No Stupid Questions
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
view the rest of the comments
That's fair. The line is clearly harder to draw than I am making it seem. For the sake of argument, can we both agree that a line exists somewhere? Or would you putting forward that there is never a situation in which killing someone is morally justified no matter what the situation is?
And a follow up question, would you instead prefer that for certain extreme offenders, a life imprisonment sentence is used? I believe an argument could be made that, as the prison system exists in many countries now, this may be worse.
Or perhaps more broadly, for someone guilty of rampant repeated murder with no demonstrated indications of potential remorse or reform, what would be the ideal punishment or societal repercussion?
I think the part of your original comment that I find upsetting, and I understand this is a lot my own biases at play here too, is this idea that if we start killing the ultra wealthy then we or people we like and care for will be next. It's not that that is incorrect per se, it's more a cause an effect thing. Living in the US, it's been made abundantly clear that the ultra wealthy are not waiting on violence to justify their violence, they are just doin violence as often and eagerly as they feel like. In my state, it is officially, government certified legal to run over a protester who blocks the road. This ruling was made after a truck decided to do it. Police here kill people for being the wrong skin color. The ultra wealthy kill us albeit more indirectly by paying starvation wages and denying medical care for life saving treatments, and restricting housing access and making homelessness functionally a crime. People here get to watch their friends and neighbors already having extreme violence and sometimes murder done upon them already.
I know that an eye for an eye is not a great approach. But for most it feels like self defense, and it's worth remembering that no lasting societal change or revolution in the world's history has ever been successful without at least some violence. Hearing "hey you shouldn't be violent" can be hard to take for people who just watch it happening all day every day to everyone around them, especially when not paired with an alternative, preferable suggestion that works.
So I guess I would ask what alternative you are advocating for, and what you might tell people like me and, presumably, op, who are so sick of all of it that violence is starting to look like an ok option
To address the edit, I think part of the US's problem is that you are already on the slope, and have been for a while. Violence has been normalised and accepted (and legalised as you've pointed out). I'd like to beleive you can reverse course, but it certainly doesnt seem likely.
I dont have any answers for you or op, but if it were me, I would focus on the defence and protection of my family/community first, rather than searching for retribution. I know that sounds hollow and empty though.
I can definitely place people above the line so to speak, but I dont think I could draw an objective one-size-fits-all line.
Humanity is a continuous spectrum from people living in extreme poverty up to the one percent, and its very hard to find any clean delinineation that I would be comfortable drawing the line through.
And the other problem is that the definition of that line would vary wildly from person to person.
If I'm honest with myself, I live in a well off first world country, that in of itself means that I am indirectly responsible for a non-zero amount human suffering in other parts of the world. It doesnt necessarily make me black and white evil, but to someone in one of those parts of the world, they definitely might see it that way.
I'm happy with death as a penalty for certain acts of evil, but I would want it to be the exception, not the rule. Everytime someone is death-row'd, we should all be unanimously sure that its the right thing to do.