[puredemo]

Yep. Personally, I could not care less when violent criminals like Michael Brown get shot by the police. Fewer violent criminals is a good thing.

Articles like this presume I must lack empathy because of that view. Well, I have plenty of empathy for my friends, co-workers and inner circles. That empathy simply doesn't extend to violent criminals who constantly make society worse, those who would rob or harm my family in a minute if they could.

Empathy is a biological adaptation to help us get along with people who are the closest to us, within our own tribe. It doesn't need to be extended willy-nilly onto every thief and violent actor across the globe. That's simply being an enabler.

Bring on the disdain because I don't agree with the shallow indoctrination of, "WE NEED TO LOVE EVERYONE." ;)

[sehr]

Just a heads up:

Please avoid introducing classic flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say about them.

Please don't bait other users by inviting them to downvote you or announce that you expect to get downvoted.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[puredemo]

I changed the downvote line, thanks.

[mmoche]

Your conclusion is worrisome. Lots of people, and lots of groups of people, have been considered "violent criminals" despite being neither violent nor criminals.

I can understand why worldwide empathy is a good thing regardless of how it could, conceivably, benefit those who would use it for nefarious purposes.