Then nothing is going to change by holding anyone accountable. So if that’s true, what’s going to change by punishing anyone for the death of that wealthy insurance exec?
Because that’s our law and rule of the land. He did he crime, he can do the time. Besides he’s super proud of it and you all will donate plenty to his prison fund, so he’ll have plenty of ramen noodles to eat.
If you don’t like the laws, then vote someone in who will change them.
Except it’s not the law of the land. Laws are applied equally to everyone. If the rule of law existed, fat shitbags in suits wouldn’t get to make decisions that defrauds their clients and directly leads to their deaths, then hide behind a corporation to avoid justice.
Every day Brian Thompson went to work was an affront to justice and our legal system, and no one did a goddamn thing about it. But someone allegedly kills him to save the lives of others, and THAT is suddenly a problem.
Except it’s not. Because as I stated earlier laws are applied equally and to everyone. The failure of our justice system to punish people like Brian Thompson does not impart or imply guilt on the behalf of someone that committed an act to defend themselves and others.
Murder is not against the law when it’s in defense of yourself or others. That’s established precedent. There is no established precedent today allows businesses or their executives to escape punishment for actions that directly lead to the harm and deaths of others. Especially when the people that are being harmed and killed are clients and customers of said business.
From a legal standpoint what Brian Thompson did was just as bad as defrauding shareholders which is a serious crime. And he was also trying to kill his companies clients, which from a moral standpoint makes him worse than a run of the mill murderer.
Whoever killed him was protecting the integrity of the business and shareholders interests. And what they did also would have been completely in self-defense if they themselves were a customer.
Law doesn’t exist in a vacuum, it either applies to everyone or it doesn’t exist at all. If the law didn’t exist when it came to punishing Brian Thompson why should it exist in any other respect to him?
Laws should be applied equally to everyone, you mean. I think if Brian Thompson committed actual crimes, then he should have been prosecuted and sent to prison. Not shot dead on the street. Luigi deserves to spend the rest of his life in prison. Just because he killed an asshole, doesn’t mean he shouldn’t answer for the crime.
Besides, if he’s such a hero like Lemmy thinks he is, and did it all in protest, thjen he should man up and accept his punishment.
Brian Thompson committed crimes that are typically handled by military tribunals and the Hague. But I’m not here to make excuses for the last 30 years of US criminal policy towards mass murders, fraudsters, con-men, and other ‘white’ collar criminals. The president is already busy doing that.
Then nothing is going to change by holding anyone accountable. So if that’s true, what’s going to change by punishing anyone for the death of that wealthy insurance exec?
Because that’s our law and rule of the land. He did he crime, he can do the time. Besides he’s super proud of it and you all will donate plenty to his prison fund, so he’ll have plenty of ramen noodles to eat.
If you don’t like the laws, then vote someone in who will change them.
Except it’s not the law of the land. Laws are applied equally to everyone. If the rule of law existed, fat shitbags in suits wouldn’t get to make decisions that defrauds their clients and directly leads to their deaths, then hide behind a corporation to avoid justice.
Every day Brian Thompson went to work was an affront to justice and our legal system, and no one did a goddamn thing about it. But someone allegedly kills him to save the lives of others, and THAT is suddenly a problem.
Except it’s not. Because as I stated earlier laws are applied equally and to everyone. The failure of our justice system to punish people like Brian Thompson does not impart or imply guilt on the behalf of someone that committed an act to defend themselves and others.
Murder is not against the law when it’s in defense of yourself or others. That’s established precedent. There is no established precedent today allows businesses or their executives to escape punishment for actions that directly lead to the harm and deaths of others. Especially when the people that are being harmed and killed are clients and customers of said business.
From a legal standpoint what Brian Thompson did was just as bad as defrauding shareholders which is a serious crime. And he was also trying to kill his companies clients, which from a moral standpoint makes him worse than a run of the mill murderer.
Whoever killed him was protecting the integrity of the business and shareholders interests. And what they did also would have been completely in self-defense if they themselves were a customer.
Law doesn’t exist in a vacuum, it either applies to everyone or it doesn’t exist at all. If the law didn’t exist when it came to punishing Brian Thompson why should it exist in any other respect to him?
Laws should be applied equally to everyone, you mean. I think if Brian Thompson committed actual crimes, then he should have been prosecuted and sent to prison. Not shot dead on the street. Luigi deserves to spend the rest of his life in prison. Just because he killed an asshole, doesn’t mean he shouldn’t answer for the crime.
Besides, if he’s such a hero like Lemmy thinks he is, and did it all in protest, thjen he should man up and accept his punishment.
Brian Thompson committed crimes that are typically handled by military tribunals and the Hague. But I’m not here to make excuses for the last 30 years of US criminal policy towards mass murders, fraudsters, con-men, and other ‘white’ collar criminals. The president is already busy doing that.