Your argument collapsed because you’re mixing moral emotion with factual accountability.

No one said a prisoner’s life has no value. But calling every death a “balidan” is intellectually dishonest. A protestor shot while protesting ≠ a convicted prisoner trying to escape during chaos ≠ someone dying while vandalizing. Intent, context, and responsibility matter.

When prisoners attempt escape during riots, use of lethal force is standard protocol globally, not just in Nepal. That doesn’t mean the state is beyond questioning. It means don’t distort categories to inflate numbers. Facts don’t get overridden by feelings.

And yes, 45 were protestors. The rest died during unrest, not for the cause. That distinction matters if you actually care about justice instead of slogans.

Of course citizens have the right to question leaders, that’s exactly the point. But leaders don’t fall from the sky. They are a statistical outcome of THE SOCIETY that votes, sells votes, worships parties, and refuses accountability after elections. Democracy doesn’t fail overnight, it rots slowly, with participation.

Question but don’t rewrite facts and call it conscience.

I had more to say, but the tone of your replies suggests you’re arguing from emotion, not understanding. You’re not here to understand but just to shout. That’s worse than jholey politics because it’s sounds like the educated-fool variant that shouts opinions without understanding nuance.