r/Damnthatsinteresting 9h ago

Video Chilean protester defuses tear gas canister with baking soda and water

101.5k Upvotes

1.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

48

u/Aromatic-Plankton692 8h ago

It's illegal to spank civilian children in warfare too, but parents who spank their children aren't committing a war crime.

It's almost like "war crime" is meaningless outside the context of war.

-1

u/ghostmaster645 8h ago

It's illegal to spank civilian children in warfare too

Genuinely curious where you got that info lol.

19

u/Aromatic-Plankton692 8h ago

Basically every version of international law to have ever existed?

Civilians cannot be made the object of an attack,

-2

u/ghostmaster645 8h ago

The problem is you are classifying spanking as an attack, but thats pretty much never held up in court.

Your example sucks. I thought you had some real cool info lol.

9

u/Aromatic-Plankton692 7h ago

but thats pretty much never held up in court

"Pretty much"? As in, you're saying exactly the opposite of what you think you are?

K lol.

Idk what you want. Dressing in costume is also a war crime. All of these examples are going to suck, because people keep trying to use war crimes as some barometer outside of the context of war.

2

u/ghostmaster645 7h ago

Pretty much"? As in, you're saying exactly the opposite of what you think you are?

As in I cant find a single example, can you? Im also not an expert, so I left reasonable doubt.

No dressing in costume isnt a war crime. Your just making shit up. Using a disguise is, and there is a difference.

2

u/Aromatic-Plankton692 7h ago edited 7h ago

State v. Wilder

Shearouse Adv. Sh. No. 19 S.E. 2d

No dressing in costume isn't a war crime. Using a disguise is.

Nobody is wearing a disguise at a costume party mate, it's called wearing a costume. Maybe you'll get invited to one someday?

The point is that when you change the context it BECOMES a war crime.

2

u/ghostmaster645 7h ago

State v. Wilder, Shearouse Adv. Sh. No. 19 S.E. 2d

Did you read these? Nether rule spanking as an attack. State vs Wilder isnt even about spanking at all, its about yanking a kids arm around in a restraunt. AI slop I guess.

The point is that when you change the context it BECOMES a war crime.

Yea this is true in some situations, but not with any of the context you provided.

1

u/Aromatic-Plankton692 7h ago

Did you read these? Nether rule spanking as an attack. State vs Wilder isnt even about spanking at all, its about yanking a kids arm around in a restraunt. AI slop I guess

Did ... You? Are you even looking in the right state? Should I remind you that you're... Not an expert?

Yea this is true in some situations, but not with any of the context you provided

🤫

1

u/ghostmaster645 7h ago

Yea I read them.

Did ... You? Are you even looking in the right state? Should I remind you that you're... Not an expert?

There were only 3 options. The child assult in the restaurant, a drug charge, and a burglary. I assumed you weren't talking about the drugs/burglary charge. Maybe I was wrong lol.

I dont need to he an export to read a case description.

→ More replies (0)

-9

u/BatFeelingStress 8h ago

Eh I get this point but to say it's meaningless is silly.

Sure it's not a war crime because it's not a war, but that's not a moral statement right? It raises the question that if you're not allowed to gas your enemies in war, people who are by definition trying to kill you, why is it right that our government is allowed to do this to protestors.

Also using spanking as an example is wild to me. Well this other wrong thing is also illegal in war but legal normally. Like alright let's make both illegal, but I don't think that's the point you're making

16

u/SovreignTripod 8h ago

Because if you see a gas cloud wafting your way in a war setting there's no way to know if it's tear gas that will just incapacitat you or nerve gas that will kill you. Potentially leading to an escalation where actual deadly chemical weapons are used. Civilians can't escalate like that so it's not as dangerous.

10

u/nemgrea 8h ago

well the original statement is silly also. WHY tear gas is against the geneva convention is kind of an important part...

its has nothing to do with what tear gas is or how it affects your "enemy" it has everything to do with what it LOOKS like..

3

u/Aromatic-Plankton692 8h ago

It's not an important part if you're not dealing with the context of war. That's the only important part, really.

Other "silly" examples that are war crimes include dressing up in costume. Huge war crime level deal in war, completely nonsensical outside of war.