• RedditRefugee69@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    For the longest time, people thought “terrorism” meant “very evil,” so now that someone who isn’t evil is being labeled a terrorist, they are upset.

    In reality, if you try to change politics with violence against a civilian, you are a terrorist.

    “One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.”

    • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      That’s not what the law in NY actually says. It’s not merely that you’re trying to change government policy through violence. It’s that you’re trying to do it through intimidating government employees. The prosecutor screwed the pooch on this one. Luigi didn’t actually meet the terrorism modifier requirements in NY. At least that’s what I got from Legal Eagle.

        • glimse@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          That’s an incredibly flimsy argument. People have been writing messages on ammo since ammo existed. There’s not even an established pattern of terrorists writing on ammo - they’re more likely to claim credit for an attack after the fact and include their message there.

          Those were words for him. Deny and defend this, mother fucker.

          • RedditRefugee69@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            You assert my argument is flimsy, yet your argument is that someone is going to be able to read the casings popping out of a guy’s gun shooting at him from behind?

            Lol. Lmao, even.

            • glimse@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              Please tell me you’re trolling so I don’t think I’m talking to someone THIS obtuse.

              Do you think this writing was to make a political message in the wreckage? Do you think really I think the soldiers who wrote it expected the victims to read it on the way down?

              No, you moron, it’s a message to the victim that the killer knows they’ll never read. It’s a personal touch on the ammo that empowers the shooter. A more poetic version of “a bullet with your name on it”

              Added bonus for you

                • glimse@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 months ago

                  Yeah because my Lemmy app posting twice is indicative of my intelligence.

                  I love that you have nothing to say about my comment so you point out the app bug. Very smart

        • AnyOldName3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          The company’s other employees are, at time of writing, still living, so sending a message to the living doesn’t mean it’s not solely revenge.

            • AnyOldName3@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              I think it’s entirely plausible that it’s the same guy, but he was tracked down through illegal means and the tip-off was faked. If so, it’s reasonable to think that some or all of the physical evidence was planted in order to have something that would be admissible. If evidence was potentially planted, though, it can’t be used as the basis for a guilty verdict, so even if Mangione did do it, there might not be enough evidence for a conviction.

              • inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                You know. I’ve been having a hard time with both the official story and the that’s not the real shooter theory.

                Your theory is a third one I haven’t thought of before. He is the shooter but they faked how they found him to protect their secret surveillance capabilities from being reported on. Maybe illegal maybe not, but probably tech they don’t want the public knowing about.

                This actually sounds most plausible to me.