![Avatar](/_next/image?url=%2Flemmy-icon-96x96.webp&w=3840&q=75)
assassin_aragorn
No I think the person who fires the gun or drops the bomb is far more culpable than the person who gave them the gun/ammo/bomb.
The person supplying the weapon still bears responsibility and guilt and is culpable. But they are not as culpable. The actual murderer is always the most culpable and the most guilty. Those who aid the murderer are culpable and guilty too, but far less so.
This is a classic case of the differences between lawful good, lawful neutral, and neutral good.
Lawful good would feel conflicted but settle on conviction, because it was premeditated and not self defense.
Lawful neutral would convict and feel no conflict at all. The law was broken, nothing else matters.
Neutral good would not convict, because they don’t think the law adequately handles this kind of situation.
The problem is, within the legal system, neutral good is seldom an option – by definition it’s going to be some kind of lawful. And that sucks here.