1053
Guns
(lemmy.world)
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 Dec 2024
1053 points (100.0% liked)
Comic Strips
18504 readers
1603 users here now
Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.
The rules are simple:
- The post can be a single image, an image gallery, or a link to a specific comic hosted on another site (the author's website, for instance).
- The comic must be a complete story.
- If it is an external link, it must be to a specific story, not to the root of the site.
- You may post comics from others or your own.
- If you are posting a comic of your own, a maximum of one per week is allowed (I know, your comics are great, but this rule helps avoid spam).
- The comic can be in any language, but if it's not in English, OP must include an English translation in the post's 'body' field (note: you don't need to select a specific language when posting a comic).
- Politeness.
- Adult content is not allowed. This community aims to be fun for people of all ages.
Web of links
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world: "I use Arch btw"
- !memes@lemmy.world: memes (you don't say!)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
They weren't, they went over this in the trial.
He became the aggressor when he removed barriers to entry and laid in wait which is a negative defense for self defense.
Wikipedia says they broke a window to enter, and that can be heard on audio—I’m not trying to argue with everything, but how is a closed window that had to be broken for entry not a barrier?
They did, read the testimony. He has the window blocked and he removed it so the window would be the easiest way to enter.
He set a trap, there's no legitimate purpose for that.
The dude clearly murdered them and had violent vigilante fantasies—I don’t argue that one bit.
That said, they still came up to his house, broke a window, and entered with the intention to burgle it. It doesn’t really matter if the window was previously blocked or made of paper—breaking and entering with the intention of burglary is a crime, and having no block on a window isn’t enticement to have your house burgled.
Again, before anyone thinks I’m defending him, I fully agree that he is a murderer. I just think the burglars weren’t innocent either. In Reddit lingo, “everyone sucks here”.
I’m not saying one is worse than the other, rather that both fucked around and found out.
Well that's strange because one is a convicted murderer.
And the others probably would have been convicted of burglary if they lived, what’s your point?
Absolutely. If you think unarmed burglary and premeditated murder are the same morally and legally I cannot agree.
Never said that. You are taking everything I say and twisting it.
The man is a murderer, the intruders are burglars, everyone sucks here. That is the only point I have ever made in this thread.
https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/comment/15490737
Except it isn't, you keep saying he had the right for the first few shots the jury found he did not.
Agreed. Never said he wasn’t.
You are correct, I misspoke there. I was intending to say that I wasn’t saying the burglars were worse than the murderer—it just came out wrong.
You are defending him boss.
The jury took less than three hours to establish as a matter of fact that none of the shootings were justified or in defense. It's a fact now, your opinion is just that... An opinion and one not backed by either statute or the court case.
I already requested the link for the info you are referencing, and I have told you where I found mine. Please provide a source, I would like to learn.
I did!
The court transcripts which I've read, you haven't and I'm not your goddamn mom. You know the source, go get it for yourself.