Crunchy Con argues that a man who kicked a toddler to death “needed killing.” (See the original story here).
The “Mighty Favoq” (see comments on Crunchy Con’s post) counters, that he needed to be stopped. Which position do you think is better stated? I agree with the Mighty Favoq. If he needed killing, than it should have been determined through due process, not in an instant by a police officer.
