• arrow74@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    That sounds reasonable to me. They took a criminal action that resulted in a death. It was their commission of the crime that killed that person.

    • zurohki@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Well, no, because murder isn’t just killing someone. It’s the motives and circumstances around the death. That’s why murder, manslaughter, reckless endangerment causing death, etc are all separate crimes.

      • arrow74@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        This is not a compelling argument. Each of the types of charges you can recieve for killing a person is defined by the law. The federal government and the majority of state governments have passed laws defining what constitutes felony murder. Juat like they codified laws defining manslaughter and first degree murder.

        • zurohki@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Yes, and the disconnect between what they wrote into law and what people consider to be real is why people are asking if it was felony murder or real murder. Because there’s a reason why we made all those different charges, and writing down that littering is now felony murder doesn’t make it real.

          • arrow74@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            23 hours ago

            writing down that littering is now felony murder doesn’t make it real.

            Well if we’re just saying nonsense I don’t see why it can’t make it real. Especially considering it is real, codified into law, and often used. That sounds very real