TexasCHLforum.com

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

longtooth wrote:Lawyers or legal eagles:
#1. What is the legal term used for breaking one law to keep a greater harm from taking place if the law was not broken.

"Necessity" TPC §9.22.

TPC §9.22 - Necessity wrote:Sec. 9.22. NECESSITY. Conduct is justified if:

(1) the actor reasonably believes the conduct is immediately necessary to avoid imminent harm;

(2) the desirability and urgency of avoiding the harm clearly outweigh, according to ordinary standards of reasonableness, the harm sought to be prevented by the law proscribing the conduct; and

(3) a legislative purpose to exclude the justification claimed for the conduct does not otherwise plainly appear.

Well yeah, if you want to get all specific and stuff <wink>
I assumed LT knows the Penal Code, but was looking for a "term" or maxim.
I shouldn't answer things "B.C." (Before Coffee) No tellin' where I'll end up when I do that.

On a lighter, less philosophical note:

I ran across this:

TIPS and WARNINGS FOR NORTHERNERS MOVING SOUTH:
Be advised: The "He needed killin'" defense is valid here.
(Don't know what State that's from, but it was stated in jest ..... maybe)

I know what you mean, but not enough coffee yet

I believe it may be a universal moral/ethical/philosophical/legal "maxim"

I first ran across it in a theoretical ethics/morality situation given out somewhere:

A woman runs and hides in a closet behind you and says "Don't tell my husband where I am, he's going to kill me"
The man comes running up with a knife and asks "Do you know where my wife is?"
Do you lie, or tell the truth?

Lesser violation to prevent a greater one.

But like I said, I'm not awake yet.

Interestingly, while searching I ran across Islamic Law::
http://pgssajkm.blogspot.com/2009/02/le ... c-law.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
“A greater harm is eliminated by means of a lesser harm” (Yuzal ad-darar ...
The madhahib are generally in agreement over them. Maxims such as “Harm must be eliminated” (Ad-dararu yuzal) and “Acts are judged by the intention behind them” (Al-umuru bi-maqasidiha) belong to this category of maxims.
Hit that link, and "CTRL F" search for "harm"... and hit "Next" and repeat
Those may be the "justifications" used by the father in murdering his daughter who joined an extremist group with plans to be a suicide bomber under Islamic law. viewtopic.php?f=94&t=40673" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Also an EXERPT from a PDF, apparently from a College PHILOSOPHY class/course
http://spot.colorado.edu/~huemer/note110b.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
In Defense of Consequentialism
• You have a choice between two possible worlds, world A and world B. Assume A is better than
B. Which one should you pick?
An example: You may murder 1 innocent person to prevent 10 innocent people from being
murdered. Should you do it?


You really have to be careful in the "application" of maxims/principles.:
Example:
contrast 2 situations of shooting 1 person, to preserve many lives:
1) shooting a body bomber, to prevent mass murder. Which might get one in the News headlines as a "Hero"
and
2) shooting an abortion clinic doctor.
Example #2 is not socially acceptable. Therefore, it comes with consequences for that action, and a different set of News headlines.


Sorry I wasn't more awake, to provide a "simple" answer ... I still am not sure of the "name" of that maxim.

A lot may be found searching thusly : http://www.google.com/search?q=maxim+%2 ... fc6f926f13" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;