• Cypher@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 hours ago

      It solves the need to feed, house, and guard murderous scum.

      In cases where there is zero doubt a person is a murderer it should be used.

      • qarbone@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 hours ago

        There have been numerous cases where racists have had “zero doubt” that a black person has done a crime.

        You keep making the wording on that “zero doubt murder” bill more air-tight, and I’ll tell you when it’s acceptable, Sisyphus.

      • biggerbogboy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        It does reduce the amount of people to feed and house, but the right to life and the right to be innocent before proven guilty both hold. Cops being the judge, jury and executioner is inherently unreliable, and human beings inherently have biases based on thousands of factors, so there WILL be officers stating “oh nah they attacked me” without the attack actually happening and their life being taken just because the officer has a racist or biased interpretation of their behaviour.

        Also, seeming that you’re from aussie.zone, it appears you are of course an Aussie like me, so you should have already caught that we are multicultural, and we are going through a tough time of the public discriminating against itself. Extrajudicial killings by law enforcement will amplify this.

          • biggerbogboy@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 hours ago

            True, that’s on me, however it still stands, as police have a tendency to ‘retaliate’ in situations that don’t endanger them, so both human error and discriminatory bias are still significant.