all 18 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 35 points 1 week ago (1 child)
[–] 34 points 1 week ago (8 children)

Pretty sure destroying humanity IS NOT against the law. There are no laws saying any such thing..

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 week ago (6 children)

    Especially given that you can only be prosecuted for a crime after you've actually committed it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 week ago (5 children)

    Is there a law against attempted destruction of humanity? Like attempted murder?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 week ago (4 children)

    Why would there be? There isn't a Nobel Prize for Attempted Chemistry.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 week ago

    That sounds oddly like crime against humanity, of which the Rome Statute covers. Specifically extermination or "other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health"

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 16 points 1 week ago

    Didn't the supreme court rule that climate change wasn't against the law?

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 1 week ago (1 child)
    [–] 4 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    Nah, meatbags had a good run. Time to call it a day

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • Those in power determine the law.

  • source
  • [–] -1 points 1 week ago

    Is it really though? Murder is, obviously, as are weapons of mass destruction. Same with genocide. But if you were actually able to kill all humans with the push of a button, would there be a specific crime for that act?

    Obviously there would be no one to prosecute, and if you included yourself you'd be dead, so it would be moot.

  • source