Rhetorical Question
 

Can one be a killer but not a murderer?

You can according to the CA Penal Code and the Model Penal Code. Look it up.... lol! Start with 187 and read on.

Rhetorically, not legally speaking.

ETA: Why are up so late Beth?

Well, if not all acts that lead to the death of another are murder, than yes, one can be a killer and not a murderer. War would be one example, killing in the line of duty, police officers (at times), self defense, the list goes on. This issue could be argued forever...

Tonight it's just because I can't sleep. Usually, if I'm up late, it's to study.

The question is totally dependant on how you define each word...

Yes. Murderer implys the taking of a human life, while killer implys the taking of a life, but not necessarily a human life.

Thank you Mr. Clinton...

But seriously, let's say a cop kills a criminal in self defense or in the defense of someone else's life or property -- is he/she a murderer?

Or, a member of our armed forces kills an enemy soldier or terrorist -- is she/he a murderer?

I imagine there are a lot of cute technicalities, but in my opinion, the answer is no.

I always thought that killing was accidental/natural, while murder was with the intent to take someone's life.

He was killed in a car accident.
He was shot in self defense and murdered.

A) We should go by definitions and in that case the answer is no.
B) What you really were trying to say is are all deaths equal if they're done by someone else.
C) 99.9% of the world says no and the other .1% are jaded.

-Rudey

Let us take this discussion backward a little. How would you personally define a murderer and a killer. Is there a difference or are the two words the same?