibly cease until a door is opened on Earth. (And even then it probably doesn’t cease, since the door will probably be opened on US territory.) ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-neil-armstrong-would-have-murdered-buzz-aldrin/337615/35 "2005-12-30T15:05:25Z")
> [@psychonaut](#): > > No it isn’t. The law claims jurisdiction over in-flight US spacecraft, but then defines “in flight” as “the moment when all external doors are closed on Earth following embarkation until the moment when one such door is opened on Earth”. Therefore US jurisdiction applies _everywhere_ the craft travels, including extravehicular activity in space or on celestial bodies. US jurisdiction does not possibly cease until a door is opened on Earth. (And even then it probably doesn’t cease, since the door will probably be opened on US territory.) Where do you see this definition in the treaty? Here is the (similar) definition that I found in the [Convention on Offences and Certain Other Acts Committed on Board Aircraft](http://www.unodc.org/unodc/terrorism_convention_aircraft.html): > [@](#): > > Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 1, paragraph 3, an aircraft shall for the purposes of this Chapter, be considered to be in flight at any time from the moment when all its external doors are closed following embarkation until the moment when any such door is opened for disembarkation. In the case of a forced landing, the provisions of this Chapter shall continue to apply with respect to offences and acts committed on board until competent authorities of a State take over the responsibility for the aircraft and for the persons and property on board. But by its own terms, this definition only applies to the chapter on “POWERS OF THE AIRCRAFT COMMANDER.” The general definition, found in Chapter 1, Article 1, is: > [@](#): > > For the purposes of this Convention, an aircraft is considered to be in flight from the moment when power is applied for the purpose of take- off until the moment when the landing run ends. As I indicated above, the US claims jurisdiction over crimes by or against it’s own citizens on [terra nullius](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terra_nullius) (land over which no country has sovereignty). The [Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies](http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=4074) says: > [@](#): > > Article II > > Outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means. [http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=4074](http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=4074) And certainly during the time-frame in question, no country could have laid claim to it. Similarly, the material I quoted in my previous post, from the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, specifically requires the US to retain jurisdiction over any personnel. By the way, the notion that a country retains criminal jurisdiction over its nationals even when they are not in that country’s territory is known as the active personality principle [http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/engior530032001?OpenDocument](http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/engior530032001?OpenDocument). The notion that a country asserts jurisdiction over those who commit crimes against its nationals is known as the passive personality principle. \*Id. \* Neither concept is especially controversial, especially when limited to _terra nullius_. India’s criminal law applies to its nationals even with respect to crimes commited in the territory of other sovereigns. [indialawinfo.com - This website is for sale! - indialawinfo Resources and Information.](http://www.indialawinfo.com/bareacts/ipc.html#_Toc496764835) ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-neil-armstrong-would-have-murdered-buzz-aldrin/337615/36 "2005-12-30T15:39:21Z")
[QUOTE=scotandrsn] > [@](#): > > On a more relevant note, a recent article in Radar Magazine, regarding the alarmingly large number of unexplained disappearances that take pleace on cruise ships, stated that technically, a ship is bound by laws of its country of registration. [http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention\_agreements/texts/unclos/closindx.htm](http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/closindx.htm) (Part VII). > [@](#): > > Both the Eagle (the lander) and the Columbia (the command and service module where the astronauts would have spent the period of time mentioned in the OP) were United States vessels, so I would have to assume that, since the law of the sea is the only comparable precedent to , IMO, a court would have to give the US government jurisdiction. There are treaties and statutes on point. But they support the same result. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-neil-armstrong-would-have-murdered-buzz-aldrin/337615/37 "2005-12-30T15:43:21Z")
I remember _The New Yorker_ once had a cartoon showing a rocket parked on the Moon. Nearby, a judge, jury, lawyers and defendant were all in spacesuits, sitting at tables on the lunar surface. The judge was saying, “Not _another_ motion for change of venue, counselor?” ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-neil-armstrong-would-have-murdered-buzz-aldrin/337615/38 "2005-12-30T15:43:26Z")
> [@Gfactor](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Originally Posted by **psychonaut** > > No it isn’t. The law claims jurisdiction over in-flight US spacecraft, but then defines “in flight” as “the moment when all external doors are closed on Earth following embarkation until the moment when one such door is opened on Earth”. Therefore US jurisdiction applies everywhere the craft travels, including extravehicular activity in space or on celestial bodies. US jurisdiction does not possibly cease until a door is opened on Earth. (And even then it probably doesn’t cease, since the door will probably be opened on US territory.) > > Where do you see this definition in the treaty? Never mind. I figured out that you were talking about 18 U.S.C. § 7(6). You are correct. ---
**Author:** ![scotandrsn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a4c791/32.png) [@scotandrsn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scotandrsn)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-neil-armstrong-would-have-murdered-buzz-aldrin/337615/39 "2005-12-30T15:52:32Z")
[QUOTE=Gfactor] > [@scotandrsn](#): > > [http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention\_agreements/texts/unclos/closindx.htm](http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/closindx.htm) (Part VII). > > There are treaties and statutes on point. But they support the same result. Ah. I didn’t realize the treaty on space was in effect before the first moon landing. Sounds like you’ve answsered it, **Gfactor**. ---
**Author:** ![Cliffy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/59ef9b/32.png) [@Cliffy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cliffy)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-neil-armstrong-would-have-murdered-buzz-aldrin/337615/40 "2005-12-30T16:11:27Z")
> [@ltfire](#): > > And, if he said ‘fuck it. I killed him and I ain’t coming back! Like a James Cagney moment…’TOP OF THE WORLD, MA!’. > How much supplies were on board? How many days could he survive? How long before the authorities could get up there in another module? And, where’s Collins in all this? “You’re on your own Neely…I’m outta here’. > Many questions. As noted above, Armstrong had very little food on the Eagle and might have had air for a day or so. In later missions the LEM was equipped with food and air to last days, but not more than that. There’s no way NASA could have gotten a mission up and running in that amount of time – people freaked out when NASA would change a mission profile four or five months out because they didn’t think it wa enough time to retrain the crew and the controllers, rewrite the procedures, test everything, etc. Spaceflight is really dangerous, so NASA protocol at the time was to check everything a million times before making a change. Plus, I doubt the equipment even existed; the contractors who built the various modules had target dates for their craft, but those weren’t so far in advance that they had extra craft sitting around under tarps somewhere. Finally, there’d be no way to capture a rogue astronaut. You can’t wrestle on the moon; even if your suit doesn’t tear, just tripping is a real danger. You could knock a belt connection loose, or bend a hose, and with all that bulk around you it’s not easy to get up. And if they managed to catch him somehow, how are they going to bring him back? There’s not room for three in the LM, there’s not room for four in the capsule – especially during reentry, when everyone has to be strapped in to the couches. –Cliffy [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-neil-armstrong-would-have-murdered-buzz-aldrin/337615.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-neil-armstrong-would-have-murdered-buzz-aldrin/337615.md?page=3)