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: That the victim 'deserved' killing is not a viable argument in Oregon.   

H. L Mencken's position regarding government officials does have some followers, though.

"I propose that it shall be no longer malum in se for a citizen to pummel, cowhide, kick, gouge, cut, wound, bruise, maim, burn, club, bastinado, flay, or even lynch a [government] jobholder, and that it shall be malum prohibitum only to the extent that the punishment exceeds the jobholder’s deserts. The amount of this excess, if any, may be determined very conveniently by a petit jury, as other questions of guilt are now determined."

"If it decides that the jobholder deserves the punishment inflicted upon him, the citizen who inflicted it is acquitted with honor."

There are governmental job and office holders.....
[A]: Non-insult


[Q]: Comment: Trump is so weak its sickening. That Australian transcript is hilarious and shows how ignorant trump really is.
[A]: Insult


[Q]: Comment: Your post just tells me that you still don't get it.  Of course celibacy has a lot to do with the sexual abuse crisis!  No wife of a priest who knew that another priest was abusing children would scream bloody murder both at her priest-husband and the local bishop...it would have ceased the moment it was identified.  Women would not have allowed the coverup from the beginning...many of the celibate male priest/bishops do not live in the real world as far as relationships are defined...and that includes the protection of children.  It may be unproven, but it is certainly likely and probably true.
[A]:
Non-insult