cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/50439521
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/33851469
Because it’s about sending a message. They’ve seen how popular this guy and his actions have become and are trying to throw everything at him so it puts off any copycats.
Death penalty increases violence because murdering the person catching you becomes a way to increase your likelihood of surviving.
Death penalty backfires because it demonstrates fear for what this person keeps saying.
So basically, killing Luigi would not make copycats less likely, but it WOULD make it more likely for copycats to shoot CEOs AND cops?
Hmm… The killing of Luigi itself would be awful, of course, but the consequences of it sound like a win to me 🤔
An interesting factoid. In Finnish language “väkivalta” means violence. It is a combination word:
väki = people, crowd, folk
valta = power, reign
Väki also means (or at least used to) ‘power’ or ‘strong’ (väkivahva, väkijuoma…) and that’s also where the etymology for ‘väkivalta’ comes from. So it’s got nothing to do with people.
Valta also sounds like a Germanic loan just a second… yep. Same root as German “Gewalt”, violence, “walten”, to rule, preside, “verwalten”, to administer, also English wield.
What’s it with Finnish. One third borrowed from Estonian, another third from the Swedes, the rest from the Sami.
MILDLY infuriating??!?
The !ExtremelyInfuriating@lemmy.world community seemed dead so I posted it here instead.
Shouldn’t there be leniency for killing a killer?
Yes I know it’s about “sending a message”, but messages go both ways.
Because most school shooters aren’t adults.
Yeah, because the US “justice” system famously never treats juvenile defendants as adults in order to mete out draconian punishment that eliminates all chances for rehabilitation…
That doesn’t mean they can’t be tried as terrorists. The main problem here is actually whether or not the facts of the crime actually allow for a terrorism charge. Fact is, he had a manifesto (see ideological goals), and the shooting was a violent criminal act.
According to the FBI that’s all it takes. It may also be what is lacking in the case of some school shooters.
While I am generally on the side of “CEO FAFO”, I recognize that the problem here is that the FBI and the laws they follow are flawed (probably deliberately) in such a way that they only target those who target the wealthy.
Shooting up a school is an act of terrorism if you do it because you’re targeting a soft target in an attempt to hurt the local, state or federal government or you’re religiously motivated etc. But not if you were bullied.
There’s been plenty of over 18 mass shooters who also haven’t been charged with terrorism. And with each one there’s people who will say they don’t want the US to become more of a police state because they believe that counterterrorism techniques (which we use internationally) shouldn’t be used against the general population.
The federal government has a habit of overstepping the rights and freedoms of the general public any time they feel like they are under attack. We saw this with 9/11 and the Patriot act. So I can see their reasoning even if I don’t agree that mass shooters should be considered terrorists under the law.
