• Free_Opinions@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    One is either for death penalty or against it. Being for it in the case of CEO’s but against it when it comes to convicted criminals is called hypocrisy.

    • Tinidril@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 day ago

      There is a stark difference between killing a mass murderer when there is no legal recourse and allowing the state to execute a prisoner who could just as easily be kept imprisoned for life.

    • cogman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      1 day ago

      Every single step that Luigi took, right before shooting the ceo, was legal. Everything the CEO and his company did to their customers is legal.

      I’m all for changing the legal system in any way that would make it harder for unwell people to get guns or insurance CEOs to stop murdering and maming their subscribers through denials. We don’t have the political will to change any of that so excusing me for not shedding tears over this CEO’s death.

      There was a literal mass shooting at a school the same day. I feel way worse for those kids.

      Being against the death penalty and bemused at conservative political consequences is not hypocrisy. Maybe stop being angry at “the left” for not shedding tears and instead propose any change that would have prevented this.

      • Free_Opinions@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        You’re not representing my view honestly.

        I’m not criticising the left for “not shedding a tear.” I’m criticising them for celebrating a murderer.

    • MartianSands@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      I disagree. It’s perfectly possible to hold an internally consistent view that it’s wrong to execute a prisoner, both because there’s no reason to do so (the prisoner already being imprisoned) and because courts get the decision wrong too often (and/or because the courts aren’t trustworthy), while also believing that it’s acceptable to kill under other circumstances

      • Free_Opinions@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Sure, it’s acceptable to kill when you’re defending yourself or your country but shooting a man on the street is a whole different case and who ever celebrates this kind of vigilante murder has no moral ground to stand on from which to criticise the death penalty.

        • Tinidril@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 day ago

          That man on the street and his like have murdered plenty of people and will continue to do so until they are stopped. It has fuck-all to do with state executions.

          The class war is literally war, and only one side has been taking all the casualties. It’s about time people fight back. The moment we can lock these people up for their crimes against humanity I will be against killing them.

    • nyctre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      23 hours ago

      “free opinions”… I guess you get what you pay for…

      Anyway, it’s not hypocrisy because you’re comparing apples to ai generated articles. He was the CEO of a company responsible for denying billions of dollars worth of life saving medicine. Comparing that to one murder is silly. Saying they both deserve the same punishment is silly.