• Doomsider@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 days ago

      Stand your ground laws disagree. If one party views it as a threat of bodily harm they can definitely defend themselves by preemptively killing someone.

      • Cataphract@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 days ago

        This was such a weird time-line switch. Trump president again and progressives on Lemmy sound like r/conservative with law interpretation. So there’s no better response, no room for the very real needed evaluation of each situation, just a blanket “shoot em” now. Idk how people are so subjective to propaganda and influence when we have such a hard grasp on reality.

        • Doomsider@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 days ago

          A bunch of women shooting men for threatening to rape them would definitely get the stand your ground laws changed for the better. Sounds like a progressive win to me.

          Reality is a strange bedfellow.

          • Cataphract@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 days ago

            Just an OG fantasy accelerationist eh? I can dig it, but I think they would dismiss it as not being fit for the definition. Judges can and are allowed to be fickle like that.