• CoffeeJunkie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    You should know it is a win. Justice is dealt swiftly, there’s no bullshit trials or wasting anyone’s time on this murdering asshole. Time or money.

    Sure, he “suffers less” getting a quick death, but let’s price this out for fun. This is in CA, Jesus, those idiots spent on average $64K per inmate annually as of 2015. Let’s not forget we’re in the era of Magic Biden Bucks™; according to Google we have experienced roughly 26% inflation since 2015. That $64K becomes $80K. Averages are just that, average, let’s be very generous & assume this guy is nothing special. Costing the taxpayer $70K per year incarcerated. Nice, even numbers. :-)

    That’s at least $700K per decade, not accounting for any future inflation. You want decades, so this revenge/justice venture will cost at minimum $1.4M. Versus 10 mins & $10 in bullets.

    I don’t really seek vengeance in the form of life sentences. The end result is the same; death is death & he got his. Justice has been served accurately with zero delay, a modern day miracle.

    • masterspace@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Oh yeah, police just shooting who they feel like is a modern day miracle! Nothing bad can come from that! Totally won’t end with a police officer kneeling on a man’s neck and slowly choking him to death for being black!

      • CoffeeJunkie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        That isn’t at all what I said, and this isn’t a case of “shooting who they feel like”. 🤨 This was a case of a killer, a true murderer, getting killed. No one will be prosecuted for fatally shooting this murderer. Stop making false equivalence arguments.

      • CoffeeJunkie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        We’re in agreement on that. But when in pursuit of an armed & dangerous individual, armed with a gun, I do believe lethal response in self-defense or pursuit of neutralizing the threat is authorized. If the killer is killed in an armed standoff with police, while not the goal, I’m going to call that a bonus.

        I think it is a lapse in moral judgment to command others to act in ways that we wouldn’t act ourselves…I think most people, pursuing an armed & dangerous killer, would want a gun & permission to use it when their lives are threatened. Tasers, stun weapons, and other non-lethal forms of detainment require getting uncomfortably close to the armed & dangerous person.