I can provide no further information that is going to help you see the point.

God speed.

You’re missing the point, especially if you think a fair and just system even exists within the US. If you want to take the stance that “murder is illegal”, sure, what he did was illegal. Jury nullification is a way we peons can still hold an iota of power. It’s spitting in the face of unjust systems.

Let me ask you this. Would you prefer a situation in which Luigi was convicted for murder, sentenced to life in prison, and the system never changes? Or would you prefer a situation in which exceptions are given in exceptional circumstances in an attempt to change a fundamentally broken system?

If your answer is the former, you might just want to apply at United and work your way up.

I’m going to copy WoodScientist’s post. Don’t know how to tag, sorry, but credit goes to him for this.

"I would say that jury nullification isn’t just some accident of the legal system, but the primary reason we have juries in the first place.

Judges will say that juries are meant to just decide the simple facts of the case. But what sane person would ever design a system that assigns 12 random untrained nobodies to do that task? If all that mattered was judging the facts of the case, why not have 12 legal scholars instead? Why isn’t “juror” a profession, just like being a lawyer or judge is? If we want people to just apply the letter of the law to the facts of a case, why not fill juries with professionals, each who had a legal degree, and who have sat as jurors hundreds of times? Judging evidence and reading law is a skill. And it’s one that can be educated on, trained, and practiced. Why do we have amateur juries, when professional juries would clearly do their purported job so much better? Or why not just do what some countries do, and have most or all trials decided solely by judges? What exactly is the point of a jury? Compared to everything else in the courtroom, the jurors, the ones actually deciding guilt or innocence, are a bunch of untrained amateurs. On its face, it makes no damn sense!

No, the true reason, and really the only reason, we have juries at all is so that juries can serve to judge both the accused AND the law. Juries are meant to be the final line of defense against unjust laws and prosecution. It is possible for a law itself to be criminal or corrupt. Legislative systems can easily be taken over by a tiny wealthy or powerful minority of the population, and they can end up passing laws criminalizing behaviors that the vast majority of the population don’t even consider to be crimes.

The entire purpose of having a jury is that it places the final power of guilt and innocence directly in the hands of the people. Juries are meant as a final line of defense against corrupt laws passed by a minority against the wishes of the greater majority. An unaccountable elite can pass whatever ridiculous self-serving laws they want. But if the common people simply refuse to uphold those laws in the jury box, those laws are meaningless.

THAT is the purpose of a jury. It is the only reason juries are worth the trouble. A bunch of rank amateurs will never be able to judge the facts of a case better than actual trained legal scholars with years of experience. But by empowering juries, it places the final authority of the law firmly in the hands of the people. That is the value of having a jury at all.

Jury nullification is not just some strange quirk or odd loophole in our justice system. It’s the entire reason we have juries in the first place."

This guy sucks Elon’s toes

Otters might look cute, but they are metal as fuck

Wow, that’s actually a really impressive analysis

Unfathomabely based

Thanks for the honest reply. I guess a couple thoughts I have on your response.

1. The screenshot in question was a vegan banning other vegans for not being vegan enough, so this didn’t seem like carnist trolls, this seems like multiple people integrated within the vegan community getting banned for having a slightly different opinion.

2. Is carnists a real term? I don’t think I have ever heard of someone who eats exclusively meat, unless this term is meant a different way

Anyway, sorry about the trolling you experience. I am personally not vegan, though I find the endeavor admirable. I think a lot of Lemmy and social media, and social circles in general need to practice a bit of “live and let live”

Serious question, not meant to be antagonistic. I’m honestly just curious.

Is the purpose of your community to simply be an echo chamber of similar opinions? Is debate not allowed, or having a different opinion?

I will never visit that community, but this seems like a wild abuse of mod powers. You do whatever you want, I don’t care and have no skin in the game, but don’t you want to foster discussion on your community? An echo chamber with other vegans doesn’t seem conducive to achieving anything, other than maybe a feels good circlejerk. The downvote button exists if you have a different opinion. A straight ban for not toeing the line seems like further isolating your view points from the greater Lemmy community, as well as entrenches the view point a lot of people have that vegans are hostile to non-vegans.

Calling other vegans fake vegans and banning them tho is whack as fuck but pretty hilarious

Not one comment in here about Lord of the Rings.

Which I agree with. Amazing movies. Glad everyone’s on the same page.

For me, it’s James Cameron’s Avatar. Visually stunning, especially for its time, but the story has to be the most cliche, predictable, boring, lazy piece of writing to ever have existed. It’s like they held an environmentally conscious 11 year old at gun point and made them write a story. The cigar chomping military guy working for corpos wants to pilfer a beautiful planet for its resources with disregard for the native populations that live there. Where have I seen that before? Oh yeah, ALL AROUND ME, EVERY FUCKING GOD DAMN DAY. Get an original idea.

Fuck this stupid piece of shit dumbass movie. It’s intellectually insulting. It’s a disgrace.

/endrant

You’re right, that is a shit opinion.

Can confirm.

Source: BC resident looking at our eastward neighbours.

Had my eye on Children of the Sun a while back. Thanks for the reminder it’s on sale, I think I’ll pick it up too.

If your point is that cops are corrupt, I agree. I also agree that resources given to cops would be better allocated to specialists to deal with certain situations, like a mental health crisis worker sent to a distressed member of the public, instead of police.

I don’t know about disbanding the police. For all their faults and flaws, they do also do work that I’m sure most people wouldn’t want to be involved in. I’m sure those occurrences are far and few between, but still.

The George Floyd reference seemed somewhat off topic, but I appreciate your level headed response nonetheless.

Because I happen to live on the small island where this happened, and live with my feet firmly planted in reality and not on the internet. I don’t hate cops for the sake of it. If I hate them, which I largely do, it’s for legitimate reasons, not because “they’re in a gang”. I have real experiences with cops, where they did real things that were bad, to me and people I know. My issue with them is their actions. Not some perceived gang. Our police have problems, but they aren’t plagued with the same problems at the same scale that American police are. American police are actually a gang. Ours aren’t, or are at least, to much, much lesser extent.

If you’re American, commenting on our police, arguing with someone who lives within the same jurisdiction as said police, stay in your lane. If you are Canadian, and happen to live in the same area, I’d love to hear why you think they are a gang, so feel free to let me know.

These are Canadian police on an island on the west coast… Not American police. I’m not defending these pieces of shit, but George Floyd’s murder has little to nothing to do with these guys or our police here on the island. Ours aren’t great, but they aren’t a gang like the American police are.

Relax, not a real tweet

Jesus Christ man, do you even have a point or are you just spinning your own tires here? Lol that entire above exchange was painful to read

It’s less money in their pockets and more money in ours. That’s not going to be a double win in their books.

Getting Epic’s money isn’t a slam dunk for profit. You’re hedging your bets taking guaranteed Epic money for lower potential sales vs non-guaranteed Steam money for higher potential sales. Having a bad exclusivity deal on Epic and then selling your game at a loss (90% discount) on steam isn’t profiting both ways, and sometimes isn’t profiting either way.

I also disagree with the sentiment that you’re reinforcing bad behavior. If anything, you’re signalling to them that you won’t support exclusivity deals, and are happy to wait for a deep discount on Steam. Ultimately, that’s a win for consumers.

That said, fuck exclusivity deals, and I’m much in the same boat where I’m hard pressed to support developers that take them.