• 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.