Check all Criminals to Continue
-
I like how you completely ignored the reason why all this has happened so you can nitpock on an argument where you barely have a leg to stand on.
-
🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 ℹ️replied to [email protected] last edited by
If the cop is partially in the same square as Luigi, do I check it?
-
I literally talked about health insurance in the first sentence of the root comment. Can you read?
-
What if we slayed it by bombing the entire town, do we still celebrate?
5/10 gotcha try again tomorrow
-
Thank you for being the only rational person in this thread
-
so funny seeing lemmy bounce around "he killed him so good" and "he didnt kill him it hasnt been proven in a court of law!"
It's either one or the other dood
-
Read my big comment later down
-
"yeah bro he's a murderer, but he killed someone bad so he ISN'T a murderer!"
No comment
-
[email protected]replied to 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 ℹ️ last edited by
I guess we'll see what our AI overlords decide
-
Show me the bombed town. What a strange comment, as if we all didn't clearly see what happened: one executive died.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Remember all these laws that invaded privacy under "fighting terrorism"? Now you are the terrorists.
-
Hmm, I think your position is well-founded. I agree - shooting people usually created division and doesn't solve the underlying problem. However, that doesn't mean that it has to be like that in every case.
I personally propose to wait a few years before judging. It is very against the spirit of the Internet, but you raise a valid point - there is very good ground to suspect it will have negative consequences.
-
You know how a trial works, right?
He still has to stand trial and be convicted by a trial of his peers.
Even if the evidence is overwhelming, the jury still has to issue a verdict.
It would hardly be the first time there’s a hung jury or even a nullified jury.
You need to learn how the justice system actually works, instead of watching law and order.
-
Whether you think the person he killed deserved it or not is irrelevant, giving a free pass because of that sets an extremely dangerous precedent
It's just patently absurd. It's an angry mob. They probably didn't even know the victim. They could turn on you, me, or each other.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Should have been extra checks over Adam's box
-
I get the sentiment, and yes rule of law is what we should strive for.
But if somebody murders an active serial killer, my internal desire for practical improvements to human well being keeps me from getting too upset about it.
And yes it’s illegal, and if the system is working as intended, the assassin will go to prison. Maybe the people intervene via jury nullification, maybe not. But if conditions are bad enough, individuals can choose to live as a hero in prison rather than as a desperate anonymous poor person.
I don’t want to see children lose their parents even if their parent is a scumbag CEO, but I want human civilization to heal and flourish even more.
-
Health insurance companies are already judge, jury, and executioner. Thousands of people die every year because they can't afford health insurance and I guarantee I'm not the only one in here who's had family die that way.
-
People can have whatever opinion on whether the shooter was right or not. But the person who modified a gun, shot his target thrice in the middle of a city, left a James Bond style message on the bullets, and rode off into the sunset without leaving a single clear photo on any nearby camera is obviously not the man who got arrested eating a meal in broad daylight with a gun and a written confession conveniently packed in his bag.
-
Correct, no one would support Luigi for murdering a homeless person. Support for Luigi is a social proxy. People don't feel like they can change the system peacefully anymore. When that happens, you're right, an angry mob can become judge jury and executioner. It is up to the system to reform itself or fail, not the masses to calm down.
