• thetreesaysbark@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 hours ago

    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.

    That’s my interpretation of it because you’re basically saying that because he was breaking the law (maybe you’re saying that it’s because he was breaking specific laws), it’s justified that he was shot and killed.

    Whether you want to pussyfoot around the distinction between him deserving it and it being justified is beside the point from my perspective because I don’t believe he did deserve it or that it was justified.

    Seems like we’ll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

    • ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I haven’t exactly claimed it was justified either. I’m literally hearing about this for the first time, and all my knowledge comes from this single article, so I don’t have enough information to form an informed opinion on whether opening fire was justified or if they could’ve just moved out of the way or not been there in the first place. My comment was more about cases like this in general rather than this specific one.

      Let’s be real here. The reason articles like this get so much media attention is because the victim was black, and the narrative of police being racist is a popular one. People, however, really struggle to acknowledge that, justified or not, the lifestyle of the majority of these infamous black people shot by police has been such that they themselves were likely fully aware it could be a possible outcome. Very rarely (though not never) does someone truly innocent get intentionally shot by police for no reason. This situation was perfectly avoidable.