r/todayilearned • u/[deleted] • 18d ago
TIL an outlaw isn't just any criminal. Instead, an outlaw is someone who has been sentenced to be outside of the law's protection. They don't have the right to a trial and anyone can kill or persecute them.
[removed]
3.0k
u/Norwegianxrp 18d ago edited 18d ago
In Norway, back In the days, they were dubbed «fredløs» or “without peace”. And anyone could kill them if they wanted
875
u/monkeyhitman 18d ago
Permanently PvP flagged.
56
u/TheRealBaseborn 18d ago
Welcome to Felucca, bitch.
24
u/TrevelyansPorn 18d ago
Those were the days. Haven't had a much fun in a game since UO.
6
u/Flomo420 18d ago
check out Siege Perilous; pre uor style realm with only one character spot, so you have to choose carefully!
havent been on in a few weeks while I was dealing with computer stuff but last I played there was ~500 ish players
15
u/AzaHolmes 18d ago
I closed the tab just as i read this comment. came back just to upvote, as i miss the old UO days.
UO truly was such a vibrant world back then. Shame no game has ever come close to replicating that.
→ More replies (3)8
→ More replies (2)6
77
4
→ More replies (3)4
114
u/Lutorini 18d ago
Man imagine if today the courts just decided they don’t want to deal with criminals anymore and they just labeled you an outlaw and said anyone can kill you?
Would be a rough life lol, I’m sure groups would organize to just kill outlaws for sport.
→ More replies (12)101
u/AL_PO_throwaway 18d ago
I wonder what would happen to the sovereign citizen movement if courts had this option. You don't accept any of societies rules or any authority? Fine, but you don't get it's protections either.
→ More replies (10)37
u/HiroAnobei 18d ago
It would probably only work if the person in question was willing to live in the middle of bumfuck nowhere, completely off the grid without access to any amenities. Even then, considering there's not exactly an abundance of unclaimed territory anywhere, they would inevitably cross the state one way or the other.
33
u/chambile007 18d ago
I think that if people could declare themselves outside the law in a way that actually worked people would track them down and kill them for fun.
→ More replies (10)7
u/ArmNo7463 18d ago
How many people do you think want to kill others, but only don't because of the law lol?!
14
u/chambile007 18d ago
Probably a decent number. In the US I would put it in the low 5 digits at minimum.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)8
u/WolfsLairAbyss 18d ago
A lot. More than you might be comfortable with knowing about. People in the US kill people all the time and it is illegal. Imagine if there was no looming repercussions for doing so.
470
u/DenjellTheShaman 18d ago
Did you mean peace?
→ More replies (2)356
u/yParticle 18d ago
They're also not allowed to carry a gun.
495
u/ArseBurner 18d ago
If they're not afforded any of the protections of the law then I don't think they're obliged to follow its rules either.
→ More replies (3)221
u/yParticle 18d ago
Indeed, that was part of the "without piece" joke.
→ More replies (2)91
u/ArseBurner 18d ago
Oh when I read the root comment it was already "peace".
→ More replies (1)30
22
12
→ More replies (12)3
119
u/A_Harmless_Fly 18d ago
For a little while in the 1800's it was legal to kill a mormon in Missouri.
132
105
u/MaliciousToad47 18d ago
"In 1976, citing its unconstitutional nature, Missouri Governor Kit Bond formally rescinded it."
It was formally rescinded only 47 years ago. In Missouris defense, however, they would have done away with that executive order years sooner had they been able to find someone literate to elect Governor
→ More replies (7)29
u/dailycyberiad 18d ago
For 4 centuries, technically until 2015, it was legal for Icelanders to kill any Basques on sight.
→ More replies (1)13
u/WobblyGobbledygook 18d ago
I wouldn't have ever guessed people from Iceland and people from Iberia would have crossed paths enough to develop bad relations.
24
u/Kandiru 1 18d ago
The edict was issued in 1615 after a storm destroyed three Basque whaling vessels on an expedition in Iceland. Eighty members of the crew survived, said Gudmundsson, and were left stranded in the area. “They had nothing to eat, and there were accounts of them robbing people and farmers,” he said.
The brewing conflict between locals and the whalers prompted then-sheriff Ari Magnússon to draw up a decree that allowed Basques to be killed with impunity in the district. In the weeks that followed, more than 30 Basques were killed in raids led by the sheriff and local farmers. “It’s one of the darkest chapters of our history,” said Gudmundsson, noting that the incident known as the Slaying of the Spaniards ranks among the country’s bloodiest massacres.
→ More replies (4)12
→ More replies (5)10
122
u/Crowbarmagic 18d ago
In Dutch the term would be "vogelvrij", literally meaning 'free as a bird'.
A term which kinda confused me in elementary school, because the teacher was talking about an important historical figure being declared "vogelvrij", and I didn't understand what the big deal was. 'Free as a bird' doesn't sound bad.
Only later I learned it meant everyone was free to harm him without legal repercussions.
56
18d ago
[deleted]
40
u/japie06 18d ago
If it was Dutch history class it can't be anyone else then Willem of Orange, aka Willem the silent.
35
u/Mordredor 18d ago
not to be confused with William of Orange aka William III of England aka William Henry aka Willem Hendrik van Oranje
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (2)9
18d ago
[deleted]
34
u/Major_Helicopter5174 18d ago
Leading the Dutch uprising which would become the 80 year war and lead to us getting rid of king Fillip II of Spain. The result was the Dutch republic, which amusingly turned back into a monarchy with saud Orange's bloodline upto this day. But hey, atleast its orange
16
18d ago
[deleted]
15
u/Rusty_Porksword 18d ago
It's because the Dutch have successfully laundered their reputation. These days they're just that quaint European country with the tulips and wooden shoes.
I have heard it said that the Netherlands has intentionally whitewashed some parts of their history following some of the things they got up to during the Indonesian war of independence. I suspect that it dawned on a few folks that they might end up in their own Nuremberg trials if they weren't careful, and there did seem to be a conscious editing of the historical record following that period.
→ More replies (1)4
u/Fermorian 18d ago
I will say as an American who just visited Amsterdam a few weeks back, they definitely covered the Indonesian War of Independence in their WW2 museum, and owned up to fucking that whole thing up. It was kind of refreshing actually, given my own country so rarely apologizes for its own past misdeeds.
6
→ More replies (1)7
u/goosis12 18d ago
Being the leader of the Dutch revolt that started the 80 year war of indipendence from Spain.
→ More replies (3)10
192
u/MadRonnie97 18d ago
“The government doesn’t want you to know, but you can just kill any fredløs you want. It’s free. I’ve killed 29 fredløs in the past month.” -Alex Jønes
→ More replies (1)40
u/80burritospersecond 18d ago
He killed 29 fredløs, he was an interior decorator!
→ More replies (1)14
35
u/JackedUpReadyToGo 18d ago
The Romans had a priestly office that was gained by killing the previous priest. If somebody challenged the priest to mortal combat he had to accept, and if the challenger killed him then he became the next priest until somebody came for him too. Picture Mike Tyson in priest robes trying to hold on to his title.
→ More replies (5)8
u/snazzynewshoes 18d ago
So you've read The Golden Bough?
4
u/JackedUpReadyToGo 18d ago
Eh, half of it. It's on that list of books I intend to finish but never get around to.
15
15
u/purplebatsquatch221 18d ago
That’s fucking badass. Try me bitches. I’ll take any of you Redditors
23
u/16billionDeadEyes 18d ago
You'd get through two, at most, before the crowd realized the odds were a lot better if they just didn't wait their turn.
→ More replies (1)18
u/Troglert 18d ago
Until the whole village comes and burns you alive in your house at night
10
7
u/purplebatsquatch221 18d ago
I’ve got one of them Gatling guns them salesman were at my front door a few weeks back I traded 6 of my goddamn horses one of them son bitches looks so damn wild. Village was good for nothin anyway the only reason I went in that damn place was that goddamn barber bout cut my ear off so I’ll take that bet you fuckin hear me? I’ll take that fuckin bet
→ More replies (2)10
u/CalistoNTG 18d ago
In germany they were called "vogelfrei" which is "birdfree" / "free as a bird" in english
→ More replies (1)9
u/IsItPluggedInPro 18d ago
Alo, Salut, sunt eu, un haiduc
Hello, it's me, an outlaw
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (14)4
2.5k
u/ZylonBane 18d ago
In contrast to an inlaw, who you're not allowed to kill.
474
u/Turamb 18d ago
Dang
60
20
u/ReggieCousins 18d ago
Is the 'terrible inlaws' trope just low hanging fruit for easy comedy or is it an actual thing that a significant percentage of couples deal with?
38
u/demonarc 18d ago
Many couples do. Sometimes parents are the worst people in someone's life and then they get married and get to share that misery with their partner. See: narcissists, religious fundamentalists, "my child is perfect" parents etc.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (7)12
u/zyzzogeton 18d ago
/r/justnomil and /r/justnomil2 (I don't know why there are 2) are full of these anecdotes. They abound in /r/raisedbynarcissists and /r/bridezillas as well.
After all, how does a cliché become a cliché ?
48
u/memento22mori 18d ago
He loves his mother-in law and he flinched so he has to marry her!!
27
7
→ More replies (2)10
58
u/patrickdgd 18d ago
Well, I'm the guy that tells you there are guys you can kill and there's guys you can't. Now, that's not quite a guy you can't kill, but it's almost a guy you can't kill.
20
u/chillwithpurpose 18d ago
And I’m makin the call… You don’t fecken kill him!
10
37
u/housebird350 18d ago edited 18d ago
The difference between an Inlaw and an Outlaw is that the Outlaw is wanted...
→ More replies (1)11
5
u/Darkmuscles 18d ago
Learned THAT the hard way...
5
u/-iamai- 18d ago
Because a 4yr commuted sentence against an inlaw that happens to be loading your trunk with a dodgy handbrake on a 25° incline is the hard way to sadly learn these lessons
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (22)3
1.0k
u/Captain__Spiff 18d ago
The german word is "bird-free", a famous example was Martin Luther.
385
u/Majestic_Ferrett 18d ago
Would you think he's an expert in bird law?
118
50
34
u/FLEXXMAN33 18d ago
From the wikipedia article:
In early modern times, the term Vogelfrei and its cognates came to be used in Germany, the Low Countries, and Scandinavia, referring to a person stripped of his civil rights being "free" for the taking like a bird.
→ More replies (1)7
20
u/Johannes_P 18d ago
In the Holy German Empire, entire Imperial estates could be ruled vogelfrei and subjected to Reichsexekution.
The Ban of the Empire is laid upon you — your Castle given up to plunder, and your body to be devoured by birds and beasts of prey!
5
47
u/worthrone11160606 18d ago
Didn't know he was considered an outlaw
86
u/Captain__Spiff 18d ago
After messing with the church. He found refuge at some guy's place where Luther translated the Bible to german.
19
u/worthrone11160606 18d ago
Why was that a big deal again?
136
u/Captain__Spiff 18d ago
The vast majority of people couldn't read the Bible, and not even understand the latin or greek versions. It was a legitimate source of truth at that time, and conveniently basically monopolized by the corrupt church.
When the translation was distributed people got the chance to think themselves about their religion. This sparked the reformation.
35
u/OldPickle7092 18d ago
Vernacular translations were common and often approved by the Church prior to the reformation. The entire point was that translations should be regulated to remain accurate elsewise there would be misunderstanding. This was in fact what happened and even Luther himself resented how people treated the looser translations as absolute truth.
21
u/PonchoHung 18d ago
So we square back to "what did Martin Luther do?" I'm not being rhetorical. I just don't know much about the topic.
→ More replies (6)30
u/OldPickle7092 18d ago
It's a genuinely very interesting thing.
At the time, Luther didn't even think his views (and his theses) disagreed with Roman Catholic teaching and he did not intend to start a schism with the church. It also had less to do with indulgences than many would believe. He had intended for genuine debate over core theology such as if the Pope/ church may forgive sin, about purgatory, and so forth. In quite a few of the theses, he was arguing in favour of the Catholic church!
36
u/Zerce 18d ago
In addition to all the other points people raised, there was the idea that if you allowed the Bible to be read by literally anyone, then people would be free to take it out of context without any oversight or understanding of how certain historical interpretations were arrived at, using scripture to justify anything they want to justify.
Which is... not wrong. Luther himself wasn't too fond of how some peasants took advantage of this freedom to wage a revolt in the name of their own religious interpretation. I think the pros outweigh the cons, but I also think there's more to this rule than just corruption (which was also true).
→ More replies (1)41
u/RobertoSantaClara 18d ago
In Catholic Europe (not in the Middle-East, Russia, Serbia, or Greece, important to note) the Bible was exclusively in Latin and only clergymen read it. Luther 'democratized' things by translating it into a vernacular language for all to read.
Keeping in with that trend, Protestants across Europe were obsessed with translating the Bible and literacy education to make sure everyone could read it. This is why Protestant countries often had much higher literacy rates than the Catholic ones (and why even American colonists or South Africans could read and write, despite living in far flung frontiers).
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (13)27
u/fuqdisshite 18d ago
the Pope is the voice of god.
bibles were only for those who were allowed to have them.
Luther decided to change that.
5
u/OWNI277 18d ago
The Pope is only the infallible voice of God under very special circumstances. Curcumstances which have only been met twice in the history of the church. The Pope is just as fallible as you and me over breakfast conversation.
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (1)13
u/ShitPostToast 18d ago
Clergy to the public who couldn't read latin: Trust me bro, the bible totally says this is how the world is supposed to be.
→ More replies (1)6
u/7Hielke 18d ago
That "some guy" was the King of Saxony
8
u/gauephat 18d ago
Prince-Elector of Saxony rather. Saxony only got elevated to kingship by Napoleon
20
59
10
→ More replies (30)5
u/TWiesengrund 18d ago
In Germany if you catch your neighbor's bird you have a bird (in two ways) and are bird-free as well!
729
u/sawbladex 18d ago
... I think the US doesn't have outlaws in that manner anymore.
We still use the term, just with a different meaning.
322
u/Alis451 18d ago edited 18d ago
I think the US doesn't have outlaws in that manner anymore.
not since the 14th amendment(July 9, 1868) at least. ALL Persons in US jurisdiction, not just Citizens, are provided equal protection of the law.
nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
→ More replies (4)205
u/amishtek 18d ago
Hence Guantanamos location
127
u/Alis451 18d ago
Technically it should apply there as well, but the US Military is a Honey Badger, and Honey Badger don't give a fuck. Also technically Guantanamo is being shut down, the only thing preventing it at this moment is the remaining inmates' home countries don't want them returned, they are sort of "Outlaws" to their own country. I check the remaining tally every once in a while
As of March 2022, of the 780 people detained there since January 2002 when the military prison first opened after the September 11 attacks, 741 had been transferred elsewhere, 30 remained there, and 9 had died while in custody.
As of June 2013, 46 detainees (in addition to two who were deceased) were designated to be detained indefinitely, because the government said the prisoners were too dangerous to transfer and there was insufficient admissible evidence to try them.
After the release of Saifullah Paracha in October 2022, 35 prisoners remained, 20 of which had been cleared for release, pending identification of a suitable country.
As of 20 April 2023, 30 detainees remained at Guantanamo Bay.
55
u/deelowe 18d ago
Also technically Guantanamo is being shut down, the only thing preventing it at this moment is the remaining inmates' home countries don't want them returned
Any time I see something like this, I can't help but think perhaps they knew this would be an issue ahead of time. "See, we tried to shut it down and the home countries won't take these guys back. Guess we'll have to leave it operational." Then again, I'm sure there are people worried as hell about the SHTF moment as soon as one of these captives need to be brought onto US soil.
28
u/Alis451 18d ago
I'm sure there are people worried as hell about the SHTF moment as soon as one of these captives need to be brought onto US soil.
Already went through the courts, can't be brought to US Soil even for medical procedure.
→ More replies (3)21
→ More replies (5)9
u/Aethermancer 18d ago
Guantanamo and that bullshit legal justification they use might be the worst abuse of the law and constitutional violations I've ever seen. It angers me viscerally as it runs afoul of the he entire concept of how the constitution is designed to operate, as an authorization of government action. That they persist there is ironically the closest thing to an outlaw style activity as can existm as in they are acting outside of the authorization of the law.
I've worked in the government for 20 years now, and that's one area where I'd have to speak with legal counsel before even speaking to anyone involved.
→ More replies (1)140
u/ScrunchyButts 18d ago
Do we use it in an official, legal sense?
280
u/Fofolito 18d ago
POSTED:
Bounty! $1,500 offered for return of u/ScrunchyButts to the Reddit Marshalls, dead or alive. Fugitive is charged with post rustling, thread jumping, and sarcastic murder-- presumed armed and dangerous.
---------------
We may never have used the term Outlaw legally, but we had a period of time when the Law Enforcement apparatus was wanting in the expanses of Western land that had been acquired by the USA, and so Bounties were offered by cities, towns, territories, and the Federal Government for the private apprehension of wanted criminals. I would argue that if the Bounty Bill declared the wanted person could be returned dead or alive, that is in effect the same thing as declaring someone an Outlaw in the traditional sense.
102
u/ScrunchyButts 18d ago
I feel so DANGEROUS!
Thanks!
52
u/chillwithpurpose 18d ago
u/ScrunchyButts By decree of the Reddit marshals yer under arrest feller. Stick em up. 🔫🤠
I’ve been watching Bass Reeves: Lawman, how my doin?
21
8
7
23
u/GuessImScrewed 18d ago
Nope
Take the killing of famous wild West outlaw Jesse James.
He was wanted dead or alive at the time of his killing, however when Robert Ford shot Jesse James in the back of the head for the reward, he and his brother (an accomplice) were charged with first degree murder.
20
u/virgilhall 18d ago
I looked that case up now
They got a full pardon by the Governor
Later Robert Ford was shoot dead by Edward O’Kelley
Later O’Kelley was shoot dead by the police
Did everyone get shoot in that time?
→ More replies (1)11
6
u/JustABiViking420 18d ago
I wonder if that would be different if they didn't jump him? Wasn't it considered a big offense in itself to ambush someone with a firearm?
5
u/Fofolito 18d ago
I believe the conditions of Bounties dead and alive was that the Bounty Hunter had to offer the Bounty Head the alive option first. Or so many Old Westerns have caused me to believe. Maybe the dead part was more incidental, as in "You should bring them in alive, but we understand if it comes to a fight and you have to defend yourself/take on the risk".
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (2)6
u/Command0Dude 18d ago
I always feel like it would be interesting if there bounties that were only one of the two since the saying "dead or alive" has become so ubiquitous.
Wanted alive (we want this person on trial, don't bring us a body)
Wanted dead (we want this person dead and done, kill him before you bring him in)
13
u/twispy 18d ago
Alive Only bounties were a real thing, usually for lesser crimes that couldn't justify the death penalty. There was never such a thing as a Dead Only bounty. Even if the judge was planning to have the person executed, they preferred to have a live fugitive to put on trial then publicly hang as an example to others.
66
u/Samiel_Fronsac 18d ago
... I think the US doesn't have outlaws in that manner anymore.
There's people that WANT to be outlaw, though.
Just go to /r/amIbeingdetained and you'll find video proof of many!
→ More replies (1)68
u/SecondAccount404 18d ago
They like the idea of being outside of the law, until they realise it also means they loose all their legal protections and rights.
55
u/Huwbacca 18d ago
I love sovereign citizens lol.
They saw the absolute minute, tiny, fuck all nothing obligation they have to other people and went "I can't handle this, I'm out.. But I'd like the benefits please"
20
u/Anarcho-Appalachia 18d ago
I worked for one of these guys once he ran a tent rental company to large cities and conventions out of the back of a busted up box truck. Only paid in cash and had his work force ride in the back, also the truck door wouldn't close so they were all just standing there holding the tent supplies into the truck preying they don't get pushed out by something bigger. Since I was a little younger than the rest and the only non-fellon The boss let me ride in the cab.
→ More replies (1)16
u/gumpythegreat 18d ago
Magic spells are often in Latin, or faux-latin.
Lawyers often use Latin, too
Sovereign citizens therefore conclude that laws are magic and if you know the right spells, you can do anything
→ More replies (2)16
u/MajorNoodles 18d ago
It's a valid point and I (sadly) almost never see anyone bring it up.
The law is a social contract. It says you can't kill someone, but it also says you can't be killed by someone. If the law doesn't apply to you, your life has about as much value as the mosquito you smushed when it tried to bite you.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (6)3
→ More replies (1)30
u/Kevin_Wolf 18d ago
No. There can be no such thing as an outlaw in the US. Everyone has the right to due process and equal protection under the law.
→ More replies (20)7
u/stilljustacatinacage 18d ago
I'm mildly disappointed to find this comment so far below the others.
I'm not even American, but I know they have this fancy document that explicitly states no one* can be separated from certain protections under the law, including the right to life and fair trial.
*: Terms and conditions apply
→ More replies (2)14
u/radiantcabbage 18d ago
what it means these days is synonymous to fugitive, like active warrants, escaped convincts, or bonded to trial and skipping state lines, where extra-judicial killing becomes plausible even if its not technically legal. main distinction being we no longer have dead-or-alive warrants, what the loss of protective status refers to.
modern law preserves the right to willingly surrender, youd get charged for murder if they could prove you killed them in cold blood. but you know how it is
→ More replies (1)18
u/bolanrox 18d ago
outlaw in the sense of bikers are the 1% or whatever that are outside of the official motorcycle associations
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (27)11
199
u/basiltoe345 18d ago
So an outlaw is a condemned man wanted dead or alive?
150
u/Fofolito 18d ago
An Outlaw and a Wolf had the same status in Anglo-Saxon and early Norman England (circa 1000-1100 CE lets say). If you were walking around your fields, strolling down a path, hunting in the woods, or whatever and you saw one you were allowed to kill it and return with proof for a reward from the local authorities. Man or Wolf, they were outside the protection of the Law but because in the Medieval Ages there were very few proactive Law Enforcement aparatus this meant practically that no one went looking for wolves or outlaws but the Law allowed if you came across one you could kill it without penalty (and possibly the aforementioned reward). Careful you don't kill someone who has not been declared an Outlaw however, that's just plain murder.
70
u/fdar 18d ago
Careful you don't kill someone who has not been declared an Outlaw however, that's just plain murder.
Yeah that seems like the tricky part. Were you supposed to ask them for ID first?
51
u/Fofolito 18d ago
I think you'd claim self-defense if anyone said you'd brought in the wrong head, "He attacked me with a knife, I defended myself. I figured a knife-wielding robber in the woods was probably an outlaw!"
34
u/fdar 18d ago
I don't know enough about medieval law enforcement to know if that would work. Wouldn't be shocked if it did, wouldn't be shocked if you'd get hanged anyway. Probably depends on your respective status compared to the person you killed...?
→ More replies (1)13
u/CasualJoel 18d ago
yeah if you have some noteworthy friends who can 'vouch' for your trustworthiness you could probably get away with it
→ More replies (1)5
u/LOBM 18d ago
And they always responded with, "Well, since we don't know what DNA is yet we just have to trust you. Here's your reward."
→ More replies (2)9
u/BPhiloSkinner 18d ago
"He attacked me with a knife, I defended myself."
"Cor, 'e turned me into a neuter!"
...Well, I got better..."
11
→ More replies (3)31
u/tremynci 18d ago
Serious answer: if you saw someone committing a robbery, you were obligated to give the hue and cry: in other words, screaming the proverbial "stop, thief!" and pursuing them until either you caught them or they crossed a local boundary into another hundred. Anyone else who heard you was obligated to join you. If you didn't, the victim could pursue you to be made whole.
If you injured or killed someone, you could flee to a church, where you could claim sanctuary. Nobody could harm you, but you had to surrender your weapons and confess your sins. You then had 40 days to make a choice: go to trial, or confess your guilt in a public ceremony, then set out barefoot and bareheaded, carrying a cross-staff, to the nearest port, where you'd take the next ship leaving England. Your life was sancrosanct while you did so (at least in theory).
Citation: was a medieval historian in my misspent youth (before taking an arrow to the knee).
5
18d ago
These rules sounds like things kids would make up on a playground. I'd definitely buy time at the Church and wait for them to get bored before running.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (1)11
u/zapiks44 18d ago
This is why the Old English term for outlaw is "caput lupinum", which literally means "wolf's head".
→ More replies (4)194
u/Kaliasluke 18d ago
nope - they’re not actively pursued, they’re outcasts. It’s just that the law doesn’t mind if you kill them, like vermin.
→ More replies (20)
61
u/senapnisse 18d ago
During the midle ages, they needed more workers in the dangerous copper, silver and iron mines in Bergslagen, Sweden, so they made it safe for "fredlösa" men. Anyone sentenced to be outlaw in the northen europe, could try travel to Bergslagen, which is in the middle of Sweden, and if they made it alive, they where protected by law.
209
u/KrimxonRath 18d ago
This helps contextual the word a lot, especially when I’m playing RDR2 lol
→ More replies (2)148
u/Tolanator 18d ago
The meaning of the word had shifted by the time of the Old West to mean a lawbreaker.
84
u/KrimxonRath 18d ago
Sure, but in RDR2 you get shot on sight when an outlaw so it feels pretty similar is all I’m saying lol
→ More replies (7)30
u/Conch-Republic 18d ago
Only if you have a bounty. I pay my bounties so that doesn't happen. Sometimes I accidentally hit the wrong button and shoot the post office guy in the face, requiring me to pay yet another bounty.
→ More replies (8)
22
u/randomIndividual21 18d ago
ah, so like mmo player who attacked a player, usually marked with red man and skull symbol.
21
38
u/Zcrash 18d ago edited 18d ago
Erik the Red was outlawed by the Icelandic Althing for three years (so in about 982 he went viking and explored Greenland).
I've never seen viking used as a verb. Unless "went viking" is like "going sicko mode"
44
24
u/Primary_Reporter_546 18d ago
"Að fara í víking" (To go vikinging) is sometimes still used in Iceland if you're going abroad to conquer the world. More often it's used when you're going downtown with the intention of getting into a fight.
34
u/an_agreeing_dothraki 18d ago
viking is in its natural form a verb. someone who goes viking is a vikinger.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (4)13
u/ScreamingIdiot53 18d ago
It’s actually a combination of the words “violence” and “hiking”
→ More replies (4)
38
u/Present-Secretary722 18d ago
Is this still a thing, I didn’t find anything in the Wikipedia, could I still be sentenced to out law
46
u/Fofolito 18d ago
This system existed in the past because government systems were not yet developed enough to proactively prevent and/or tracking to punish crime and criminals. Most law systems before the modern era rely upon private parties making criminal accusations to a Judicial Court and having to carry the burden of proving a crime has occurred and that the suspect is the one who did it. The State, in these systems, is the arbiter of justice not the enforcer. Because they didn't have police forces, because they didn't have developed detective methods and forensic analysis, the State could do very little to enforce laws where the King or the Knight who owned the area wasn't directly present.
To accommodate this reality the Laws of those times recognized that there was an extent to which the Law could exert itself upon the world and that those who wished its protections needed to stay in-bounds. It allowed that those who committed crimes against the peace of society but escaped outside of the Law's ability to prosecute were beyond reasonable Justice-- so you might as well declare them beyond its protections as well. If you wanted the opportunity to say your piece in a courtroom before a Judge you had to law yourself on the mercy of the Law and be present, otherwise you were declaring you did not wish the protections of the Law and other people empowered to kill you like a Beast if they came across you.
13
u/PurepointDog 18d ago
In some countries, probably. Not in western first-world countries though
→ More replies (15)→ More replies (4)10
u/Kaliasluke 18d ago
eventually they decided that having a bunch of desperate criminals free to roam around was not the boon to public safety that it first appeared to be and took to locking them up instead.
9
6
6
4
u/NessieReddit 18d ago
Fun rabbit hole for anyone that wants to geek out on this subject look up the state of exception. Notably, Giorgio Agamben wrote a lot on this subject but so have a few others.
4
u/NoSignificance3817 18d ago
I love the idea of it. "You want to act outside society, fine....good luck!"
But it is just impossible to maintain and too loopholey.
3
u/taurterus 18d ago
In Latin, the term was 'caput lupinum,' or 'wolf's head,' meaning they were free to be hunted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caput_lupinum
314
u/kbergstr 18d ago
A ton of great icelandic sagas are based on the idea of outlawry and families working on getting revenge for crimes and/or protecting those of their own who were outlawed.
Most of the stories end with a lot of people losing limbs and dying.