And I agree with what you are saying as veterans are in fact people. The point I was trying to make here is that it is too easy to just simply defer to the power or the convenience and as a result, at some point there is going to be push-back.
In WWII, the "push-back" resulted in millions of deaths and the toppling of a corrupt and sociopathic dictatorship. And all it took for that evil to rise to prominence in the first place was that good men did nothing which resulted in my grandfather's generation ultimately having to go to war.
I would rather see the warning be enough to change the course we are on rather than it degenerating into a wider fur-ball later on...
...It skews to far in the state's favor for getting a plea bargain on cases that would/should be dismissed or acquitted at trial and in so doing it makes the statute a very powerful tool in cases like this one for getting the civil suit against the state dismissed.
And as this is the most likely motivation for this type of prosecution tactic, the state should have to pay treble damages to the victim of this in the inevitable suit.
Also, the prosecutor and law enforcement personnel involved should be held criminally liable for harassment and serve time in jail for violating this man's constitutional rights.
My grandfather did not serve in WWII to have our country devolve into the very thing he and the rest of his generation fought against and where a great number of them died so that we could live in "freedom".
Then you add a second instrument, and you have X possiblities times X possiblities.
True, but the range of sounds that are acceptable to the majority of listeners and the fact that there are a limited number of arrangements that lead to a "hit" narrows down the choices considerably.
While you COULD fire up some Klingon Opera, it is highly unlikely to be popular...
Re: Americans rely on safe, affordable drug importation
Good cause and action taken - keep up the pressure and let's hope someone in Washington gets the message. Also, if you have a chance to confront your representatives and/or Senators before the next election, please make sure you get in their faces publicly about this...loudly.
...First off, the first amendment issue is for a court to decide. Illegal speech is not protected by the first amendment,...
Please explain to me where "illegal speech" has anything to do with this case? Last I checked, illegal speech was related to things such as bomb threats, "fighting" words, hate speech, etc.
Are you saying that a post with a link to some site somewhere that provides infringing streams is somehow a bomb threat? Really? Or perhaps induces hate speech or threatening someone's life?
Actually thought has little to do with the law outside of the act of penning the thing in the first place. The problem is with implementation, emotions, and the "needs" of the moment.
The way to correct the abuse is to make the penalties for abuse much greater than the penalties for violating the law. This would have the effect of chilling emotion and forcing a real cost/benefit analysis for potential overreach...
Someantimalwareguy (profile), 31 Aug 2011 @ 2:37pm
Re: I don't think so....
Those 5,000 jobs are simply low paying call center positions they would simply send back overseas once the dust settled and no one was paying attention. The 50,000 figure is the actual total number of jobs that would be eliminated through redundancies after the deal went through.
AT&T is simply trying to hide that fact by dangling the "jobs" carrot in front of the government who by now is no longer buying or drinking the cool-aide...
Someantimalwareguy (profile), 31 Aug 2011 @ 2:30pm
Re:
...Are they grasping as straws because I have never heard of this in the first place.
Yes, it is simply not true as T-Mob has been very profitable; not as profitable as the other majors, but still in the single digit billions.
The death of this merger will in fact give T-Mob/DT the resources they need to effectively compete and gain ground due in large part to the spectrum AT&T will have to give them along with the 3 billion in cash. This is going to make the market stronger and will drive down costs to consumers while forcing the majors to compete aggressively to retain their subs.
Someantimalwareguy (profile), 31 Aug 2011 @ 8:50am
Re: Re: Re:
And if his 27% (or whatever) is $47,000,000 then he'll be paying a lot more than 37% of his cleaning lady's $36,000 a year (or whatever, the numbers were made up to make a point).
So you are saying that those who make the least should pay a higher percentage of their overall income in taxes eh? Absolute numbers are deceptive and a 1% increase in taxation for those at the top is not felt at all while those at the middle or bottom of the pecking order could be placed in a position where they have to make a decision about whether to pay for rent this month or for their medications to keep them healthy...
Nice - running for Marquis de Sade or just shillin' for LULZ?
Someantimalwareguy (profile), 31 Aug 2011 @ 8:39am
Re: Not going to happen
One Congress Critter wanting something does not mean that the other 434 Representatives are suddenly going to say "You know, that John Conyers is right.
It depends on two things really:
1. How badly Conyers wants this to happen AND,
2. How badly the other 434 want something else that can be negotiated
Given these criteria and some good old fashioned horsetrading in the back room and you might see something happen here. The key is in how many others also will sign on to this and what they have to offer in trade to those still on the fence or opposing it when the meeting is held in said back room.
Never underestimate the power of a good negotiation to get things through, regardless of public rhetoric or campaign promises to the contrary.
legislating is not called sausage making without reason or precedent...
Someantimalwareguy (profile), 31 Aug 2011 @ 8:22am
Re: Re:
The only legitimate action is one where certain types of comm are blocked, but not all to avoid the usual "hey did you feel that?" or other unnecessary calls during a natural disaster or emergency situation so that rescue and first responders are not hampered in their duties or response times. In other words, directly related to public safety and protecting human lives.
Other than this, there is no reason to prevent anyone from exercising their first amendment rights to free speech. Though some would try to argue otherwise, it is one of the most important cornerstones to our way of life and is at the heart of our republic. To argue otherwise is to reveal yourself as un-American period.
On the post: DOOM No Longer Considered Harmful To Children In Germany, Allowed Into The Country
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Man Facing 75 Years In Jail For Recording The Police; Illinois Assistant AG Says No Right To Record Police
Re: Re: Re: Re:
In WWII, the "push-back" resulted in millions of deaths and the toppling of a corrupt and sociopathic dictatorship. And all it took for that evil to rise to prominence in the first place was that good men did nothing which resulted in my grandfather's generation ultimately having to go to war.
I would rather see the warning be enough to change the course we are on rather than it degenerating into a wider fur-ball later on...
On the post: Gibson CEO: US Government Won't Even Tell Us What Law They Think We've Violated
Re:
On the post: Man Facing 75 Years In Jail For Recording The Police; Illinois Assistant AG Says No Right To Record Police
Re:
unintended consequences indeed....
On the post: Man Facing 75 Years In Jail For Recording The Police; Illinois Assistant AG Says No Right To Record Police
Re: Re:
Also, the prosecutor and law enforcement personnel involved should be held criminally liable for harassment and serve time in jail for violating this man's constitutional rights.
My grandfather did not serve in WWII to have our country devolve into the very thing he and the rest of his generation fought against and where a great number of them died so that we could live in "freedom".
JMHO
On the post: Big Time Music Producer Sues Artists For Defamation For Suggesting He Copies Their Songs
Re:
While you COULD fire up some Klingon Opera, it is highly unlikely to be popular...
On the post: Puerto 80 Appeals: Asks Court To Recognize That Trampling The First Amendment Is Substantial Harm
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Freedom+of+Speech
On the post: Canadian Pharmacies React To US Gov't Taking $500 Million From Google Over Their Ads
Re: Americans rely on safe, affordable drug importation
On the post: Puerto 80 Appeals: Asks Court To Recognize That Trampling The First Amendment Is Substantial Harm
Re: Re: Re:
Are you saying that a post with a link to some site somewhere that provides infringing streams is somehow a bomb threat? Really? Or perhaps induces hate speech or threatening someone's life?
On the post: ISP Sued For Revealing Info On US-Based Critic Of Thai Laws
Re:
The way to correct the abuse is to make the penalties for abuse much greater than the penalties for violating the law. This would have the effect of chilling emotion and forcing a real cost/benefit analysis for potential overreach...
On the post: Surprise: Justice Department Says AT&T/T-Mobile Merger Would Be Anticompetitive
Re: I don't think so....
AT&T is simply trying to hide that fact by dangling the "jobs" carrot in front of the government who by now is no longer buying or drinking the cool-aide...
On the post: Surprise: Justice Department Says AT&T/T-Mobile Merger Would Be Anticompetitive
Re:
The death of this merger will in fact give T-Mob/DT the resources they need to effectively compete and gain ground due in large part to the spectrum AT&T will have to give them along with the 3 billion in cash. This is going to make the market stronger and will drive down costs to consumers while forcing the majors to compete aggressively to retain their subs.
It's a win for all except AT&T...
On the post: Rep. Conyers Wants To Clarify Termination Rights Under Copyright Law
Re: Re: Re:
Nice - running for Marquis de Sade or just shillin' for LULZ?
On the post: Rep. Conyers Wants To Clarify Termination Rights Under Copyright Law
Re: Not going to happen
1. How badly Conyers wants this to happen AND,
2. How badly the other 434 want something else that can be negotiated
Given these criteria and some good old fashioned horsetrading in the back room and you might see something happen here. The key is in how many others also will sign on to this and what they have to offer in trade to those still on the fence or opposing it when the meeting is held in said back room.
Never underestimate the power of a good negotiation to get things through, regardless of public rhetoric or campaign promises to the contrary.
legislating is not called sausage making without reason or precedent...
On the post: FCC Asked For Declaratory Ruling That BART Shutting Off Mobile Phone Service Was Illegal
Re: Re:
Other than this, there is no reason to prevent anyone from exercising their first amendment rights to free speech. Though some would try to argue otherwise, it is one of the most important cornerstones to our way of life and is at the heart of our republic. To argue otherwise is to reveal yourself as un-American period.
Next >>