# Resolved: An order to fire upon and kill unarmed American citizens would be illegal and refused **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 2, 2020, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-an-order-to-fire-upon-and-kill-unarmed-american-citizens-would-be-illegal-and-refused/854951 "2020-06-02T23:33:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2020, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-an-order-to-fire-upon-and-kill-unarmed-american-citizens-would-be-illegal-and-refused/854951/1 "2020-06-02T23:33:20Z")
See closed thread [here](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=897382) and ATMB discussion [here](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=897400). If President Trump gave such an order any soldier receiving it would have a have a legal (let alone moral) obligation to refuse such an order. Now I’ll grant an exception for a serious threat to the lives of others even if unarmed. I would further resolve that those in the military should be encouraged to remember that legal and ethical obligation. Open for debate. ---
**Author:** ![hajario](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hajario/32/171_2.png) [@hajario](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hajario)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2020, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-an-order-to-fire-upon-and-kill-unarmed-american-citizens-would-be-illegal-and-refused/854951/2 "2020-06-02T23:39:17Z")
Shooting unarmed civilians would probably be classified as a war crime. If, hypothetically, the military were mobilized, I think that it would be imperative for all Americans to reach out to any military that they know and remind them that they are not required to follow unlawful orders. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2020, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-an-order-to-fire-upon-and-kill-unarmed-american-citizens-would-be-illegal-and-refused/854951/3 "2020-06-03T00:13:16Z")
I’m wondering what a reasonable definition of “armed” might be. If the soldiers are armed with overwhelming force, and there is no physical threat to any third party, then surely it’s no less a war crime to order them to open fire on a group of civilians 50 feet away wielding crude improvised weapons. There must be surely be some kind of “fish in a barrel” factor where heavily armed military are involved. It can’t be the same criterion as (say) a regular cop facing a guy with a knife who could credibly kill him. ---
**Author:** ![Omar\_Little](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/omar_little/32/269_2.png) [@Omar\_Little](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omar_Little)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2020, 12:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-an-order-to-fire-upon-and-kill-unarmed-american-citizens-would-be-illegal-and-refused/854951/4 "2020-06-03T00:28:20Z")
Define unarmed. If the soldiers feel that their lives are being threatened via weapons possessed by said citizens even if they aren’t firearms, they should have the right to defend themselves. What about non-citizens? ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2020, 12:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-an-order-to-fire-upon-and-kill-unarmed-american-citizens-would-be-illegal-and-refused/854951/5 "2020-06-03T00:43:40Z")
> [@Omar\_Little](#): > > …If the soldiers feel that their lives are being threatened… Obviously so. But clearly I was considering the converse, that surely it’s not _sufficient_ that a civilian be armed in order to make an order to shoot them legal. In many situations, the military will be armed with overwhelming force, and not be under any significant threat. ---
**Author:** ![Sunny\_Daze](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sunny_daze/32/438_2.png) [@Sunny\_Daze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sunny_Daze)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2020, 12:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-an-order-to-fire-upon-and-kill-unarmed-american-citizens-would-be-illegal-and-refused/854951/6 "2020-06-03T00:44:40Z")
Do soliders have the right to defend themselves with lethal force, absent orders? Further question - how do the Posse Comitatus and the Insurrection Act work together? I can’t tell if or how bringing in certain branches of the military would be legal (or not). ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2020, 1:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-an-order-to-fire-upon-and-kill-unarmed-american-citizens-would-be-illegal-and-refused/854951/7 "2020-06-03T01:46:37Z")
> [@Omar\_Little](#): > > Define unarmed. > > If the soldiers feel that their lives are being threatened via weapons possessed by said citizens even if they aren’t firearms, they should have the right to defend themselves. > > What about non-citizens? If there’s a peaceful protest of 100 people, and there’s one person with a gun, soldiers should not have a right to shoot anyone except that one. Whether or not they’re non-citizens: the war crime is shooting unarmed **civilians** , not unarmed **citizens**. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2020, 1:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-an-order-to-fire-upon-and-kill-unarmed-american-citizens-would-be-illegal-and-refused/854951/8 "2020-06-03T01:55:53Z")
> [@hajario](#): > > Shooting unarmed civilians would probably be classified as a war crime. It may be a crime but it’s not a “war crime” when there is no war. ---
**Author:** ![Larry\_Borgia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/larry_borgia/32/156_2.png) [@Larry\_Borgia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Borgia)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2020, 2:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-an-order-to-fire-upon-and-kill-unarmed-american-citizens-would-be-illegal-and-refused/854951/9 "2020-06-03T02:03:40Z")
> [@Omar\_Little](#): > > Define unarmed. > > If the soldiers feel that their lives are being threatened via weapons possessed by said citizens even if they aren’t firearms, they should have the right to defend themselves. > > What about non-citizens? Look there are all sorts of specific situations we can imagine where an order to fire on unarmed civilians might not be illegal. That’s what defense lawyers are there for. But as a general rule, the OP is correct. You can’t fire on unarmed foreigners either. ---
**Author:** ![FlikTheBlue](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fliktheblue/32/10972_2.png) [@FlikTheBlue](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FlikTheBlue)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2020, 2:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-an-order-to-fire-upon-and-kill-unarmed-american-citizens-would-be-illegal-and-refused/854951/10 "2020-06-03T02:04:38Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > See closed thread [here](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=897382) and ATMB discussion [here](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=897400). > > If President Trump gave such an order any soldier receiving it would have a have a legal (let alone moral) obligation to refuse such an order. > > Now I’ll grant an exception for a serious threat to the lives of others even if unarmed. > > I would further resolve that those in the military should be encouraged to remember that legal and ethical obligation. > > Open for debate. I think the “would” in the thread title should be a “should”. After the events at the Episcopal church in D.C., my guess is that any such order would be followed. IMHO we’re dangerously close to an American version of Tiananmen Square. I doubt that there are enough people in the military who care about what is actually right that would refuse such orders, again my cite being the events that have already happened at numerous protests. I see no reason that the military would behave any differently than the various police departments have been. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2020, 2:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-an-order-to-fire-upon-and-kill-unarmed-american-citizens-would-be-illegal-and-refused/854951/11 "2020-06-03T02:05:00Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > If there’s a peaceful protest of 100 people, and there’s one person with a gun, soldiers should not have a right to shoot anyone except that one. Whether or not they’re non-citizens: the war crime is shooting unarmed **civilians** , not unarmed **citizens**. Blame my thread title. Chosen though to avoid any discussion of “extrajudicial executions” of unarmed non citizens deemed to be threats. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2020, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-an-order-to-fire-upon-and-kill-unarmed-american-citizens-would-be-illegal-and-refused/854951/12 "2020-06-03T02:13:04Z")
Got it. I thought that was a weird objection, but didn’t notice the wording in the title. [**Rickjay** actually appears to be correct in his pedantry](https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/war-crimes.shtml): after a paragraph discussing various war crimes, it states: > [@UN](#): > > Paragraph 2 (e) applies to armed conflicts not of an international character and thus does not apply to situations of internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence or other acts of a similar nature. It applies to armed conflicts that take place in the territory of a State when there is protracted armed conflict between governmental authorities and organized armed groups or between such groups. It looks like [Crimes against humanity](https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/crimes-against-humanity.shtml) might be the appropriate term: > [@](#): > > For the purpose of this Statute, ‘crime against humanity’ means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack: > > ``` > Murder; > Extermination; > > ``` > > … > Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; > … > For the purpose of paragraph 1: > > ``` > ‘Attack directed against any civilian population’ means a course of conduct involving the multiple commission of acts referred to in paragraph 1 against any civilian population, pursuant to or in furtherance of a State or organizational policy to commit such attack; > > ``` So, if the military were commanded to fire on civilian protestors in multiple places as part of a governmental policy, there’s a pretty strong case that that’s a crime against humanity. ---
**Author:** ![DWMarch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dwmarch/32/1010_2.png) [@DWMarch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DWMarch)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2020, 2:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-an-order-to-fire-upon-and-kill-unarmed-american-citizens-would-be-illegal-and-refused/854951/13 "2020-06-03T02:55:03Z")
None of the war crimes/crimes against humanity laws apply to the United States by deliberate self-exclusion. The US does not support the ICC and in fact has threatened to arrest and prosecute ICC officials who act against Americans: > **[US threatens to arrest ICC judges who probe war crimes - France 24](https://www.france24.com/en/20180910-us-threatens-arrest-icc-judges-who-probe-war-crimes)** > > US threatens to arrest ICC judges who probe war crimes ---
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2020, 3:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-an-order-to-fire-upon-and-kill-unarmed-american-citizens-would-be-illegal-and-refused/854951/14 "2020-06-03T03:22:14Z")
Whether or not it would be a “war crime” or a “crime against humanity” and whether or not the ICC would have jurisdiction, U.S. service members are bound by the Uniform Code of Military Justice. According to [Article 118](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/918) of the UCMJ > [@](#): > > Any person subject to this chapter who, without justification or excuse, unlawfully kills a human being, when he— > …intends to kill or inflict great bodily harm; [or] > is engaged in an act which is inherently dangerous to another and evinces a wanton disregard of human life is guilty of murder. While [Article 92](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/892) makes it a crime under military law to refuse to obey a lawful order, it does have to be a **lawful** order. The issue is that it’s unlikely to be anything like a direct order to “kill those unarmed people over there, even though they clearly pose no direct danger to anyone’s life or limb”. And in the event of the inevitable ambiguity and doubt, the military will have a strong bias towards obeying the orders of the legitimate President. And the Republicans have made it pretty damned clear that, short of “Round up all the Democrats and shoot them!”, they won’t do a damned thing about anything Trump does. And Trump’s “base” among the American public–not anything like a majority, but a substantial minority of the people–will accept anything short of Trump abolishing the Republic and proclaiming himself Emperor. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2020, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-an-order-to-fire-upon-and-kill-unarmed-american-citizens-would-be-illegal-and-refused/854951/15 "2020-06-03T03:32:00Z")
Depends on the scale of the fight. If it’s a full blown insurrection or civil war of course unarmed folks are going to be targeted and killed if they are vital to the opposition’s war effort. That’s how wars are won and insurrections ended. If it is a mostly peaceful group with one or two armed rabble rousers strafing with an A-10 would be vastly disproportionate. It doesn’t matter if this is how you think the world should be this is how the world is. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2020, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-an-order-to-fire-upon-and-kill-unarmed-american-citizens-would-be-illegal-and-refused/854951/16 "2020-06-03T03:37:20Z")
dupe from timeout thingy ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2020, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-an-order-to-fire-upon-and-kill-unarmed-american-citizens-would-be-illegal-and-refused/854951/17 "2020-06-03T03:37:49Z")
> [@MEBuckner](#): > > And the Republicans have made it pretty damned clear that, short of “Round up all the Democrats and shoot them!”, they won’t do a damned thing about anything Trump does. And Trump’s “base” among the American public–not anything like a majority, but a substantial minority of the people–will accept anything short of Trump abolishing the Republic and proclaiming himself Emperor. I disagree. Given the thinnest veneer of excuse and/or blame, and looking at the unending chain of “last straw” events we have gone through to date, I truly believe that in either case there would be no “stopping short”. ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2020, 4:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-an-order-to-fire-upon-and-kill-unarmed-american-citizens-would-be-illegal-and-refused/854951/18 "2020-06-03T04:27:02Z")
Going all Bloody Sunday like 1 Para in (London)Derry is manifestly unlawful. Using lethal force to prevent a position from being overrun by a large mob, may not be. Depends on the circumstances. There is no right answer, sans examination of the context. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2020, 4:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-an-order-to-fire-upon-and-kill-unarmed-american-citizens-would-be-illegal-and-refused/854951/19 "2020-06-03T04:30:38Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > Going all Bloody Sunday like 1 Para in (London)Derry is manifestly unlawful. > Using lethal force to prevent a position from being overrun by a large mob, may not be. Depends on the circumstances. > There is no right answer, sans examination of the context. Public spaces are not military “positions”. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2020, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-an-order-to-fire-upon-and-kill-unarmed-american-citizens-would-be-illegal-and-refused/854951/20 "2020-06-03T04:35:49Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Public spaces are not military “positions”. Would you consider the White House grounds “public spaces”? Leaving aside the 82nd Airborne shooting people in The Mall, what about a mob of unarmed people rushing the White House? If you were in command what would you tell your Company to do if they were charged with protecting the White House? [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-an-order-to-fire-upon-and-kill-unarmed-american-citizens-would-be-illegal-and-refused/854951.md?page=2)