True, the penalty for robbing a bank should be levelling the entire neighborhood the robbers lived in. The deaths of the neighbors is the robbers fault, because he was using them as human shields
The fact that he brings up a hypothetical bank robbery for his god awful analogy just highlights why I fucking hate the human shields narrative
No one would accept it if that excuse was used by cops who responded to a bank robbery even if the robbers were literally using people as human shields
Anyone who’s willing to shoot through a “human shield” is just a fucking murderer
Like if I was in a situation where a genuinely bad guy was hiding behind a child I would simply not shoot at the child
No one would accept it if that excuse was used by cops who responded to a bank robbery even if the robbers were literally using people as human shields
No they would, this is where the concept of “Stockholm Syndrome” comes from. There was a bank robbery in Stockholm. The robbers took hostages. The cops and government decided that killing eveyrone to save capitalism was a good idea. The hostages had to negotiate with the government on the robber’s behalf to keep the government from killing everyone, and some of them actually became friends with the robbers.
Afterwards a psychologist who never spoke to anyone involved decided the only explanation was, pardon my french, “Bitches be crazy” and shat out the idea that the women had fallen in love with their captors because of some incomprehensible mysogynist farting noises.
Everyone forgot where the concept came from but the idea that stuck and now people believe that if hostages get released thinking their captors had good points it can be safely written off as a mental health problem.
True, the penalty for robbing a bank should be levelling the entire neighborhood the robbers lived in. The deaths of the neighbors is the robbers fault, because he was using them as human shields
The fact that he brings up a hypothetical bank robbery for his god awful analogy just highlights why I fucking hate the human shields narrative
No one would accept it if that excuse was used by cops who responded to a bank robbery even if the robbers were literally using people as human shields
Anyone who’s willing to shoot through a “human shield” is just a fucking murderer
Like if I was in a situation where a genuinely bad guy was hiding behind a child I would simply not shoot at the child
No they would, this is where the concept of “Stockholm Syndrome” comes from. There was a bank robbery in Stockholm. The robbers took hostages. The cops and government decided that killing eveyrone to save capitalism was a good idea. The hostages had to negotiate with the government on the robber’s behalf to keep the government from killing everyone, and some of them actually became friends with the robbers.
Afterwards a psychologist who never spoke to anyone involved decided the only explanation was, pardon my french, “Bitches be crazy” and shat out the idea that the women had fallen in love with their captors because of some incomprehensible mysogynist farting noises.
Everyone forgot where the concept came from but the idea that stuck and now people believe that if hostages get released thinking their captors had good points it can be safely written off as a mental health problem.