-
Maybe, Snottyotter, but I still object to a video like that being made available, at the very least out of respect for the victim's relatives.
And three people today objected to images of some sort being published, at the very least out of respect for their beliefs.
Obviously the way you are responding is profoundly different (and better), but you're nonetheless taking it upon yourself to pass judgement on others because you have some sense of what is right which differs from theirs.
-
Everybody's passing judgement: my judgement is that this material shouldn't be shown (and has only been shown because it makes 'good' television - but that's another matter); your judgement is that it should be shown because to not allow it to be shown would violate some idea of... civil liberty, I suppose.
My retort to that is: at what point does it no longer become acceptable to broadcast images that many people might find disturbing? Paedophilia, the stoning to death of someone found guilty of adultery, acts of torture, somebody trapped in a burning vehicle...?
I find it odd that some people here seem to equate my wanting to deprive them of being able to see something as being somehow more pompous, self-righteous, and almost laughable, than them wanting to allow people to see something.
The_Kindness_of_Trees
Maybe, Snottyotter, but I still object to a video like that being made available, at the very least out of respect for the victim's relatives.
What on earth is going on in your avatar?