3 ms·

> How is the person speaking for the dead qualified to make this accusation? How are you? You clearly assert this isn't murder. Convincing someone to commit su

> How is the person speaking for the dead qualified to make this accusation? How are you? You clearly assert this isn't murder. Convincing someone to commit suicide has at least garnered a manslaughter charge in the US. edit: I also fall squarely in the "this is murder" side of this. This isn't even close to the first time KiwiFarms has done this - there is obvious intent, they seek people out to harass who are unstable, repeatedly. If you directly aim to kill someone, and your actions lead to their death, that is murder - a knife or a gun or doxxing as the weapon isn't relevant.

nathanaldensr 5y ago
Right, but that's my point: manslaughter is not murder, not are harassing and bullying considered murder. Obviously this is jurisdiction dependent, and some countries may actually consider it so. Regardless, my opinion is more colloquial in nature. I didn't intent to reference legal definitions when I opined about what murder is and isn't. Everyone is free to hold their own opinion, of course. That should go without saying.
- staticassertion 5y ago
  > Everyone is free to hold their own opinion, of course. How convenient! Thanks for letting us all know, after you felt the need to respond to the announcement of someone's death, from a friend, that you didn't like their language! I'm out.
- robocat 5y ago
  You could have made your argument in a less callous/thoughtless/disrespectful manner. Personally I think intent is the difference between the words murder versus manslaughter. If the intent of the people harassing Near was to cause their death, that fits my personal non-legal definition of murder. Legally or technically, perhaps you are correct, but the common usage of words doesn't always fit the autistically literal meaning. Edit: also if looks like this happened in Japan, so the legal definition of 殺人 might be different from your assumptions.

nathanaldensr 5y ago

Right, but that's my point: manslaughter is not murder, not are harassing and bullying considered murder. Obviously this is jurisdiction dependent, and some countries may actually consider it so. Regardless, my opinion is more colloquial in nature. I didn't intent to reference legal definitions when I opined about what murder is and isn't. Everyone is free to hold their own opinion, of course. That should go without saying.

staticassertion 5y ago
> Everyone is free to hold their own opinion, of course. How convenient! Thanks for letting us all know, after you felt the need to respond to the announcement of someone's death, from a friend, that you didn't like their language! I'm out.
robocat 5y ago
You could have made your argument in a less callous/thoughtless/disrespectful manner. Personally I think intent is the difference between the words murder versus manslaughter. If the intent of the people harassing Near was to cause their death, that fits my personal non-legal definition of murder. Legally or technically, perhaps you are correct, but the common usage of words doesn't always fit the autistically literal meaning. Edit: also if looks like this happened in Japan, so the legal definition of 殺人 might be different from your assumptions.