this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2024
613 points (84.6% liked)

US Authoritarianism

1269 readers
1 users here now

ChonkyOwlbear is an Illegitimate Usurper

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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 35 points 9 months 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 9 months 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.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months 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] 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

I'm from the UK here. That would be manslaughter. Not murder. The whole concept of felony murder is insane and illogical. They went in to rob a place, and theft here would probably be like 5 years actual time behind bars. Here, the case would sit against the cop, and it would be weighed up to be self-defence, so no real charge. This dude, unless he had intention to kill, but simply was involved in the process of theft, then he really shouldn't be held responsible for other people's actions because he made a decision to go there. He's just a dumb kid who made a silly mistake. Basically taking their life away for a fuck up.

The part of the brain that processes risk isn't fully developed until like 24ish, so holding them accountable for something they cannot accurately make a decision on is weird punitive nonsense. Has it led to an actual decrease so is effective as a deterrent? Nah.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

We don't know his intentions for sure because he didnt have the capability to kill, only the one thief had a gun. We do know that they had been going around as a group robbing and killing prior to the event, so its fair to say that they knew going into that last robbery there was a good chance someone would get hurt or die. Thats why he's guilty. I think the sentencing is wrong for a minor by like, maybe 25 years or so though.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Murder is a strict intent crime dumb dumb.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

They intended to commit armed home invasion. The results of that are theirs to bear. Dumb dumb.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

What evidence is there if that side from yo feelins.

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