...an extreme degree, of course.
2007-03-11 09:31:17 · 7 answers · asked by Albanian 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
No.
Part of the definition of civil disobedience is that the people do not break any criminal laws or commit any violence in the process.
If laws are broken during civil disobedience, they are non-violent activities such as refusing to disperse, or failing to get permits before gathering. Not killing someone.
2007-03-11 09:34:21 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely not. Civil disobedience means non-criminal and non-violent behavior.
However there is one exception: assassinating Osama Bin Ladin. That's legal of course.
2007-03-11 16:40:55 · answer #2 · answered by krollohare2 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. The term "civil disobedience" refers to the refusal to obey an unjust law or the demands of a governemnt WITHOUT resorting to physical violence.
2007-03-11 16:36:01 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Assassination is more like terrorism. Civil disobedience is more like something MLK or Gandi would do.
2007-03-11 16:37:01 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. Civil disobedience, by definition, is nonviolent. It does not involve actions which are, in and of themselves, objectionable (even if, under very unusual circumstances, justified).
2007-03-11 16:36:15 · answer #5 · answered by dukefenton 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
no, it can be consedered patriotism. becasue assassination is a way of showing your dissent, and "dissentis the sencerest fomr of patriotism" (thomas jeffersaom)
2007-03-11 16:39:15 · answer #6 · answered by sincerepariot 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Maybe a more formal (federal) crime of treason?
2007-03-11 16:33:59 · answer #7 · answered by longleggedfirecracker 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋