• ZMonster@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    Lol, walk me to the door on this one:

    So you are arguing that because the majority of people that commit this horrific crime are so encumbered by depravity that they kill themselves to avoid facing justice or are too SYMPATHETICALLY VULNERABLE, the proportion of shooters that ever face justice is already very low? Even accepting your argument (assuming that you believe school shooters who face justice are sentenced appropriately), we should see nearly every shooter who faces justice getting the death penalty…

    But we don’t. You would be hard-pressed to find any references to school shooters that get sentenced with the death penalty because of how infrequent it is - child or not 🙄.

    My man, get some fucking perspective. How did you put it, surface level logic? You know a lot about that, eh?

    • spireghost@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      we should see nearly every shooter who faces justice getting the death penalty

      I’m not sure what you mean by this, is this what you believe? I should add that the death penalty is rare to end up being sentenced and that it isn’t justified in every case as well.

      I’m saying that the death penalty is already rare, then you need to be at least 18, you need to survive the shooting, and then you need to have a jury mostly unanimously agree to sentence you

      Also it’s not like Mangione has been sentenced with the death penalty, these articles are reacting to the possibility of facing charges that could lead to the death penalty, which has been applicable for any other first-degree murder cases, for example killing a single person during a bank robbery

      I’m just saying that the comparison is pointless. Complain about him receiving federal charges unusually, sure. But doing this “whataboutism” and referencing school shooters vs the UHC shooter is not well-founded

      • ZMonster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        The part you cut out gives the context you are asking for.

        I’m not sure what you mean by this, is this what you believe?

        Words are hard. I get it. Accepting your argument and assuming you stand behind it… Yes. In your hypothetical world, yes, I do. Was that not your point??? That shooters don’t get perceived as receiving appropriate justice because they die or are ineligible??? is this what you believe?

        the death penalty is rare

        you fucking donkey

        No shit Sherlock. What do you think the point of the OC was???

        • spireghost@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          22 hours ago

          Exactly, complain about the terrorism charge, not the red herring that is "he has the possibility of potentially being charged with the death penalty (as compared to a random other type of shooting?), when that’s something that is a blanket standard possibility for federal murder – A bank robber is probably not as evil as some mass shooters, but one is more eligible for the death penalty, while the mass shooter depends on the state they’re in.

          The addition of federal murder and stalking charges is critical. The fact that he will have to be trailed twice for one murder seems excessive