this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2024
607 points (84.5% liked)

US Authoritarianism

714 readers
414 users here now

Hello, I am researching American crimes against humanity. . This space so far has been most strongly for memes, and that's fine.

There's other groups and you are welcome to add to them. USAuthoritarianism Linktree

See Also, my website. USAuthoritarianism.com be advised at time of writing it is basically just a donate link

Cool People: [email protected]

founded 6 months ago
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] freeman 35 points 1 week ago (52 children)

Garbage in garbage out.

If you accept US disgusting legal system as fair or 'normal' you can justify this outcome. Its obviously not.

Charging a person with felony murder when no murder was commited is not justice no more than Saudi Arabia executing people for being gay.

I 'll also give you some personal advice, no non-bootlicker preemptively disclaims being a bootlicker.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago (38 children)

Exactly. I'm not even particularly opposed if you take part in a violent felony that resulted in death so long as it's a victims death. Participants dying by accident or by external deadly force especially police use of force getting charged is fucking dumb.

[–] Rekorse 3 points 1 week ago (37 children)

Why? Just because it feels wrong?

Their decision to break and enter directly lead to a persons death. Why do make a distinction between who's life it is?

If your actions lead to a persons death, you should be charged for it.

The flip side of this is what? As long as you have others do the murdering you can't be charged?

Walk me through why its wrong?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

What? its not just “a person’s death.” There is a huge difference between your decision to commit a crime leading to an unwilling participants death and your decision to commit a crime leading to the death of your co-participant.

  1. Let’s say you and I go rob a bank right now. A security guard starts giving us problems and I shoot him in the face. I should be charged with murder, makes sense.

  2. Let’s say we are robbing that same bank. Same security guard is giving problems and I shoot him in the face. You can be charged with murder, I see the argument.

  3. Let’s say we are robbing that same bank. Everything is fine and no one gets hurt, but as we are walking out a cop shoots me in the face. On what planet does it make sense to charge you with murder when I am the one who accepted the risk of getting shot in the face by deciding on my own to commit the crime? If you robbed the bank alone, you would have committed the exact same crime and only been charged with robbery, not murder, because I wouldn’t have been there and wouldn’t have been shot in the face.

[–] Rekorse 2 points 1 week ago

In the case of number three, you would have to be a violent threat to be shot in the face legally. If the cop knows you have no weapons and are not harming anyone, say a silent robbery, then shooting you in the face is excessive force and the cop should be charged for murder (I understand the politics prevent this, but if cops had to adhere to the law too they would be charged).

Besides the fact that this is not the case to hold up as an example of bad felony murder. The guy was part of multiple violent events, and its reasonable to expect that he knew if he carried on with his friends someone would surely be hurt.

People need to be held accountable for making bad decisions that lead to harm or death, no natter who it is. This person got a slightly heavy punishment, at most.

load more comments (35 replies)
load more comments (35 replies)
load more comments (48 replies)