• TrickDacy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    9 months ago

    You wouldn’t know. Because by this nothing burger of an argument, no one is allowed an opinion that wouldn’t hold up in a specific courtroom. Because as we all know, courtrooms have only ever decided cases a) accurately to reflect the law and b) under laws that are 100% just.

    Therefore, FascistDefender9000 is forced to conclude that opinions contrary to legal definitions are 100% evil and abhorrent, and are identical to just making up any shit that can be imagined.

    What’s next in a world where people’s opinions aren’t based on law? Social change? Dogs and cats living together?! I cannot just sit idly by while opinions like “taking a gun to menace people you hate and then killing them likely means you premeditated exactly such a scenario” exist!!!

    • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      9 months ago

      no one is allowed an opinion that wouldn’t hold up in a specific courtroom.

      I think your definition of murder is shit, regardless of a courtroom being involved, hence why my first first example didn’t involve a courtroom at all.

      FascistDefender9000

      Funny name there. Thinly veiled ad-hominems aside, do you think that Kyle Rittenhouse (or anyone else) should be denied due process because of their fascist beliefs? That actually sounds pretty fascist to me…

      … opinions contrary to legal definitions are 100% evil and abhorrent…

      Not what I said. This is a poor attempt at a strawman.

      What’s next in a world where people’s opinions aren’t based on law?

      Pretty much the usual shit? Laws are based on established opinions about social conduct. You’re the one who thinks that your opinion of what makes a person a murderer should be used in legal proceedings, which is why you are so angry that a teen in a clear-cut self defense scenario did not get convicted of murder.

      I cannot just sit idly by while opinions like “taking a gun to menace people you hate and then killing them likely means you premeditated exactly such a scenario” exist!!!

      That is your opinion on what happened. In the case of what actually happened, should Kyle, or anyone else, lay on the ground and let people beat, and possibly even execute them, after they tried to de-escalate and escape the situation, or do they have a right to defend themselves?

      • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        That is your opinion on what happened.

        Which is why it’s weird you didn’t just move on and I’m still getting ridiculous messages in my inbox. Now you’re trying to imply that I think legal processes shouldn’t exist due to my read of a single situation. Try harder. Good luck with your trolling campaign.

        • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          9 months ago

          Now you’re trying to imply that I think legal processes shouldn’t exist due to my read of a single situation.

          This wasn’t you?

          He murdered two people, flashed his Republican card, and walked.

          This isn’t your definition of a murderer?

          I think it’s murder when you take a gun to a place specifically to oppose a group you hate, then you kill multiple of those said people that you knew before leaving home that you hated.

          FascistDefender9000

          That wasn’t you insinuating that I’m defending fascists, and that it’s a bad thing to hope for equal application of justice, even when the people protected by it are people that I find reprehensible?

          Self-reflection is a removed, ain’t it?

          • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            9 months ago

            Rittenhouse and his party are fascists. Sorry you’re mad they can’t kill anyone they want without being criticized. Must be really hard for them.

            • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              9 months ago

              Rittenhouse and his party are fascists.

              You’re right about that. Being a fascist doesn’t preclude self defense. Or is that your actual opinion, that people you deem to be fascist have to let themselves be beaten and executed in public?