I am not a court. I don’t have to have a trial to believe in somebody’s guilt. According to the evidence I have seen it appears he shot a man to death.
They are, by law, innocent until proven guilty. The “evidence” you have seen is certainly not all the evidence, and your beliefs have been swayed before defense can make an argument.
You don’t know anything other than what lying American police told you and lying American media reported they said. You have absolutely no evidence or have any knowledge of his guilt or innocence. It appears that way to you because liars told you and now you are repeating it to me like an obedient dog.
I mean, the word criminal basically means law breaker.
Now as many laws are unjust and many horrific actions are protected by the law.
Just like at one point in time… a futitive slave, would be by definition a criminal, and his owner by definition not a criminal.
Again, the whole concept is noting that it’s about the definition of the word criminal… and that criminal does not have to do with morality… only in concurance with the laws of the land it is taking place in.
Commiting a crime makes you a criminal, so if you break a law you are a criminal. And if the decisions of health insurance workers are also breaking laws they are criminals too.
Then if you have ever gone faster than the speed limit, you are a criminal. That makes most people in the developed world criminals.
That aside, the point is that naming someone a criminal has moralistic baggage, and by saying that anyone that breaks laws is a criminal thus immoral, you imply all laws are inherently moral.
I am not a court. I don’t have to have a trial to believe in somebody’s guilt. According to the evidence I have seen it appears he shot a man to death.
They are, by law, innocent until proven guilty. The “evidence” you have seen is certainly not all the evidence, and your beliefs have been swayed before defense can make an argument.
I sure as hell hope you never serve on a jury.
I am not representing the law. I am representing my own opinion. I am not a judge or a jury member.
You don’t know anything other than what lying American police told you and lying American media reported they said. You have absolutely no evidence or have any knowledge of his guilt or innocence. It appears that way to you because liars told you and now you are repeating it to me like an obedient dog.
Are you telling me it’s FAKE NEWS?
no investigation no right to speak
He shot a man to death who killed thousands. He’s a vigilante if anything.
He still commited a crime which makes him a criminal which is just a fact and has nothing to do with the crime being justified
What makes someone “criminal” as a quality? Breaking the law? Killing people? Are all health insurance workers criminals too?
I mean, the word criminal basically means law breaker.
Now as many laws are unjust and many horrific actions are protected by the law.
Just like at one point in time… a futitive slave, would be by definition a criminal, and his owner by definition not a criminal.
Again, the whole concept is noting that it’s about the definition of the word criminal… and that criminal does not have to do with morality… only in concurance with the laws of the land it is taking place in.
Commiting a crime makes you a criminal, so if you break a law you are a criminal. And if the decisions of health insurance workers are also breaking laws they are criminals too.
Then if you have ever gone faster than the speed limit, you are a criminal. That makes most people in the developed world criminals.
That aside, the point is that naming someone a criminal has moralistic baggage, and by saying that anyone that breaks laws is a criminal thus immoral, you imply all laws are inherently moral.
It’s an infraction.
Depends on the jurisdiction. In some places in some conditions going 50 in a 30 is a criminal act that can result in jail time.
Just a bit more than “faster than the speed limit”.
That is indeed true, although then it is a pretty subjective label