Skip navigation
Skip navigation

A Problem of Paradigms: Grounding Asymmetric Institutional Permissions for the Use of Lethal Force

Gastineau, Adam Charles

Description

In this thesis I seek to demonstrate that the legal and customary norms defining the permissible use of lethal force by police are more restrictive than those defining the permissible use of lethal force by military personnel. I argue that in many cases this asymmetry can rest on a foundation provided by the moral norms of individual self- defense, but that the strength of this foundation is contingent on the context in which lethal force is used. Provided...[Show more]

dc.contributor.authorGastineau, Adam Charles
dc.date.accessioned2016-11-24T04:21:46Z
dc.date.available2016-11-24T04:21:46Z
dc.identifier.otherb40394414
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1885/110614
dc.description.abstractIn this thesis I seek to demonstrate that the legal and customary norms defining the permissible use of lethal force by police are more restrictive than those defining the permissible use of lethal force by military personnel. I argue that in many cases this asymmetry can rest on a foundation provided by the moral norms of individual self- defense, but that the strength of this foundation is contingent on the context in which lethal force is used. Provided that three contextual asymmetries between police and military operations hold, we can morally justify the asymmetric legal and customary permissions granted to these two institutions on the basis of threat, liability, necessity, and proportionality. However, there are limits to the moral grounds these norms can provide. In cases where the three contextual asymmetries begin to break down, the moral foundation offered by the moral norms of individual self-defense weakens. In cases of contextual equivalence, we are forced to adopt one of two conclusions. Either we accept that our legal and customary norms are without moral foundation in such cases, or we must find alternative moral reasons to morally justify the asymmetry. In the final section I briefly draw out the strengths and weaknesses of both positions and offer some discussion of what other moral reasons we might use to shore-up the moral foundation for the asymmetry in the legal and customary norms regulating the permissible use by military and police institutions.
dc.language.isoen
dc.subjectLethal Force
dc.subjectSelf-Defense
dc.subjectMilitary Ethics
dc.subjectPolice Ethics
dc.subjectLaw of Armed Conflict
dc.subjectInternational Human Rights Law
dc.subjectGrey Zone Conflict
dc.subjectIrregular Conflict
dc.subjectWar on Terror
dc.subjectMilitarization of Police
dc.subjectHumanitarian Intervention
dc.titleA Problem of Paradigms: Grounding Asymmetric Institutional Permissions for the Use of Lethal Force
dc.typeThesis (MPhil)
local.contributor.supervisorLazar, Seth
local.contributor.supervisorcontactseth.lazar@anu.edu.au
dcterms.valid2016
local.description.notesauthor deposited 24/11/2016
local.type.degreeMaster of Philosophy (MPhil)
dc.date.issued2016
local.contributor.affiliationCentre for Moral, Social, and Political Theory, School of Philosophy, ANU College of Arts & Social Sciences, The Australian National University
local.identifier.doi10.25911/5d7636f9b37f6
local.mintdoimint
CollectionsOpen Access Theses

Download

File Description SizeFormat Image
Gastineau Thesis 2016.pdf1.09 MBAdobe PDFThumbnail


Items in Open Research are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Updated:  19 May 2020/ Responsible Officer:  University Librarian/ Page Contact:  Library Systems & Web Coordinator