Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected] or [email protected]
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
I mean, is this just a wild hypothetical? Because it's really obvious that this isn't the case. Nothing about this murder was normal. He wasn't some professional killer because he was sloppy with cameras and the garbage in Starbucks. But he definitely plotted and planned to murder this guy. And then he purposely left evidence of his motive. The gun he used was rare, and he clearly trained with the weapon because of how quickly he was able to clear the jam he had and then kept firing.
Speculative discussion is pointing towards the smiling guy but bring the same person. Any conclusions to the methods of the shooter are still very fraught.
How about now? You think they just released some random person's photo still?
You mean how I used the word speculative?
Or how I said conclusions are fraught?
You didn't know any better than anyone else, and perhaps you forget the Boston bomber situation, but it's always good to slow down on plastering someone's face/identity on a crime till reports are concrete.
The police released that information because they were confident in it. It wasn't reddit.
And reports from authorities, at the time I commented that, were raising concerns that it may not have been the same person. My comment was one of caution, yours is of luck.
To be clear: I'm talking about a possibility, not a prediction.
We've nothing to go on but incomplete and likely incorrect public information. It would be foolish of me to entrench around speculation.