When is murder murder?
Roger directed me to a grisly story about a serial pet rabbit decapitator and exsanguinator in Germany ("Rabbit ripper shocks Germany"). There have been 30 "victims" to date, and the police are worried that "the killer" might switch to killing people, which I assume would be a real problem.
Here’s my question: When is murder murder? I believe according to the law in the US, the victim must be a human being, as must be the perpetrator. But many secondary and tertiary definitions I quickly looked up made no mention of the victims being human or even "persons" (which wouldn’t include nonhumans but would, oddly, include corporations).
Kill is to take one’s life, no matter who’s defining the word, and there’s no mention of humans of nonhumans. Slaughter is sort of the flipside of murder in that the primary definitions of the various dictionaries make particular mention of animals ("especially for food," they’ll say). Secondary definitions include people, killed in either large numbers or in an especially brutal manner.
When I think of the taking of the life of a lamb or a fish or a cow, when not in self-defense, I cannot help but think of murder.
Strangely, a ripper (from the title of the article this post refers to and reminiscent of "Jack the-") is a murderer who specifically uses a knife to slash his victims (according to several dictionaries, although a ripper is a killer according to at least one other).
So the killer of the rabbits is indeed a ripper: a murderer.
I personally experience kill as a sterile word for some reason, and have no visceral reaction to it, perhaps because it doesn’t imply malice or intent. Murder, on the other hand, with its intent to end a life, is a word I think we should be using more often when it comes to what we do–merely because we want to–to sentient nonhumans.
Now, there’s always the mild, but perceptible jolt I often notice in the person I’m speaking with when I use murder when talking about animals. It’s the same jolt you see when you say flesh. But, when used carefully and perhaps with an explanation of why it’s an accurate word, murder could be an important part of the shifting of a paradigm whose shift is long overdue.
What do you think?
I had exactly the same thoughts a few weeks ago when on NPR I heard something about "murdered mountain gorillas." I couldn't help but think, "Since when do you consider animals people?" So as far as I'm concerned there are a few criteria for being a murder victim rather than simply "killed" or "slaughtered."
1. You can be someone's pet, like the rabbits.
2. You can be a cause celebre for environmentalists, like mountain gorillas or pandas.
3. You can be a great ape, dolphin, or some other highly intelligent animal that's "almost as smart as humans."
These are all classic cases of Francione's moral schizophrenia. What makes it especially ironic, though, is that people can torture rabbits in labs and no one considers these rabbits people. People can confine great apes to zoos, and dolphins to aquariums, and no one considers these animals people.
I think people just refuse to make the connections, because if they did, they would be implicated in speciesist atrocities.
I think this is a good post.
"I personally experience kill as a sterile word for some reason, and have no visceral reaction to it, perhaps because it doesn't imply malice or intent."
Also, you can kill both sentient and non-sentient beings. You can kill anything that is alive basically. But really, you even "kill" the rest of your drink, or "kill" a frozen computer program. "Kill" gets around, permeates the langauge. So yes, very sterile, lacks visceral impact. Someone could come over to my appartment and kill my tomato plant, and then kill me too. Same word, despite the moral distinction. But yes, many limit the scope of "murder" merely to humans, possibly including beloved nonhuman "pets", which is symptomatic of speciesism.
There are similar themes here: http://human-nonhuman.blogspot.com/2008/03/horsesense-or-lack-of-it.html looking at the notion of victimhood etc. It was this research that alerted me to the German news.
RY
In the Oxford English Dictionary, the first three listed senses of "murder", considered as an act of killing, are:
(a) The deliberate and unlawful killing of a human being, esp. in a premeditated manner; (Law) criminal homicide with malice aforethought (occas. more fully wilful murder); an instance of this.
(b) Terrible slaughter, massacre, loss of life; an instance of this. Obs.
(c) The action of killing or causing destruction of life, regarded as wicked and morally reprehensible irrespective of its legality (e.g. in relation to war, death sentences passed down by tribunals, and other socially sanctioned acts of killing); an instance of this.
The third is relevant for our purposes: Murder is morally reprehensible killing, regardless of its legality.
Angus,
I was just about to update! I forgot my password and/or user name for my OED account (they've since sent it to me). THANKS! None of the other 4 dictionaries I went to online (or my one hard copy) provided that third definition. But that doesn't surprise me, as common usage rules the online dictionaries.
Excellent point Mary – The word "kill" is inaccurate and falls short of the viciousness of the act of "murder". "Exterminate" and "extinquish" might also be two other terms that fail to clearly define what "killing" human/non-human animals is: "Murder".
One other point – strange as it seems – my husband and I were just (3 hours ago) evaluating why omnivores have such a hard time when you use the word "flesh" to describe thier "meat"….. Guaranteed – if you use this truthful term it will insight an omnivore to defensive mode, every time.
Words do indeed have power. Thanks for reminding us to use them accurately and effectively.
Murder in the wilderness starts today (August 1-March 31). The "bag limit" for wolves has gone up from three to seven for resident killers. Non resident killers can murder two wolves each just for the hell of it. This is 'Murder' in the wilderness–Government style.
The savagery of human-kind continues!
Run with the wolves…
That's so sad Mike. I'm sorry. I know how hard you work for all creatures and it's heartbreaking to see that so little progress has been made.
usually people only count it murder if the killed being is human shaped
e.q : real human, human shaped mascot, manequine, etc