In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: insult and non-insult. Insult is any lanugage or act that is disrespectful or scornfully abusive.

[Q]: Comment: As much as everyone here would like to believe that, his argument is there was no legal probable cause to justify the search warrant in the first place. To use an analogy, what if I were to go to the police and say, "I saw justmyview371 kill Allie, and hid her body in his spare bedroom." Would my outright lie be probable cause enough for a judge to issue a search warrant and, consequently, for the cops to force their way into your house and tear up your home?

Likewise, if the evidence against this guy was wrongfully procured, then any subsequent action resulting from that evidence would be invalid. The Protestants that founded this country built into the Constitution in order to protect our rights against actions that their former English government wrongfully used against their own people.

The prosecutors bungled this case. They should have known their video evidence was wrongfully procured (if that was indeed the case), then procured alternate evidence with which to prosecute.
[A]: Non-insult


[Q]: Comment: If you've ever shot anyone you would know that it's not easy and the first time is generally worse. I don't care that the attacker got shot, just that someone had to pull the trigger.
[A]: Non-insult


[Q]: Comment: What seems to be forgotten is the fact that it wasn't just "indigenous" people who suffered in the past.  Workhouses, poorhouses, deportation, enclosure, starvation, church run schools (with tremendous abuse), hanging for theft, sexual abuse, physical abuse, to name a few of the acts.  It, tragically, was the way it was, and in some cases is.
[A]:
Non-insult