I’m 100% in favor with de-paramilitarization. But that has nothing to do with this incident.
Thanks for a succinct and rational response. I agree.
Agreed that this incident has little to do with de-paramilitarization. However, both proponents and opponents seize on incidents like this.
The proponents hope to use a prominent, publicly known example to illustrate their cause, even if it is not a good example.
The opponents want to use a poor example as a straw man argument to oppose the idea.
The trouble is that proponents and opponents sound much alike, and create a nebulous gray area where before there was clarity, thus diluting support for the change.
Probably the best example of the resulting confusion is the border fence with Mexico, in that its strongest supporters were often actually dead set against it, so sought to sabotage the idea from within in a number of ways.
Its seeming opponents were in some cases supporters, who were instead focused on the most efficiency in keeping out illegal aliens, only putting up fences where illegal aliens actually crossed or could cross, not in road-less and empty desert where no one crossed. Satisfied if they could keep out 90% of aliens on a budget, rather than insisting on 100% at 100 times the cost, which they knew would never be funded.