this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2024
613 points (84.6% liked)
US Authoritarianism
801 readers
711 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 8 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Robbing a bank and killing a person are two very different crimes. Intentionally killing someone is murder. Unintentionally causing a death is a different moral failing altogether, and should be treated differently.
They as a group put a persons life in danger. That person protected themselves. What exactly is wrong with holding the group responsible for their actions? Should the cop be held accountable for defending themselves?
If it was the homeowner instead does that change it for you? Follow actions to consequences.
If the officer did not commit murder how then could could anyone be charged with felony murder for a murder that did not happen. Justified homicide is specifically not murder.
If their actions could forseeably lead to violence and death, and that actually happens, yes they are responsible.
He could not foresee that his accomplice was either armed or an attempted murderer. There's no claim he resisted as far as I can tell just that he and two others took part in what they thought was solely going to be going into buildings not shooting at cops.
I don't think anyone is responsible for summer else's actions, you can do you time for your actions serving time for someone else's is fucking weird.
Yes he could and he likely did. Them having a gun is partly why they are able to go around robbing people. The whole group likely knew it, it had been used prior as well, and the expectation in a group like that is that if things go wrong the person with the gun will handle it.
Everyone else did the only thing they possibly could do when a gun fight broke out and they had no guns, run and hide. They should not get credit for doing the only possible thing at the time. Its likely if he had the gun it would have been expected he use it to defend the group as well.
There's no evidence to suggest that, what you feel is irrelevant.
They should absolutely get credit for not being the ones armed. You're being obtuse and kinda bigoted.
No, ive been in their shoes. I'm lucky I didnt get prison like he did. The only answer from the criminals perspective is that they are responsible for anything that happens as a result of their choice to commit their crimes, full stop.
Everyone's mad at the sentence anyways, if he got 10 years noone would even complain.
Being an admitted criminal isn't a good brag nor does it actually matter, it just makes you a hypocrite.
That's the whole point of the conversation! It's the point of the article, Jesus Christ dude read the fuckin thing before you speak.
Ed:
The fact you admit you should have got prison but didn't means combined with that comment means that you would have to turn yourself in and take your prison time to not be a whole ass hypocrite.
I don't think you know what the words you are saying means. Calm down.
Says the guy who thought I said gun but I said gum.
The same guy who goes on a rant about an article they clearly haven't read to express opinions about their feelings on a case they couldn't be bothered to research.
That about right? Sounds right.
Yeah I'm also the guy who admitted my mistake. Try it once in a while.
What details of this case do you think I don't know?
Point to a mistake.
The ones I've already corrected, again read.
Am I supposed to be checking your comments for edits regularly?
Do me a favor and get fucked.
You're intended to read the comment you reply to... Yes.
You first boo boo.