I like it.

ACTIO LIBERA IN CAUSA AND NUCLEAR DETERRENCE: TWO FACETS OF ONE PROBLEM
Claire Finkelstein & Leo Katz

i think this is only a limited example of what it means.

=====
The first manifestation of our problem goes by the name of the Actio Libera in Causa, namely the problem of defendants who manufacture the conditions of their own defenses.

The standard example is the case of the defendant who deliberately drinks himself into a state of irresponsibility in order to commit a crime while in that state. A related kind of case in which the defendant is aware of, but does not deliberately place himself in a situation in which he may need to avail himself of a defensive condition, such as the person who knowingly drives risking an epileptic seizure behind the wheel, or the person who knowingly places himself in a situation in which he may end up subject to duress. Such cases are commonly referred to as the Actio Illicita in Causa.
=====

so it's doing something

@@ -13,1 +13,1 @@
-<gloss>action committed while intoxicated</gloss>
+<gloss g_type="expl">manufacturing the conditions of one's own defence (e.g. getting drunk in order to commit a crime)</gloss>

Fair enough.

@@ -13,0 +13,1 @@
+<gloss>action committed while intoxicated</gloss>

I was just wondering if it would be worth adding the English translation of the Latin phrase as part of the definition?

Looking on Google, I found "action committed while intoxicated" and "criminal responsibility as a result of knowingly bringing about a condition of alcoholic incapacity in order to commit an offence" as examples.

Entry created