So killing is not okay except when its internet-approved vigilantism?
Example: “Polititian commutes death sentences” Lemmy be like “good”, but then when “Politician condemns assassination” Lemmy have a problem with condeming political violence?
(Like Gavin Newsom commutes all death row immates in California vs when Democratic polititians condemned Luigi Mangione)
Or are these different groups of Lemmings?
Obviously the death penalty is a cruel, medieval, outdated punishment, which is against humanity, as every halfway intelligent person will agree. At the same time, murdering someone is against the law in any country, and should be punished (jail), whatever the motivation. Those people that support Luigi will probably put forward that his victim was responsible for numerous deaths, but we do not live in societies that condone lynch justice, there are definitely other and better ways to express or push political opinions.
War is state sanctioned murder.
“I believed then, as I believe now, that the politicians should be given the guns and asked to sort out their differences themselves, rather than partaking in nothing more than organized mass murder.”
So it’s wrong to defend yourself or others with lethal force, and you should instead allow yourself and others to be killed unlawfully?
The courts are captured, they won’t do it. Your take is way off base here. I oppose the death penalty as operated by the state too, but to argue there is never any reason for those without the protection of the state to kill someone, shows you have lived a very sheltered and privileged life, and frankly shows naivety.