DZ
DefZone.Net

Kien thuc cong nghe & giai tri

Wiki Article

Talk:State violence

Nguồn dữ liệu từ Wikipedia, hiển thị bởi DefZone.Net

Xem trên WikipediaBài ngẫu nhiên khác

Wiki Education assignment: The Anthropology of Violence

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 8 January 2024 and 23 March 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Skyjay999, Aemoe85 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Chase2424, Winter-PSU, Zmbois, Szelinsky, FrozenFrosch, Grackle.cackle, EliasSpence84.

— Assignment last updated by RiverScullerPDX (talk) 05:06, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Globalize

[edit]

This article currently contains only US examples of state violence, and would benefit from more examples from more places to form a more complete understanding of the topic. Lebonk (talk) 04:06, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article is limited.

[edit]

I don't understand how the United States is shown as the only example given in this article. This state does not deny any of the information presented in the article, but without a broad list if examples of state violence throughout the world, past and present, only focussing on one society suggests a bias by omission. 192.208.126.49 (talk) 01:07, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Missing information on how bodies are governed

[edit]

The article, which is inconsistent and lacking in many ways, could benefit from a more clear distinction between physical and non-physical violence. Furthermore, to address questions about how human bodies can be governed and threatened by states for a wide variety of reasons, one could look at Mikdashi's book Sextarianism (2014), specifically the fifth chapter which focusses on power manifestation through bodily regulation and violence by the Lebanese state. 145.15.244.233 (talk) 12:03, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New Section - States are a monopoly on violence itself

[edit]

I propose to add a new section (or completely re-write the article) to reflect these objectively true facts about state violence:

A state (government) is an organization that holds a monopoly over the initiation of violence in a particular geographic area, to which its subjects (citizens) submit, due to a shared belief in its necessity to serve a greater good.

The state enforces this monopoly by threatening violence against its citizens who oppose it, even through completely passive non-violent opposition like not paying taxes.

The primary tool of the state is violence, or threats of violence - That's what laws are: An authorization or obligation granted or given to state-affiliated individuals to initiate violence against citizens when certain criteria are met.

The purpose of the article should not be a debate as to whether specific acts of state violence are justified - Rather it should comprehensively cover the concept of state violence itself. 174.88.98.196 (talk) 05:27, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed Additions:
State violence is the use of violence by a government or its agents to impose laws, secure compliance, or punish violations. Modern legal systems organize this power as an exclusive authority of the state. Private actors are generally prohibited from initiating violence, while designated public officials are authorized to do so within prescribed limits. In practice, criminal codes, arrest-authority statutes, resistance crimes, and immunity doctrines together define who may use violence, and when it may be used.[1][2][3][4]

== United States ==
In U.S. federal law, several features illustrate the state’s monopoly over the initiation of violence:

Authorization to use violence
Congress empowers specific classes of federal officers to carry firearms, execute warrants, and make arrests, including for non-violent offenses, authorizing the use of violence to implement federal statutes. Examples include FBI agents under 18 U.S.C. § 3052 and Drug Enforcement Administration personnel under 21 U.S.C. § 878. Resisting, impeding, or assaulting officers engaged in their duties is itself a federal crime (18 U.S.C. § 111), and killing or attempting to kill them is separately criminalized (18 U.S.C. § 1114).[5][6][7][8]

Allocation (not abolition) of violence between state actors
“Limiting” statutes typically reassign who may wield violence rather than renounce it. The Posse Comitatus Act makes it a federal offense to use the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, or Space Force to execute domestic law unless expressly authorized by the Constitution or Congress (18 U.S.C. § 1385), thereby channeling domestic enforcement to civilian authorities.[9][10]

Judicial standards that assume, then limit police violence
The Supreme Court regulates how state actors may use violence without questioning that they may use it to enforce law. Tennessee v. Garner restricts deadly force against fleeing suspects; Graham v. Connor requires that all police force be “objectively reasonable” under the Fourth Amendment.[11][12]

Accountability and the scope of immunity
Federal criminal civil-rights statutes allow prosecution of officials who, “under color of law,” willfully deprive persons of rights (18 U.S.C. § 241; 18 U.S.C. § 242). Civil remedies are limited by sovereign immunity (with a partial waiver via the Federal Tort Claims Act), and by qualified immunity for individual officials (e.g., Harlow v. Fitzgerald; Pearson v. Callahan). The Court has also narrowed implied damages actions against federal officers under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents (e.g., Egbert v. Boule). Together, these doctrines regulate, but also shield the exercise of state violence.[13][14][15][16][17][18]

Examples of non-violent offenses enforced by armed arrest authority
Federal law criminalizes a variety of non-violent conduct, including tax offenses (e.g., 26 U.S.C. § 7201; 26 U.S.C. § 7203) and controlled-substances offenses under the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. § 801 et seq.), which are enforced by armed officers pursuant to arrest authority statutes cited above.[19][20][21]
== See also ==
== References ==
  1. ^ [[1](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/3052) "18 U.S. Code § 3052 – Powers of Federal Bureau of Investigation"]. Legal Information Institute. Cornell Law School. Retrieved 2025-09-14. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)
  2. ^ [[2](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/21/878) "21 U.S. Code § 878 – Powers of enforcement personnel"]. Legal Information Institute. Cornell Law School. Retrieved 2025-09-14. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)
  3. ^ [[3](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/111) "18 U.S. Code § 111 – Assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers or employees"]. Legal Information Institute. Cornell Law School. Retrieved 2025-09-14. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)
  4. ^ [[4](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1114) "18 U.S. Code § 1114 – Protection of officers and employees of the United States"]. Legal Information Institute. Cornell Law School. Retrieved 2025-09-14. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)
  5. ^ [[5](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/3052) "18 U.S. Code § 3052 – Powers of Federal Bureau of Investigation"]. Legal Information Institute. Cornell Law School. Retrieved 2025-09-14. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)
  6. ^ [[6](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/21/878) "21 U.S. Code § 878 – Powers of enforcement personnel"]. Legal Information Institute. Cornell Law School. Retrieved 2025-09-14. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)
  7. ^ [[7](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/111) "18 U.S. Code § 111 – Assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers or employees"]. Legal Information Institute. Cornell Law School. Retrieved 2025-09-14. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)
  8. ^ [[8](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1114) "18 U.S. Code § 1114 – Protection of officers and employees of the United States"]. Legal Information Institute. Cornell Law School. Retrieved 2025-09-14. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)
  9. ^ [[9](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1385) "18 U.S. Code § 1385 – Use of Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, and Space Force as posse comitatus"]. Legal Information Institute. Cornell Law School. Retrieved 2025-09-14. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)
  10. ^ [[10](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R42659) "The Posse Comitatus Act and Related Matters: The Use of the Military to Execute Civilian Law"]. Congressional Research Service. 2018-11-06. Retrieved 2025-09-14. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)
  11. ^ [[11](https://www.oyez.org/cases/1984/83-1035) "Tennessee v. Garner"]. Oyez. Retrieved 2025-09-14. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)
  12. ^ [[12](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/490/386/) "Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989)"]. Justia. Retrieved 2025-09-14. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)
  13. ^ [[13](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/part-I/chapter-13) "18 U.S. Code Chapter 13 – Civil Rights"]. Legal Information Institute. Cornell Law School. Retrieved 2025-09-14. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)
  14. ^ [[14](https://www.justice.gov/crt/deprivation-rights-under-color-law) "Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law (Section 242)"]. U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division. 2021-05-31. Retrieved 2025-09-14. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)
  15. ^ [[15](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/11-10362_2d9g.pdf) "Millbrook v. United States, 569 U.S. 50 (2013) (opinion PDF)"]. Supreme Court of the United States. 2013-03-27. Retrieved 2025-09-14. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)
  16. ^ [[16](https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep457/usrep457800/usrep457800.pdf) "Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (1982)"]. U.S. Reports (Library of Congress). Retrieved 2025-09-14. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)
  17. ^ [[17](https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep555/usrep555223/usrep555223.pdf) "Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (2009) (opinion PDF)"]. U.S. Reports (Library of Congress). Retrieved 2025-09-14. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)
  18. ^ [[18](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-147_g31h.pdf) "Egbert v. Boule, 596 U.S. 482 (2022) (opinion PDF)"]. Supreme Court of the United States. 2022-06-08. Retrieved 2025-09-14. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)
  19. ^ [[19](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/7201) "26 U.S. Code § 7201 – Attempt to evade or defeat tax"]. Legal Information Institute. Cornell Law School. Retrieved 2025-09-14. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)
  20. ^ [[20](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/7203) "26 U.S. Code § 7203 – Willful failure to file return, supply information, or pay tax"]. Legal Information Institute. Cornell Law School. Retrieved 2025-09-14. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)
  21. ^ [[21](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/21/801) "21 U.S. Code § 801 – Congressional findings and declarations: controlled substances"]. Legal Information Institute. Cornell Law School. Retrieved 2025-09-14. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)

70.26.67.59 (talk) 05:11, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]