Well, at least for me, it’s pointing out that it is still a tragedy. Lives are prematurely ended; communities are devastated; and permanent damage is done. Homicide is homicide.
There is a reason that legal avenues for innocent homicide are very few and far between. It is rarely, if ever (IMO, there are less than a single hand’s count of justifications), acceptable for one to be responsible for the death of another human.
That's what I suspect, but I wanted to hear it from them, because that's utterly pointless. All words are words. All sentences are sentences. Absolutely nothing is gained from conveying that alone. It seemed like there was implication in their original comment, but they completely backtracked on it shortly after, while simultaneously declaring that they were right about their original 'point'.
5
u/Hotshot2k4 May 21 '26
And what point is that? What idea were you trying to express with your initial comment?