Pro-death penalty, gender-specific application, and ignoring due process probably puts this on the right.
Plenty of people on the left advocate for self-defense even to the point of lethal force but almost all of those would want an investigation and trial, and that probably means holding the killer in jail until a bond hearing. Carte blanche trust that the killer was justified is something unlikely to be offered outside of individualist people with a very strong distrust of the government to interfere with people’s lives, and those tend to be on the right. It also implies women need a legal exception as a vulnerable group which reinforces the traditional idea that they are dependent on external protection.
If this had been “people should have the right to kill thieves / cyclists / trespassers / basically anything else”, I’d have said “right”, but OP’s statement requires the acknowledgement that women are people and rape is wrong, so… left, but maybe my bar has just become far too low.
If this had been “people should have the right to kill thieves / cyclists / trespassers / basically anything else”, I’d have said “right”, but OP’s statement requires the acknowledgement that women are people and rape is wrong, so… left, but maybe my bar has just become far too low.
very well. i shall now falsely claim rape to murder someone, and since the victim has no way of proving innocence (on account of being dead), they would have lost the right to due process anyways, and then i get away with it scot-free since it is now legal for me to kill my “rapist”.
the “false rape agenda” is an incel fascist rhetoric pushed by MRA activists
Maybe today. But you said you wanted to do away with due process for murder. What do you think due process is?
Your position here is every bit as ludicrous as Trumpists saying “immigrants don’t deserve due process because they entered the country illegally”. Ignoring the fact that some of the people being deported had a legal right to be there that could have been proven if they were given their basic due process rights.
there is no due process in actions not carried out by courts
You’re talking about killing someone. Self-defence doesn’t ever happen without due process. You face a very high chance of being charged with murder, and then you plead “not guilty by reason of self-defence”. And present your evidence, hoping the jury believes it. That is what due process is.
Removed by mod
Pro-death penalty, gender-specific application, and ignoring due process probably puts this on the right.
Plenty of people on the left advocate for self-defense even to the point of lethal force but almost all of those would want an investigation and trial, and that probably means holding the killer in jail until a bond hearing. Carte blanche trust that the killer was justified is something unlikely to be offered outside of individualist people with a very strong distrust of the government to interfere with people’s lives, and those tend to be on the right. It also implies women need a legal exception as a vulnerable group which reinforces the traditional idea that they are dependent on external protection.
Why limit that to women?
Rapist just shows up as PVE for anyone in their vicinity? Not a bad idea.
Left
This is absolutely a right wing take, tons of libertarians would agree with this
If this had been “people should have the right to kill thieves / cyclists / trespassers / basically anything else”, I’d have said “right”, but OP’s statement requires the acknowledgement that women are people and rape is wrong, so… left, but maybe my bar has just become far too low.
Removed by mod
I don’t think that’s a position I’d classify as left… Curious as to your reasoning.
If this had been “people should have the right to kill thieves / cyclists / trespassers / basically anything else”, I’d have said “right”, but OP’s statement requires the acknowledgement that women are people and rape is wrong, so… left, but maybe my bar has just become far too low.
why limit to women?
where’s the due process?
wouldn’t this open an avenue for getting away with murder using rape as an excuse and therefore also degrading the severity of actual rape cases?
Removed by mod
very well. i shall now falsely claim rape to murder someone, and since the victim has no way of proving innocence (on account of being dead), they would have lost the right to due process anyways, and then i get away with it scot-free since it is now legal for me to kill my “rapist”.
Removed by mod
Maybe today. But you said you wanted to do away with due process for murder. What do you think due process is?
Your position here is every bit as ludicrous as Trumpists saying “immigrants don’t deserve due process because they entered the country illegally”. Ignoring the fact that some of the people being deported had a legal right to be there that could have been proven if they were given their basic due process rights.
Removed by mod
You’re talking about killing someone. Self-defence doesn’t ever happen without due process. You face a very high chance of being charged with murder, and then you plead “not guilty by reason of self-defence”. And present your evidence, hoping the jury believes it. That is what due process is.
oh, no, i’m just massively in support of legally killing anyone i want, so thanks for giving me an easy and legal way to do it!
Removed by mod
Why limit that to “their.”
Removed by mod