Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
I think murder is murder but that doesn’t mean that things like self defence aren’t morally justifiable.
Murder is murder in the simple scenario but it gets more complicated when the murderer is not the initial aggressor.
There are many cases where someone killed the person who murdered their loved one, and they still got convicted of murder.
This case would be seen less like revenge killing, more vigilantism. AFAIK, Luigi didn't have someone close to him that died due to denied insurance claims. This removed the emotional factor unlike if, say, a person killing the murderer of their child to avenge their child's death. The averge person have less sympathy to vigilantes than, a person who is avenging the death of their loved ones. Also, the bureaucracy and paperwork behind insurance denials obfuscates who is really responsible. People easily understand stabbing, or shooting someone to death, but doesn't really make the connection of people dying, with the insurance's claim denials. There's no blood, no violence, just a calm and "peaceful" pull on people's life support. It doesn't trigger the same emotional response as shooting someone in the middle of the street.