Neither the article, or anything mentioned on these comments is claiming the victim’s ‘imnocence’. They are however making the point that EVEN if you do all of those things you shouldn’t expect to be shot and killed.
Your comment sounds equivalent of claiming girls that dress provocatively deserve to be raped. It’s just isn’t the point. The point is that he should not have been killed.
People like to conveniently forget that we have the courtroom to decide someone’s innocence or guilt. The police should not be judge, jury, and executioner.
Neither the article, or anything mentioned on these comments is claiming the victim’s ‘imnocence’. They are however making the point that EVEN if you do all of those things you shouldn’t expect to be shot and killed.
Your comment sounds equivalent of claiming girls that dress provocatively deserve to be raped. It’s just isn’t the point. The point is that he should not have been killed.
People like to conveniently forget that we have the courtroom to decide someone’s innocence or guilt. The police should not be judge, jury, and executioner.
My comment specifically states that killing him wasn’t the optimal solution here, so I can’t see how that’s your intrepretation of it.
Nobody ever deserves to be shot. That’s completely incompatible with my worldview. However, sometimes it’s justified.
“Murder is wrong, BUT” is a really weird hill to die on…
What’s your point?
I don’t think a murdered deserves to die but I think killing them in self defence is perfectly justfied.