Yup you’re right of course. It was a throwaway reply to someone clearly arguing in bad faith. While it isn’t legal precedent, it is a fairly compelling defense.
It is not in any way compelling unless you’re just looking for excuses. Take your bad faith genocide apologia to someone gullible enough for it.
EDIT: Also just take a moment to notice how fucking wild it is that “Yeah, I was totally wrong but the other guy was also wrong I reckon so it’s fine also I think what I said was good actually,” was their defense. That sure was a bunch of words they said.
Again, the fact anybody liked this comment is a definite sign of brigading.
No it’s not. You need to have a trial to have legal precedent. You can’t base a legal precedent on “Those other times were the same I reckon.”
Lazy, wrong bullshit like this gets 7 upvotes, how? Brigading.
Yup you’re right of course. It was a throwaway reply to someone clearly arguing in bad faith. While it isn’t legal precedent, it is a fairly compelling defense.
It is not in any way compelling unless you’re just looking for excuses. Take your bad faith genocide apologia to someone gullible enough for it.
EDIT: Also just take a moment to notice how fucking wild it is that “Yeah, I was totally wrong but the other guy was also wrong I reckon so it’s fine also I think what I said was good actually,” was their defense. That sure was a bunch of words they said.
Again, the fact anybody liked this comment is a definite sign of brigading.
It’s one of most basic things about Law that merelly “somebody else did the same and got away with it” isn’t at all a valid defense.
The act itself is lawful or unlawful, quite independently of other people having done the same and gotten away with it.