Comment by tunesmith

> Why would that be bad exactly?

Because shooting looters is disproportionate. You arrest them and charge them for burglary, and then determine mitigating factors. The looters aren't shooting people. As for why it is bad to kill someone that isn't a killer, we have to go back to general moral philosophy and common law. Extremely generally, aside from the moral cost of taking a life, it's also because it is systematically escalatory that invites a further escalatory response.

> Anyway, I am glad that you did not have to survive through something like that.

Me too, but I fail to see the relevance. I understand that someone living through that might make someone more willing to shoot looters, but that doesn't mean it is proportionate or appropriate.

> In times of mass-looting?

Yes, in times of mass-looting, it would be better to have a functional police system that would be able to arrest, charge for burglary, and then determine mitigating factors by looking at the overall context. And I agree, our current police system is not up to that task.

> What would you suggest for right now?

I think we should not move past that the answer is not right now, but a few days ago - we should not have a system where it is even thinkable that police officers can kneel on people's necks and kill them. That exposed that it is a dysfunctional American police system (in that area and many others). Societal cohesion does not operate based off of the overwhelming strength of a police system, but common trust, mores, and belief in the overall system. If you break those bonds by kneeling on someone's neck and killing them, then many other things can break as well.

As for right now, the aim is to re-assert control in a non-escalatory fashion, and then let justice-driven investigations run their course. That's the right thing to do.