If a burglar breaks in and terrorizes granny into a heart attack, should he get a free pass on that? His felony caused her death directly.
That guy is not the person being discussed. The subject is his accomplice waiting in the car, who thought the house was empty. Is he guilty of murder as well?
They want to get rid of s*** like AK-47s and other such weapons of mass murder
The thing is, the mass shootings with scary rifles get the headlines, but most gun deaths are from handguns. Any gun violence plan that doesn't deal with the handguns that are already out there is somewhere between window dressing and falling short of the mark.
The entirety of the loony right will have to invent fictions on how this is just another dirty trick of the left to try to cheat Trump out of that which is rightfully his.
I'd still argue that getting banned for a few days for nothing is far worse outcome than having to click a button to hide posts you don't like.
By that time, you've already seen the post. So whatever you didn't want to experience by seeing it, you've already experienced. Hiding it after the fact is slightly better than nothing, but it's not much.
Yes, I think that is an error. From the FIRE letter:
"While Emerson is a private institution not bound by the First Amendment, it must honor its Statement on Freedom of Expression..."
Not clear what is meant by "must". Morally? Legally? Practically? I have not heard of such documents being legally binding but maybe they are. I don't think there's a lawsuit involved, just letters, so my guess is they haven't done anything illegal and are just being accused of hypocrisy.
He can read fine, you're just astonishingly dumb, if you actually believe the things you type. I know it's not your fault but you could choose to keep it to yourself.
"Concluding from this analysis that vaccines are useless is misleading and inaccurate. Rather, the analysis supports vaccination as an important strategy for reducing infection and transmission, along with handwashing, mask-wearing, proper ventilation and physical distancing."
This is not a case of the Streisand Effect. That's where someone's objection to something they want to keep secret draws more attention to the thing. There's nothing not public going on here.
Lame duck has a very particular meaning in US politics. A lame duck president is one who is serving out the remainder of his term after an election he or she has just lost. So Carter was only a lame duck president for the last few weeks of his administration.
For has horrible as they claim the protestors might have been, they seem to be completely unaware of the documented actual bad things the other side has engaged in for a very long time.
I think you're mischaracterizing / oversimplifying the city's position. They're not saying St. Michael's can't have their rally because they're bad people who have done bad things, therefore the number and degree of bad things other people have done is irrelevant. The city's claim is that the speakers St. Michael's is inviting have a history of inciting violence. Or possibly because they anticipate violent counter protestors. Or maybe both. I'm not saying they're right, I'm just saying they're not saying what you seem to be saying they were saying.
Arguing that the people speaking have called for violence in past events and and gotten it I could see as reasonable grounds to deny them a platform
That's prior restraint. I can't be denied the right to speak in public in perpetuity just because I've advocated for violence in the past. My opinion anyway, maybe the right to free speech is weaker than I would like to think.
I disagree; I could not have predicted much of the rambling word salad that escapes his mouth. For example:
You know, New York was very nice to you people last night, you know that, right? Did they hand you that game? They handed it! I said, I am going to have the friendliest audience -- sit down -- I am going to have the friendliest audience. So I wasn't sure, was I happy or was I sad? But Jerry Jones is a great guy, and he deserves everything he gets, frankly. And you know, another great guy is Mark Cuban. And I think, you know, he's been talking about maybe doing this himself. And I think he'd do a great job. We don't have the exact same feelings about where we're going, but that's okay. But Mark was great. You know, he called me, like, literally a few days ago, and he said, "You know, if you want to use the arena" -- which by the way is a beautiful arena, this a great arena -- and Dirk is a fantastic player, he's just a wonderful player -- and the Mavericks have been fantastic and it's just a great team -- but he said, "You know, if you want to use the arena." And I said, "Mark, when?" He said "How 'bout Monday night?" It's like, that was like in four days. And you had a big holiday in between. And he said, "They really like you in Dallas, they really like you in Texas, maybe you can get a lot of people." Because we were coming here, and we thought maybe we'd get a thousand people, but we never get a thousand anymore, it's always, like, the same thing. You know, we went to Alabama. We started off with a 500-person ballroom. And after about two minutes -- look at all these guys -- paparazzi, look at this we've got everybody here. We started off, by the way, with a 500-person ballroom, and after about two minutes the hotel called up begging for mercy. "We can't do it!" They were inundated, so we went to the convention center, and that was 10,000 and that was wiped out in about an hour. So we went to a stadium, we had 31,000 people, which is by far the largest, they say, like, ever, for an early primary, and that's probably true.
Even he could not have predicted he was going to say that.
Pravda was government propaganda. Trump is not part of the government anymore.
That just means the propaganda on Truth Social won't be from the US government. It doesn't rule out any other government. Not that I have one in mind or anything.
On the post: Judge Dumps Felony Manslaughter Charges Brought Against An Arrestee After A Deputy Ran Over Another Deputy
Re:
That guy is not the person being discussed. The subject is his accomplice waiting in the car, who thought the house was empty. Is he guilty of murder as well?
On the post: Chicago Court Gets Its Prior Restraint On, Tells Police Union Head To STFU About City's Vaccine Mandate
Re:
The thing is, the mass shootings with scary rifles get the headlines, but most gun deaths are from handguns. Any gun violence plan that doesn't deal with the handguns that are already out there is somewhere between window dressing and falling short of the mark.
On the post: Trump Given 30 Days To Have His Social Media Site Comply With Open Source License
Re:
It's right there in the name: copyleft.
On the post: Facebook AI Moderation Continues To Suck Because Moderation At Scale Is Impossible
Re: Re: Re:
By that time, you've already seen the post. So whatever you didn't want to experience by seeing it, you've already experienced. Hiding it after the fact is slightly better than nothing, but it's not much.
On the post: Massachusetts College Decides Criticizing The Chinese Government Is Hate Speech, Suspends Conservative Student Group
Re: Wait, what?
Yes, I think that is an error. From the FIRE letter:
"While Emerson is a private institution not bound by the First Amendment, it must honor its Statement on Freedom of Expression..."
Not clear what is meant by "must". Morally? Legally? Practically? I have not heard of such documents being legally binding but maybe they are. I don't think there's a lawsuit involved, just letters, so my guess is they haven't done anything illegal and are just being accused of hypocrisy.
On the post: Report: Client-Side Scanning Is An Insecure Nightmare Just Waiting To Be Exploited By Governments
Re: Client side?
That would be server side. This is software that runs on the phone (client side) scanning images and reporting any hits.
On the post: Hollywood Is Betting On Filtering Mandates, But Working Copyright Algorithms Simply Don't Exist
Re: Re:
He can read fine, you're just astonishingly dumb, if you actually believe the things you type. I know it's not your fault but you could choose to keep it to yourself.
On the post: Court Says City Of Baltimore's 'Heckler's Veto' Of An Anti-Catholic Rally Violates The First Amendment
Re: Re: Re:
In case you're actually interested in the answer to that question:
https://www.google.com/search?q=police+initiate+violence+at+protest
On the post: Chicago Court Gets Its Prior Restraint On, Tells Police Union Head To STFU About City's Vaccine Mandate
Re: Re: Re:
[study co-author] Subramanian told PolitiFact:
"Concluding from this analysis that vaccines are useless is misleading and inaccurate. Rather, the analysis supports vaccination as an important strategy for reducing infection and transmission, along with handwashing, mask-wearing, proper ventilation and physical distancing."
On the post: Court Says City Of Baltimore's 'Heckler's Veto' Of An Anti-Catholic Rally Violates The First Amendment
Re: Re: Re:
Oh, well you mostly gave examples of committing violence, rather than calling for it.
On the post: Chicago Court Gets Its Prior Restraint On, Tells Police Union Head To STFU About City's Vaccine Mandate
Re:
This is not a case of the Streisand Effect. That's where someone's objection to something they want to keep secret draws more attention to the thing. There's nothing not public going on here.
On the post: Chicago Court Gets Its Prior Restraint On, Tells Police Union Head To STFU About City's Vaccine Mandate
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Check the gravatars - he (/she) is that same idiot.
On the post: Trump Announces His Own Social Network, 'Truth Social,' Which Says It Can Kick Off Users For Any Reason (And Already Is)
Re: Re:
Lame duck has a very particular meaning in US politics. A lame duck president is one who is serving out the remainder of his term after an election he or she has just lost. So Carter was only a lame duck president for the last few weeks of his administration.
On the post: Trump Announces His Own Social Network, 'Truth Social,' Which Says It Can Kick Off Users For Any Reason (And Already Is)
Re: Re: Re:
How??
On the post: Court Says City Of Baltimore's 'Heckler's Veto' Of An Anti-Catholic Rally Violates The First Amendment
Re:
I think you're mischaracterizing / oversimplifying the city's position. They're not saying St. Michael's can't have their rally because they're bad people who have done bad things, therefore the number and degree of bad things other people have done is irrelevant. The city's claim is that the speakers St. Michael's is inviting have a history of inciting violence. Or possibly because they anticipate violent counter protestors. Or maybe both. I'm not saying they're right, I'm just saying they're not saying what you seem to be saying they were saying.
On the post: Court Says City Of Baltimore's 'Heckler's Veto' Of An Anti-Catholic Rally Violates The First Amendment
Re:
That's prior restraint. I can't be denied the right to speak in public in perpetuity just because I've advocated for violence in the past. My opinion anyway, maybe the right to free speech is weaker than I would like to think.
On the post: Chicago Court Gets Its Prior Restraint On, Tells Police Union Head To STFU About City's Vaccine Mandate
Re: Re: Re: Re:
That's people who get sick despite being vaccinated, not people infected by the vaccine.
On the post: Trump Announces His Own Social Network, 'Truth Social,' Which Says It Can Kick Off Users For Any Reason (And Already Is)
Re: Re: Re:
True, the broad strokes are predictable.
On the post: Trump Announces His Own Social Network, 'Truth Social,' Which Says It Can Kick Off Users For Any Reason (And Already Is)
Re:
I disagree; I could not have predicted much of the rambling word salad that escapes his mouth. For example:
Even he could not have predicted he was going to say that.
On the post: Trump Announces His Own Social Network, 'Truth Social,' Which Says It Can Kick Off Users For Any Reason (And Already Is)
Re: Re: Translation
That just means the propaganda on Truth Social won't be from the US government. It doesn't rule out any other government. Not that I have one in mind or anything.
Next >>