Wanting laws to change because of a political bent is kind of the whole point of politics. Laws are often value choices. Here (and in many other respects), our laws make the choice to prioritize the right to gun ownership and gun possession over the right to life. That's a choice I disagree with. Of course I intend to take political action to change those choices.Beebs52 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 4:28 pmYou're really an advocate for justice? Of course the result would be the same. You want laws to change because of your political bent? Or you just don't agree with the result?Bob78164 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 4:07 pmFor those who are content with a legal regime that allows a situation like this to occur without consequence under the criminal law, remember that the same set of rules will apply if the demonstrators are right-wingers and the defendant is an avowed adherent of the philosophy of antifa.
I'm not saying that the jury got this wrong. I'm saying it's probably time to think about changing the law so that the next time this happens, the law points to a different result. It's probably a bad idea for it to be legal for a 17-year-old to obtain an assault weapon, cross a state line in order to go looking for trouble, find the trouble he was looking for, and kill a couple of people as a result. --Bob
Wow.
But remember this conversation when it's an antifa shooter who kills right-wing demonstrators. See if you remain content with the laws then, or whether you might consider taking political action to change the laws so that the same actions lead to a different result in the future. --Bob