Soldiers and police have fundamentally different legal rules for lethal force

Evidence

To seize upon a first approximation of the difference between those two models, we must consider what it is that distinguishes the prerogatives of a soldier on the battlefield from those of a police officer on patrol when it comes to the use of lethal force. Whereas a soldier may, with impunity, “shoot to kill” at any legitimate military target, a police officer can fire only as a last resort, and only as a proportionate response to an imminent threat. — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 539

Categorization

• DEFINE: Sharpens the soldier-vs-police lethal force distinction that anchors the whole chapter’s legal analysis.
• XREF: connects to: Target-centered battlefield logic legally licenses worldwide execution of suspects; Geocentric war law is attacked to justify lethal policing beyond borders — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 248; A legal hybrid of war and policing grants a global license to kill — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 553 (+2 more)

Related

• Geocentric war law is attacked to justify lethal policing beyond borders (similarity 0.86)
• Target-centered battlefield logic legally licenses worldwide execution of suspects (similarity 0.85)
• The proposed hybrid legal regime grants a global right of lethal policing (similarity 0.85)
• Police preponderance over the military encodes a regime’s claim to global rule (similarity 0.85)
• Some advocates propose a new legal regime of unconstrained lethal self-defense (similarity 0.83)
• A legal hybrid of war and policing grants a global license to kill (similarity 0.83)
• Claimed technical precision is used to justify global extension of lethal force. (similarity 0.81)
• The combatant-to-militant shift expands the right to kill indefinitely (similarity 0.81)
• US dual legal justifications blur the line between armed conflict and self-defense (similarity 0.78)

Broader Connections

• A legal hybrid of war and policing grants a global license to kill #expands (0.75) — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 553
• US dual legal justifications blur the line between armed conflict and self-defense #expands (0.70) — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 1044