Interesting you say not vs never. It seems this kid thought it was a time where violence was needed. The question i always ask in these situations is about what the line would be that would justify violence?

Things like healthcare, crime, existential ai, have very grey lines as it isnt obvious when one needs to flip the table. How broken must a system be?

▲

jmull 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Violence is an extreme failure state.

If your goal is to improve the system then you always want to move away from it.

Probably a reasonable justification would be self-defense, committing violence to stop worse violence. (Preemptive violence is not self-defense.)

	▲	rustystump 2 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		But that is the kicker. As the sister comment said it matters a great deal what others do. At some point a broken system enacts soft violence on people. So it isnt surprising people act out when they think survival is at stake. With healthcare, it really can be. But where is the line? When someone you know dies? 10 people? It is messy.

▲

Aeolun 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> what the line would be that would justify violence

It doesn’t matter where we think the line should be drawn, only where those much worse off draw it.