• Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Anyone who looks at a situation where nobody died, and thinks it would have been better if people had been killed, is a violent person and a danger to others.

      • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Look, there are literally two sides here. The situation that actually happened, and the situation you think would have been better.

        Nobody died in reality, but your solution involves death, so I guess the real issue here is that you picked a side, and it’s a morally reprehensible one.

    • magic_smoke@links.hackliberty.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      That’s not true, there are plenty of people who if they just fuckin’ keeled over the world would be a better place.

      That being said I don’t think shooting into a crowd of teenagers is the solution, though if I was being beaten by a crowd of them I might change my mind. Call me violent but IMO if it came between me and a crowd of fucking cishets, I know my choice.

      That being said the guys a fucking dofus for leaving his car. I mean what are you going to do, fucking scold them?

        • magic_smoke@links.hackliberty.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          I don’t think most people would sit around and accept being beaten by a crowd of randos was my point.

          Like you can commit to an act of self preservation while understanding you’re not some paragon of justice, rather another animal that got backed into a corner. Whether or not self defence is the moral choice, I think its probably the most human one. I don’t think we can fault people for making that choice.

          That also doesn’t mean you have to be some bloodthirsty weirdo who jerks off to r/justiceporn to see that nuance.

          • NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Yeah I was pointing more towards the fact that someone’s gender or sexuality should not determine whether you are going run them over.

            I thought I made that clear with the transhom thing.

            • magic_smoke@links.hackliberty.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              My point was to drive home for a predominantly leftist and queer-friendly fediverse, that if put in the same situation, they would probably be doing the same shit. As a trans woman myself, I can tell you that the fear of being hate crimed by a cis straight dude is very real. It is much more likely that we’d be victimized by cis dudes, than other trans folk, or even cis women for that matter.

              By framing it from a familiar prospective, it makes it easier to see the point of view of those we might not agree with. That’s why I used that specific example.