Not exactly. I'm saying that he is exploiting the "horror" of death to further a narrative. If death is so horrible that we should notate it, then all deaths should be equal. What makes one death worse than any other regardless of cause? Is it worse that a 2 year old died than a 90 year old? Why does the cause of death matter? And more to the point, does anybody really care if its somebody they don't have any connection to? A million people die everyday, and none of them really matter to you unless you know them, so why focus on 1 out of that million?
So I think it's tricky. At the individual level of course one death isn't more horrible than another and I think that's something most reasonable people would agree with. Now take it a step further. Are there certain deaths that harm society at large more than others?
The state has a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence. We the people grant the state that. If that contract is broken and that power is misused then we cannot have a functioning and healthy society.
The same can be said with a social contract at the individual level right? The difference here is that most seem to agree we have a justice system that tends to be fair more often than not (although I'm sure many some argue against that)
So in the case where the state abuses its power and is not held accountable to the same degree of the citizen then we will have a system that will not stand the test of time. So that's where I think a very good argument can be made at highlighting certain things but that's only if the narrative is true.
Forget death, what ab other crime? I can't get behind the idea that your neighbor stealing your call = the state stealing your car if the state is allowed to get away with it more frequently.
To be clear, I'm making no claim as to the veracity of the narrative, just stating how I think it could be viewed should the narrative actually be correct. If the narrative is bullshit then yea...
As far as your other argument ab not actually caring about death unless it's someone you know, well.... not sure I'm on board with that. I guess you need to define "care" a bit more. I mean obviously there's only so much capacity a person has to give outwardly (monetarily, time, emotion etc) but I don't think it's hard to argue that some actually do care more than others.