Also remember, things are newsworthy because they’re novel. US sees like 2 gun deaths per day and thousands due to insurance company malpractice, but this one death dominates newscycles.
Also remember, things are newsworthy because they’re novel. US sees like 2 gun deaths per day and thousands due to insurance company malpractice, but this one death dominates newscycles.
If I serve on his jury, I’ll for sure push for nullification.
Sure he broke a law, we can all acknowledge that.
But was he wrong? (Based on the overall reaction I’d argue society doesn’t think so, and that’s where laws come from) Or are the laws, allowing things to get to a place where this is understandable behavior, wrong?
Self defense. He wasn’t wrong, he was forced to act because someone else was using deadly force against millions of Americans.
I don’t think self defense could be stretched that far, honestly.
But that’s why jury nullification exists. His actions were legally wrong but morally/situationally not, so you let them walk.
I don’t know if it really matters. Earlier this year Palestine Action got released despite having no defence because the judge wouldn’t allow them to argue they had to break the law to protect life and property.