804
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Empricorn@feddit.nl 171 points 3 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

This is so ridiculous. He killed a dude. That's worthy of the death penalty (not in Texas)!? People have done worse to many people, or children, or... and not been sentenced to death.

Even if you're 100% against murder in all circumstances and feel he should be locked up forever, you have to see this is just CEO's exercising their outsized influence to discourage further punishment of the 1% and corporate leaders that prey on Americans...

[-] JustEnoughDucks@feddit.nl 58 points 3 days ago

Trump himself and all of his rich friends on Epstein's island have done way worse than Luigi. At least I consider the systematic rape of children and human trafficking worse than killing a mass murderer.

[-] futatorius@lemm.ee 5 points 2 days ago

The more that Trump floods the zone with bullshit, the more likely the defense can convince a judge that a fair trial is impossible.

[-] Red_October@lemmy.world 39 points 3 days ago

They're not even going to pretend that people are equal. The Donvict, President Musk, and the MAGAstappo deeply believe that rich white men are worth more than anyone who isn't one of them, and will use the full force of the law as they interpret it to protect their interests.

Just you wait. They're going to push for laws specifically protecting what they'll call "High Value Citizens" or something to that effect. Give it time.

[-] ThirdConsul@lemmy.ml 5 points 3 days ago

It's called VIP and the concept isn't new.

[-] Red_October@lemmy.world 15 points 3 days ago

"VIP" getting you a special booth at a restaurant or preferential treatment at a business is one thing.

"VIP" giving you special legal protections and immunity to prosecution is another. As bad as "VIP" bias is now, just wait until it's actually codified into law and you'll see why "Second class citizen" is such a ubiquitous term for the systematically oppressed.

[-] Jumpingspiderman@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

I'm sure the SCROTUS will find some reason to invalidate the Constitutional forbidding of a nobility soon. Like they ignored the Constitutional bar to holding office by participants in an insurrection.

[-] ThirdConsul@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 days ago

Not codified?

Some opportunities are codified to only VIPs - e.g. you can't invest in a hedge fund legally unless you have certain net worth.

Punishments? If a punishment for a crime is monetary (like a fine), it's an absolute, not percentage based, so wealthy and not people are affected very differently by it.

What else do you want? Literal human hunting license?

So you are saying that VIP has a specific legal definition?

[-] CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 71 points 3 days ago

I see this as "if I'm going to get the death penalty anyway, might as well take out as many of them as I can."

[-] x00z@lemmy.world 40 points 3 days ago

Murder is legal in self-defense or to save the live of another.

That's how you need to look at this.

[-] futatorius@lemm.ee 8 points 2 days ago

Self-defense and defending another person are both defenses against a murder charge. Neither of those acts is in itself murder. Killing another person is homicide. For it to be murder, additional factors have to be considered.

[-] null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 3 days ago

I understand what you're getting at but self-defense requires an imminent risk of physical harm.

You can't self-defense a bank employee who might harm you by declining your loan application.

You can't self-defense your alcoholic neighbor because they might drive drunk later and kill someone.

[-] x00z@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago

Most legal systems would not justify lethal force to stop murder by omission unless the omission creates an immediate life-threatening situation and there is no other reasonable alternative.

We can even pinpoint the exact moment it becomes life-threatening without a reasonable alternative; When these spawns of the devil have a momentary self-reflective thought while moving their pencil to the checkbox to deny a valid healthcare claim. In that moment they either help their fellow human, or commit murder.

[-] Jumpingspiderman@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

It's not murder if it's done in self-defense or to save the life of some other innocent person. It's justifiable homicide.

[-] canajac@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 days ago

Depends on what country you live in. In Canada that is not a valid reason to kill.

[-] canajac@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 days ago

I call bullshit on that. Post the law that makes it legal.

[-] x00z@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

Of which country?

I generalized the law of most civilized countries.

Look up murder by omission or something.

[-] Welt@lazysoci.al 2 points 3 days ago
[-] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 13 points 3 days ago

People kill people in war and they don't go to jail. Luigi fought for us in the war against abusive healthcare monopoly prices. He is a hero and should be freed.

[-] futatorius@lemm.ee 8 points 2 days ago

His is a wonderful use case for jury nullification. Just remember never to use that term during deliberations. Just vote not guilty, and if pressed, say that the evidence doesn't support the charge. And say nothing more. Jurors are not obliged to explain their reasoning to the judge or to other jurors.

[-] Nosavingthrow@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

This actually isn't enough, right? It just results in a hung jury, and the prosecution gets another bite at the apple. You need to actively convince your fellow jurors to render a not-guilty verdict.

this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2025
804 points (100.0% liked)

News

25269 readers
3502 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. 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