If Something Is Allowed Under The Law, It Doesn’t Mean That That Thing Is Inherently Good Or Insusceptible

if something is allowed under the law, it doesn’t mean that that thing is inherently good or insusceptible to misuse. the law itself may not be intrinsically capable of detecting and punishing misuse either.

guns are allowed in domestic policing, but that still doesn’t mean that you can fire at will. you can’t willy-nilly shoot at criminals if they do not pose any threat to you. it is the way it is because the use of a gun against even the most heinous of criminals with no weapon in hand, especially if it threatens civilians nearby, is a human right violation. now replace “guns” with “chemical weapons” and read that excerpt again.

if you live in america - with that degree of police brutality and the deafening outcry against it - and i still have to make this allegory so you understand, then maybe you should go outside and talk to real people for once.

^^^———

It is WILD that you say “selling drugs and engaging in gang turf war does not make you not a citizen” as if that changes the fact that they’re still CRIMES.

I mean, if your logic is that Zaun is technically part of Piltover and thus falls under Piltover’s jurisdiction… committing a CRIME under their jurisdiction means you can suffer consequences from your actions. No? It doesn’t MATTER if you’re a citizen or not. Being a citizen doesn’t give you free rein to do whatever you want! You have to obey laws!

If I’m a citizen of a city in America, and I do a crime, the police of that city are allowed to take away my rights as a citizen. That’s what being a citizen in a functional society MEANS!

WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT YOU WEIRD ASS MOTHER FUCKERS????