• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    012 days ago

    The tool you use to kill is irrelevant, because the tool has no intent. Mens rea is, with the exception of a very, very few strict liability crimes, a requirement for an action to be criminal. A tool can not have intent.

    • @Lumisal
      link
      112 days ago

      Setting aside that the discussion was never a legal one (and either way, what is legal does not mean is moral);

      The tool is still very relevant. If you have the intent to kill many but only a stick, you probably won’t get as far because sticks are not as dangerous as guns, or even words for that matter, when used.

        • @Lumisal
          link
          012 days ago

          Thanks for the strawman, I see now you’re arguing in bad faith (or are one of those Americans hyper focused on guns)

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            011 days ago

            Oh, look, an ad hominem. Cool.

            Firearms are not, themselves, the problem, despite however much people want to treat them as though they are. Likewise, in the UK, kitchen knives and scissors are not the problem, although the gov’t treats them as though they are.

            Guns, knives, sticks, cars, and yes, even explosives, are tools. If you eliminate the causes that turn people to violence, you eliminate the use of the tools to commit violent acts. But no one is willing to discuss violence as a result of things like economic warfare or systemic racism; they insist that violence exists because the tools used in violent acts exist.

            • @Lumisal
              link
              011 days ago

              The discussion was never about the guns, dumdum (this, btw, is an ad hominem)

                • @Lumisal
                  link
                  010 days ago

                  Still missing the point.

                  The criticism was on your “words don’t kill people” part.

                  Neither guns nor words spawn out of nothing.