1388
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2023
1388 points (97.3% liked)
News
23644 readers
2078 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I don't call it a win. That murderer deserved to be tried and convicted for their crime and serve decades behind bars. They gave him the easy way out.
From another article (The Sun is owned by Murdoch iirc), they suggested that the murderer did not want to get arrested and was aggressive. It's sad that people get so hateful that they would rather die hating people than just going about life.
Do they ever want to get arrested? That sounds like a poor excuse not to hit him with a bunch of taser darts and take him down that way. Sure, that might kill him too, but at least there would be a chance. Easier for the cop to reach for their gun and "solve" the problem.
The safety of other people is more important than you feeling better.
How is tasering someone less safe than shooting a gun?
Tasers are easily defeatable with t-shirts, and they themselves kill people, to start.
Because despite what you've seen on television tasers aren't as effective in threat suppression.
My cognitive dissonance is thinking both you and the guy you replied to are correct.
As much as I will defend my stance that I'm glad the shooter is dead, I still do agree with Flying Squid to an extent. Immediately murdering the aggressor goes against the whole of the system of law, I suppose a fair trial should still be taken place, but I'd be the happiest if they got the death penalty. Keeping him behind bars just keeps the hate alive
You should know it is a win. Justice is dealt swiftly, there's no bullshit trials or wasting anyone's time on this murdering asshole. Time or money.
Sure, he "suffers less" getting a quick death, but let's price this out for fun. This is in CA, Jesus, those idiots spent on average $64K per inmate annually as of 2015. Let's not forget we're in the era of Magic Biden Bucks™; according to Google we have experienced roughly 26% inflation since 2015. That $64K becomes $80K. Averages are just that, average, let's be very generous & assume this guy is nothing special. Costing the taxpayer $70K per year incarcerated. Nice, even numbers. :-)
That's at least $700K per decade, not accounting for any future inflation. You want decades, so this revenge/justice venture will cost at minimum $1.4M. Versus 10 mins & $10 in bullets.
I don't really seek vengeance in the form of life sentences. The end result is the same; death is death & he got his. Justice has been served accurately with zero delay, a modern day miracle.
Oh yeah, police just shooting who they feel like is a modern day miracle! Nothing bad can come from that! Totally won't end with a police officer kneeling on a man's neck and slowly choking him to death for being black!
You erroneously framing a self defense situation which the cops were actually in for once as some 90's revenge movie cliche is only hurting us.
This is not about you.
They're replying to the comment celebrating the fact the suspect was given a quick and cheap death by the police.
Maybe the police actions in this case were warranted because of self defense, but that's not what the comment was saying at all.
I don't care. They can think how they want and you do not have the moral authority to tell them they can't. Go find something better to do with your free time than exploiting a tragedy to bully other people into adopting your way of thinking.
Don't participate in a discussion thread if you don't want to talk about that topic. It's not complicated.
You ought to listen to yourself there. I am not gonna be quiet because you don't want me to speak the truth, and the truth is he HAS no moral authority to dictate anything to anyone. He's just some schmuck like the rest of us, and so are you.
Lol I didn't tell you not to say what you want, I said not to shut others down. Maybe drink less or ask a human to type for you before posting.
The moral authority to tell someone that their stance that police can shoot anyone they want without due process because it's cheaper that way is morally wrong?
Yeah, everyone has that.
I'm not trying to make light of the tragedy that happened to the original victim, nor am I saying it's sad that the killer got killed himself. But if someone is arguing to eliminate due process because of this case, I'll argue against that. And so should anyone else.
Yes. You have no authority to tell them any moral stance is wrong, especially telling people they can't kill obvious hateful cultists who are a threat to the community and have proven it by killing actually innocent people. You have NO business saying that in a modern society AT ALL.
No one has the authority to tell someone that. Not even you. And if you claim it I will pit you right back in your place, far below actual decent people, where you belong. You will get what you give and you won't like it.
Well you are, and you make light of countless tragedies both violent and nonviolent across this nation and across this planet when you open your stupid fucking mouth and insinuate something so evil. And until you stop, my stance won't change.
The only one who took away his right to due process was him, and he did it of his own volition by being dumb enough to fire at cops. When you shoot at ANYONE unprovoked, you have to accept the very high risk of being killed for your trouble and therefore never seeing a trial because that is how reality works.
Self-defense is a fundamental human right that supercedes any right you claim an aggressor to have.
Get over it you don't like it.
And stop making me defend pigs
Final reply, because I feel this not going anywhere.
I, or the person I was defending, was not talking about this specific situation. Of course they have the right to self defense. I explicitly mentioned that before two comments ago.
I'm also not trying to defend the killer or feel sad at all he got killed by the police.
All my replies were aimed at the comment from CoffeeJunkie who apparently was advocating for the police to be judge, jury and executioner because that's cheaper. That's a major simplification and I'm sure that's not what they meant, but that's how I, and probably others, interpreted it and why I chose to go against it.
Again, I'm done arguing with you. You're resorting to ad hominem attacks because you're misunderstanding what I'm saying.
That isn't at all what I said, and this isn't a case of "shooting who they feel like". 🤨 This was a case of a killer, a true murderer, getting killed. No one will be prosecuted for fatally shooting this murderer. Stop making false equivalence arguments.
It's not the job of the police to dispense justice.
We're in agreement on that. But when in pursuit of an armed & dangerous individual, armed with a gun, I do believe lethal response in self-defense or pursuit of neutralizing the threat is authorized. If the killer is killed in an armed standoff with police, while not the goal, I'm going to call that a bonus.
I think it is a lapse in moral judgment to command others to act in ways that we wouldn't act ourselves...I think most people, pursuing an armed & dangerous killer, would want a gun & permission to use it when their lives are threatened. Tasers, stun weapons, and other non-lethal forms of detainment require getting uncomfortably close to the armed & dangerous person.