Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 9 Dec 2021 @ 1:13am
Re:
"But, but, but aren't creators also copyright holders?"
Well, yeah, but unless you have the spare resources to dispute false claims on the content you've created and uploaded the proper classification would be "powerless victim".
A large copyright holder like Nintendo has the spare cash to wipe out a disproportionate amount of less affluent creators just by deploying a copyright troll company with automated takedown claim bots.
Those who can't afford this will be left spending hours daily to dispute one insane and unwarranted claim after another. Because under the DMCA burden of proof is effectively reversed. Youtube can't risk any takedown claim being unwarranted - and of course the copyright holders abusing the system know this.
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 9 Dec 2021 @ 12:44am
Re: Elon is right about everything
"Elon has a vision and needs to make progress towards it now and not in 20 years time. Sure, things will need to be tweeked, but that vision needs to be implemented."
The issue being that Elon cutting corners on safety means that vision comes at the cost of investments - and possibly lives - which weren't volunteered for that purpose.
"Elons software as is everyone else's"
It really isn't. Software which may endanger lives is not to be issued in beta version.
At the end of the day if the result of the means is casualties the end goal is ruined. This is how you turn a laudable vision into a failed pie-in-the-sky project. By using means which result in the end goal never being reached.
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 8 Dec 2021 @ 7:38am
Re: Re: Re: Re: Totally without merit
"And since they use the same rhetoric you do, I consider that they are worth mentioning in my response to you."
There's a bit of a difference. No, guns do not, in fact, kill people.
In the US the issue with that assertion is that usually it's tossed out by a 2nd amendment fanatic as the irrelevant response to proposals of gun restrictions.
Do note that Lostinlodos has repeatedly asserted to be in favor of regulation and restriction.
No, guns do not kill people. People kill people. Thus people likely to kill people should not have guns. THIS is the proper response to a 2nd amendment fanatic trying to use a correct but irrelevant assertion to answer to a call for gun control.
"Overall though, legislative action needs to be taken to address the problem of guns in general."
This runs into the prohibition scenario; As long as a large portion of americans have the craving for firearms no law will be effective. In order to get to, say, where Switzerland is you first need to get the citizenry into the same mental state as the population of Switzerland.
If you want the guns gone you'll first need to fix the state of affairs which has so very many people believing the gun is absolutely necessary for them. In the US the lower-income classes are utterly bereft of hope with crime and violence being the one way for many to survive. The middle class fears the lower-income class because they've got just enough money to be interesting to a burglar and just too little to afford living in a gated community guarded by rent-a-cops.
The answer to that is to turn the USA into a social democratic welfare state - like Germany, France or Sweden. With upwards mobility, opportunity and hope offered the lower income classes violence will become less prevalent a solution - and that in turn removes a lot of fear from the middle income classes. At THAT point and not before, will you have ANY shot at implementing effective gun regulation.
This will be a tough sell in the country of Fuck You, Got Mine.
As impossible as that may seem though, it's not anywhere near as hard as even the most minor gun restriction will be to impose on the US of today.
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 8 Dec 2021 @ 6:34am
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Totally without merit
"But rock salt will, and has, drive off wolves. With what would generally be non lethal shot. "
Wolves tend to be smart and skittish. I can't say the same for desperate, high or berserking humans, which is why you need something which doesn't rely on a warning or mere pain to take them down. The taser or a net gun is basically it.
"I also thing schools need to go back to shock and awe gonzo videos for education. Not just for firearms but all aspects of education. "
In this, I agree. I'm all for parents standing by their spawn come hell or high water...but not when it comes to teaching said spawn convenient lies rather than the stark, unvarnished truth.
"And I partly attribute gun violence today to the lack of such education when combined with Hollywood and Batman and other bang bang bad guy gets up tv. "
Partly. Hollywood, comics, any form of entertainment where the hero downs a dozen bullets in one sitting and still goes strong or can Rambo their way through a firefight calmly bursting down the poor well-armed scrubs just graduated from the Imperial Stormtrooper Marksmanship Academy.
It surely doesn't help that the NRA and right-wing militias and NGO's then swamp them with the myth of the gun tied to the myth of the american heartland, heroism, truth, justice and mom's apple pie.
Rittenhouse is one textbook example there. I think the guy's an asshole and murderer or not his actions needlessly cost lives. But he was made into what he is. And now his future is cast as the living mascot of a pretty damn deplorable crowd.
Still, he's alive which is more than can be said for every needless death caused by those 12 year old kids you mention playing cops and robbers with dad's unsecured guns or the 13 year old who got handed a firearm by the "cool kids" and told here's his chance to start being a real man.
"And that more than anything should be the most deeply saddening aspect of this country. How in 40 years we went from education to failure. "
Bit longer than that, really. The systemic rot may have started with Nixon and Goldwater's southern strategy and the republican party embracing anti-science rhetoric...but magical thinking has been a part of the US cultural identity since the pioneer days when snake oil salesmen were grifting their way into the hearts and minds of pioneers and P.T. Barnum charmed the socks out of his victims.
"But the goal should be getting the hand guns from the 12yr old kids. The semi-autos out of the hands of abused teens. And all weapons from people who are too unstable to use them. Train how to use it AND train on the end results."
I like to quote Beau of the fifth column at points like this. To change society you don't change laws. You change thought.
Like it or not, contemporary US is in love with the idea that even the loosest cannon should have a cannon. Before trying to take the guns away from people who so desperately feel they need them you need to remove the perception of that need.
Fix the education system. Fix law enforcement. Fix social security. Stop making society an ultracompetitive pressure cooker producing hard-nosed psychos and broken paranoid people.
And to do that you need to go back to FDR. And that's going to be a very tough sell by now, because the US of today is the nation of "No we can't" where people will talk a lot of bullshit on how public healthcare and sensible welfare mechanics will condemn the nation without even looking at the parts of the world where all of that works out just fine.
Once you have people who aren't constantly under social and fiscal pressure you can start dealing with the tendency to view violence as a problem solver. After that you'll have the political leverage to regulate firearms.
You can't do it the other way around, same as you can't build a house from the roof down.
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 8 Dec 2021 @ 5:57am
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ultimate Test
It's not, no. Koby knows better than to answer it and instead chooses to gaslight.
I guess his new tactic is to double down and derail rather than just vanish. Won't change much as we've all seen this playbook before around these parts.
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 8 Dec 2021 @ 5:55am
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ultimate Test
"Still isn't grounds for censoring any and all support of others."
The only one who gets to choose what defines grounds for censoring is the owner of the property where that party took place.
If a bunch of Proud Boys want to show up and celebrate Rittenhouse "owning the libs" - shooting a mentally ill person, one person defending his girl, and the paramedic who tried to stop it - then I think I'm entitled to toss those people out of my house. And so is the owner of a social media platform.
What planet do you live on, Koby, where the owner of property can't evict someone from that property, based entirely on the property owner's opinion.
"But then you classify any difference of opinion as being such an egregious violation of some nonexistent rule that it requires content takedown. "
So all you've got is, once again, the statement that a property owner needs to justify tossing an unpleasant asshole out? Noted. Again.
"If you want to takedown speech and ban users, without appearing biased, then you've got to provide better reasoning than "maybe" with a complete reversal after the trial."
Why? Trial or not Rittenhouse remains an unpleasant asshole who shot three people needlessly.
Feel free to open your doors to the Proud Boys caroling over his release. I maintain that there's nothing strange at all for anyone with half a mind to keep denying them entry.
No, Koby, the fact that most people still think Rittenhouse is an ass and his new friends are all assholes is enough for any private enterprise engaged in hosting debates online to bar them entry. Few people want them around and thus they have no place where the majority gather. Because the majority does not want them anywhere near them.
That, incidentally, is how 1A's "right of association" works. You know, the one you keep trying to overturn.
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 8 Dec 2021 @ 5:20am
Re: This fuckwaffle
"Kentucky, more than most other states votes for people who are against our own self-interests every time we have a choice. It's maddening."
Except for North and South Carolina, Alabama, Mississippi, Arizona, Texas, Georgia, Tennessee and Florida, you mean?
It's not like you aren't in good company.
What really busts my chops, looking in from outside is that when politics is divided neatly into "The deranged" and "Everyone not stark raving mad" that doesn't provide high incentive for the democrats to any more than just "business as usual".
Which, sadly, appears to be to satisfy their campaign contributors.
A healthier body politic tends to consist of about half a dozen parties vying for power - and at that point it's not enough to just make the right noises, you have to deliver in order to remain competitive.
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 8 Dec 2021 @ 5:14am
Re: Re: Moving Target
Very hard to hit a goal you're actively aiming to miss is all I'm saying. Koby's spent most of his time here shilling for the alt-right view that a property owner shouldn't be allowed to evict asshole guests from their own property.
His view is that the Klansman is entitled to scream the N-word on Facebook, the nazi is entitled to proclaim their ideology in the bar...and, by the same logic, the creepy lech is entitled to the right to a woman's body.
Because having to treat people equally is a terrible infringement of the rights of the poor, poor bigots he keeps carrying water for.
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 8 Dec 2021 @ 5:05am
Re: Re: Re: Moving Target
"That's definitely not a public forum."
It is, by definition, if a government official is using it to present government information to the public.
"The government has never been required to let everyone into the event."
If they don't then it is, by definition, not a public forum. It would be a closed government function.
"And the government does kick out hecklers all the time. It may be an event, but there is no forum."
It is. You can be removed from the public space as well if you misbehave. I suggest you go read up on the laws pertaining to "public disturbance".
"If the a judge rules that it was a public forum, where you have to allow any citizens inside, and they can say anything they want, then it STILL is a public forum, right now."
The judge didn't rule that way. Both in the case of Trump and in the case of Thomas Massi the judge determined that their particular twitter feed was a public forum when used by the president and Massi. Not the rest of Twitter.
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 8 Dec 2021 @ 4:56am
Re: Moving Target
"In the past, it has been claimed that social media is not a public forum. Now, all of a sudden, it IS a public forum."
Koby, what part of 1A did you simply not understand?
Thomas Massie is a government official. He is not allowed to block people from partaking of his communications - they count as public, because they're governmental.
Much like the way Il Duce Arancia's twitter feed was judged a public forum when he was prez.
Do we have to tell you, once again, why government official is restricted by 1A but private citizen is not?
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 8 Dec 2021 @ 3:41am
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: consequences needed
"One egregious example: vaccines and autism. Someone suggesting this outside of a scientific article with proper evidence and methodology is spreading misinformation plain and simple. "
The problem being that the gibberish linking autism to vaccines was proposed in a scientific article created by a person with the proper credentials. It's just that said scientist was a crook manufacturing false evidence in the hope of making a lot of gainful work for his little side project.
"There's no space for doubt here..."
...under a government still relatively benevolent, sure. This is not a tool we want.
"...if some news outfit is reporting on it and not mentioning the articles linking vaccines and autism have been debunked thoroughly by the scientific community then they are open for enforcement."
Here's a better way; find some way to remove or dilute the sheer competitive leverage of clickbait. Educate people better and to higher standards.
Shit like this doesn't fly in Europe - or anywhere else, really. It takes a citizenry beholden to magical thinking, already steeped in the idea that science is a religion, before a nation can become held hostage to grift like we keep seeing in the US.
Legislative measures won't help. You need to change the fundamental mindset. Until americans én másse stop being gullible morons eager to fall for any good-sounding con affirming their personal articles of faith, there is no cure to be found.
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 8 Dec 2021 @ 3:03am
Re: Play Stupid Games, Win Stupid Prizes
"Sounds like the system is working as intended, then. A couple of guys committed some crimes and they're gonna have to pay the price for it."
A pair of trained law enforcement officers demonstrated neither of them had a clue what to do when they performed a hit-and-run vehicular homicide. Then asked for what amounts to help in disposing of the body while covering up their crime. And ended up driving around with the body stashed in the trunk of their car.
No, the system did not work as intended when it manages to hand the right to enforce the violence monopoly to morons of this caliber. The closest comparison I can envision would be the fire department indeed sending firefighters to the scene where one of their numbers stands gazing at a burning building with a silly grin and mumbling "The fire. It speaks to me" while holding an empty gas canister.
This is not a single acceptable mistake. It's a long string of incomprehensible decisions so outrageously dumb the worst cop parodies in comedy won't measure up to them.
"...how is this newsworthy here?"
The literal blog description might offer you a clue there;
the Techdirt blog relies on a proven economic framework to analyze and offer insight into news stories about changes in government policy, technology and legal issues that affect companies' ability to innovate and grow. As the impact of technological innovation on society, civil liberties and consumer rights has grown, Techdirt’s coverage has expanded to include these critical topics.
Techdirt's "About Us" blurb.
"And "hindering one's own apprehension"? Wouldn't that apply to literally every criminal?"
That and about a hundred other charges, probably, if the prosecutor feels mean that day, Loitering With Intent or Being Bloody Stupid.
The US practices a much higher degree of prosecutorial discretion than most other countries (common visavi civil law). Thus the standard US prosecution involves throwing the book at any suspect and then convince said suspect to fess up to what'll get them five to ten in the slammer rather than a total sum of about three lifetimes worth. From the pov of the prosecution this saves valuable court time since all they need to do is to file the accused's plea of nolo contendere to crimes A, B and C.
From the pov of the suspect it usually means "not doing time until they're 80".
I always feel a certain cognitive dissonance when I, a european, know standard US prosecutorial conduct better than the average american. You really shouldn't have to ask that question.
One of the key issues with this aspect of common law is that it in practice means the prosecutor can almost invariably secure the condemnation of an innocent person by way of intimidation, without the case ever going to trial.
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 8 Dec 2021 @ 1:04am
"“(The suspects) returned to the scene multiple times before Santiago loaded the victim into the Honda and removed him from the scene,” [Essex County Prosecutor Theodore] Stephens said. “Santiago then took the body to his home in Bloomfield where he, his mother and Guzman allegedly discussed what to do with the body.”"
How could this sad sack of unadulterated moron even pass police training let alone remain an officer?
Or that's what I'd ask if similar deranged nonsense didn't come out of the US every week...
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 7 Dec 2021 @ 7:52am
Re: Re: Re: Re:
"The problem is fundamental to the premise: when you put someone in control of a system you necessarily enforce corruption of the system. The corruption doesn't become a possibility, it becomes a command as certain as gravity."
I am grieved indeed I have but one "like" to give for that insight.
Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 7 Dec 2021 @ 7:46am
Re:
"It is obviously a very sensitive issue but I'd argue we need media regulation. I mean, a huge outfit like NYT flat out lies (I'm not going to mention Fox because it's like mentioning water is wet) or distorts data and nothing happens."
Why?
We don't have this issue in most places in Europe, despite the US and us having more or less the same publishing laws in this regard.
Over in our neck of the woods when a newspaper gets caught lying - not just dropping their own pov, but deceiving - the readership tends to be quick on noticing, criticizing, and the other newspapers catch on to it quickly and the result is noticed in dropping subscription rates.
All you need is a well educated and highly critical readership unwilling to accept all their news from one and the same source and able to exercize critical thinking.
Oh, wait...this is america we're talking about. You in trouble, people...
"I'm not sure how regulations could be enacted without leaving openings to abuse but we should start discussing this to come with feasible ways."
It literally can not be done. And that's not for a lack of trying - various versions of regulating the press has been tried for millennia, ever since the first time some roman senator grew irate of the pundits gossiping about him in the forum romanum.
What you can do is make sure the population is less inclined to believe everything they read. And that's a tall order to make of a nation which is the eldorado of grift and conmanship, where magical thinking is on par with that of the aforementioned roman empire...
On the post: YouTube Copyright Transparency Report Shows The Absurd Volume Of Copyright Claims It Gets
Re:
"But, but, but aren't creators also copyright holders?"
Well, yeah, but unless you have the spare resources to dispute false claims on the content you've created and uploaded the proper classification would be "powerless victim".
A large copyright holder like Nintendo has the spare cash to wipe out a disproportionate amount of less affluent creators just by deploying a copyright troll company with automated takedown claim bots.
Those who can't afford this will be left spending hours daily to dispute one insane and unwarranted claim after another. Because under the DMCA burden of proof is effectively reversed. Youtube can't risk any takedown claim being unwarranted - and of course the copyright holders abusing the system know this.
On the post: Report Showcases How Elon Musk Undermined His Own Engineers And Endangered Public Safety
Re: Elon is right about everything
"Elon has a vision and needs to make progress towards it now and not in 20 years time. Sure, things will need to be tweeked, but that vision needs to be implemented."
The issue being that Elon cutting corners on safety means that vision comes at the cost of investments - and possibly lives - which weren't volunteered for that purpose.
"Elons software as is everyone else's"
It really isn't. Software which may endanger lives is not to be issued in beta version.
At the end of the day if the result of the means is casualties the end goal is ruined. This is how you turn a laudable vision into a failed pie-in-the-sky project. By using means which result in the end goal never being reached.
On the post: Federal Court Dismisses Another Negligence Suit Against Online Gun Marketplace Armslist But Says Section 230 Doesn't Protect It
Re: Re: Re: Re: Totally without merit
"And since they use the same rhetoric you do, I consider that they are worth mentioning in my response to you."
There's a bit of a difference. No, guns do not, in fact, kill people.
In the US the issue with that assertion is that usually it's tossed out by a 2nd amendment fanatic as the irrelevant response to proposals of gun restrictions.
Do note that Lostinlodos has repeatedly asserted to be in favor of regulation and restriction.
No, guns do not kill people. People kill people. Thus people likely to kill people should not have guns. THIS is the proper response to a 2nd amendment fanatic trying to use a correct but irrelevant assertion to answer to a call for gun control.
"Overall though, legislative action needs to be taken to address the problem of guns in general."
This runs into the prohibition scenario; As long as a large portion of americans have the craving for firearms no law will be effective. In order to get to, say, where Switzerland is you first need to get the citizenry into the same mental state as the population of Switzerland.
If you want the guns gone you'll first need to fix the state of affairs which has so very many people believing the gun is absolutely necessary for them. In the US the lower-income classes are utterly bereft of hope with crime and violence being the one way for many to survive. The middle class fears the lower-income class because they've got just enough money to be interesting to a burglar and just too little to afford living in a gated community guarded by rent-a-cops.
The answer to that is to turn the USA into a social democratic welfare state - like Germany, France or Sweden. With upwards mobility, opportunity and hope offered the lower income classes violence will become less prevalent a solution - and that in turn removes a lot of fear from the middle income classes. At THAT point and not before, will you have ANY shot at implementing effective gun regulation.
This will be a tough sell in the country of Fuck You, Got Mine.
As impossible as that may seem though, it's not anywhere near as hard as even the most minor gun restriction will be to impose on the US of today.
On the post: Federal Court Dismisses Another Negligence Suit Against Online Gun Marketplace Armslist But Says Section 230 Doesn't Protect It
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Totally without merit
"But rock salt will, and has, drive off wolves. With what would generally be non lethal shot. "
Wolves tend to be smart and skittish. I can't say the same for desperate, high or berserking humans, which is why you need something which doesn't rely on a warning or mere pain to take them down. The taser or a net gun is basically it.
"I also thing schools need to go back to shock and awe gonzo videos for education. Not just for firearms but all aspects of education. "
In this, I agree. I'm all for parents standing by their spawn come hell or high water...but not when it comes to teaching said spawn convenient lies rather than the stark, unvarnished truth.
"And I partly attribute gun violence today to the lack of such education when combined with Hollywood and Batman and other bang bang bad guy gets up tv. "
Partly. Hollywood, comics, any form of entertainment where the hero downs a dozen bullets in one sitting and still goes strong or can Rambo their way through a firefight calmly bursting down the poor well-armed scrubs just graduated from the Imperial Stormtrooper Marksmanship Academy.
It surely doesn't help that the NRA and right-wing militias and NGO's then swamp them with the myth of the gun tied to the myth of the american heartland, heroism, truth, justice and mom's apple pie.
Rittenhouse is one textbook example there. I think the guy's an asshole and murderer or not his actions needlessly cost lives. But he was made into what he is. And now his future is cast as the living mascot of a pretty damn deplorable crowd.
Still, he's alive which is more than can be said for every needless death caused by those 12 year old kids you mention playing cops and robbers with dad's unsecured guns or the 13 year old who got handed a firearm by the "cool kids" and told here's his chance to start being a real man.
"And that more than anything should be the most deeply saddening aspect of this country. How in 40 years we went from education to failure. "
Bit longer than that, really. The systemic rot may have started with Nixon and Goldwater's southern strategy and the republican party embracing anti-science rhetoric...but magical thinking has been a part of the US cultural identity since the pioneer days when snake oil salesmen were grifting their way into the hearts and minds of pioneers and P.T. Barnum charmed the socks out of his victims.
"But the goal should be getting the hand guns from the 12yr old kids. The semi-autos out of the hands of abused teens. And all weapons from people who are too unstable to use them. Train how to use it AND train on the end results."
I like to quote Beau of the fifth column at points like this. To change society you don't change laws. You change thought.
Like it or not, contemporary US is in love with the idea that even the loosest cannon should have a cannon. Before trying to take the guns away from people who so desperately feel they need them you need to remove the perception of that need.
Fix the education system. Fix law enforcement. Fix social security. Stop making society an ultracompetitive pressure cooker producing hard-nosed psychos and broken paranoid people.
And to do that you need to go back to FDR. And that's going to be a very tough sell by now, because the US of today is the nation of "No we can't" where people will talk a lot of bullshit on how public healthcare and sensible welfare mechanics will condemn the nation without even looking at the parts of the world where all of that works out just fine.
Once you have people who aren't constantly under social and fiscal pressure you can start dealing with the tendency to view violence as a problem solver. After that you'll have the political leverage to regulate firearms.
You can't do it the other way around, same as you can't build a house from the roof down.
On the post: GOP Claim That Biden FCC Nom Gigi Sohn Wants To 'Censor Conservatives' Is AT&T & Rupert Murdoch Backed Gibberish
Re: Re: "conservative"
The difference being that the "anti-americanism" of liberals tends to be over their nation no longer being a place they can be proud of.
Whereas the alt-right celebrates he erosion of everything the nation ostensibly stood for.
On the post: Twitter Admits It Messed Up In Suspending Accounts Under Its New Policy, But Policies Like This Will ALWAYS Lead To Overblocking
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ultimate Test
It's not, no. Koby knows better than to answer it and instead chooses to gaslight.
I guess his new tactic is to double down and derail rather than just vanish. Won't change much as we've all seen this playbook before around these parts.
On the post: Twitter Admits It Messed Up In Suspending Accounts Under Its New Policy, But Policies Like This Will ALWAYS Lead To Overblocking
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ultimate Test
"Still isn't grounds for censoring any and all support of others."
The only one who gets to choose what defines grounds for censoring is the owner of the property where that party took place.
If a bunch of Proud Boys want to show up and celebrate Rittenhouse "owning the libs" - shooting a mentally ill person, one person defending his girl, and the paramedic who tried to stop it - then I think I'm entitled to toss those people out of my house. And so is the owner of a social media platform.
What planet do you live on, Koby, where the owner of property can't evict someone from that property, based entirely on the property owner's opinion.
"But then you classify any difference of opinion as being such an egregious violation of some nonexistent rule that it requires content takedown. "
So all you've got is, once again, the statement that a property owner needs to justify tossing an unpleasant asshole out? Noted. Again.
"If you want to takedown speech and ban users, without appearing biased, then you've got to provide better reasoning than "maybe" with a complete reversal after the trial."
Why? Trial or not Rittenhouse remains an unpleasant asshole who shot three people needlessly.
Feel free to open your doors to the Proud Boys caroling over his release. I maintain that there's nothing strange at all for anyone with half a mind to keep denying them entry.
No, Koby, the fact that most people still think Rittenhouse is an ass and his new friends are all assholes is enough for any private enterprise engaged in hosting debates online to bar them entry. Few people want them around and thus they have no place where the majority gather. Because the majority does not want them anywhere near them.
That, incidentally, is how 1A's "right of association" works. You know, the one you keep trying to overturn.
On the post: Sidney Powell's Michigan Election Fraud LOLsuit Just Cost Her And Her Buddies $175,000 In Legal Fees
Re: Re:
"Admittedly that's more than most billionaires pay in taxes, but that's still a really good return on investment for Powell, et al."
Who says crime doesn't pay?
Trump built his whole career on grift and fraud. And became president to top it off. Now he's credibly shooting for a dictatorship.
It's not a wonder he inspired copycats.
On the post: Rep. Thomas Massie Seems To Have Skipped Over The 1st Amendment In His Rush To 'Defend' The 2nd
Re: This fuckwaffle
"Kentucky, more than most other states votes for people who are against our own self-interests every time we have a choice. It's maddening."
Except for North and South Carolina, Alabama, Mississippi, Arizona, Texas, Georgia, Tennessee and Florida, you mean?
It's not like you aren't in good company.
What really busts my chops, looking in from outside is that when politics is divided neatly into "The deranged" and "Everyone not stark raving mad" that doesn't provide high incentive for the democrats to any more than just "business as usual".
Which, sadly, appears to be to satisfy their campaign contributors.
A healthier body politic tends to consist of about half a dozen parties vying for power - and at that point it's not enough to just make the right noises, you have to deliver in order to remain competitive.
On the post: Rep. Thomas Massie Seems To Have Skipped Over The 1st Amendment In His Rush To 'Defend' The 2nd
Re: Re: Moving Target
Very hard to hit a goal you're actively aiming to miss is all I'm saying. Koby's spent most of his time here shilling for the alt-right view that a property owner shouldn't be allowed to evict asshole guests from their own property.
His view is that the Klansman is entitled to scream the N-word on Facebook, the nazi is entitled to proclaim their ideology in the bar...and, by the same logic, the creepy lech is entitled to the right to a woman's body.
Because having to treat people equally is a terrible infringement of the rights of the poor, poor bigots he keeps carrying water for.
On the post: Rep. Thomas Massie Seems To Have Skipped Over The 1st Amendment In His Rush To 'Defend' The 2nd
Re: Re: Re: Moving Target
"That's definitely not a public forum."
It is, by definition, if a government official is using it to present government information to the public.
"The government has never been required to let everyone into the event."
If they don't then it is, by definition, not a public forum. It would be a closed government function.
"And the government does kick out hecklers all the time. It may be an event, but there is no forum."
It is. You can be removed from the public space as well if you misbehave. I suggest you go read up on the laws pertaining to "public disturbance".
"If the a judge rules that it was a public forum, where you have to allow any citizens inside, and they can say anything they want, then it STILL is a public forum, right now."
The judge didn't rule that way. Both in the case of Trump and in the case of Thomas Massi the judge determined that their particular twitter feed was a public forum when used by the president and Massi. Not the rest of Twitter.
But you knew that, Koby.
On the post: Rep. Thomas Massie Seems To Have Skipped Over The 1st Amendment In His Rush To 'Defend' The 2nd
Re: Moving Target
"In the past, it has been claimed that social media is not a public forum. Now, all of a sudden, it IS a public forum."
Koby, what part of 1A did you simply not understand?
Thomas Massie is a government official. He is not allowed to block people from partaking of his communications - they count as public, because they're governmental.
Much like the way Il Duce Arancia's twitter feed was judged a public forum when he was prez.
Do we have to tell you, once again, why government official is restricted by 1A but private citizen is not?
On the post: Rep. Thomas Massie Seems To Have Skipped Over The 1st Amendment In His Rush To 'Defend' The 2nd
Re: Re: Re: Re:
"So please tell me, what 'shithole' country do you live in where you need an arsenal of weapons just to feel "safe" from the world?"
Well, if the 2nd amendment crowd is to be believed, the US would be that shithole of a country.
On the post: New York Times Lies About City's Murder Rate, NYPD's Clearance Rate To Sell Fear To Its Readers
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: consequences needed
"One egregious example: vaccines and autism. Someone suggesting this outside of a scientific article with proper evidence and methodology is spreading misinformation plain and simple. "
The problem being that the gibberish linking autism to vaccines was proposed in a scientific article created by a person with the proper credentials. It's just that said scientist was a crook manufacturing false evidence in the hope of making a lot of gainful work for his little side project.
"There's no space for doubt here..."
...under a government still relatively benevolent, sure. This is not a tool we want.
"...if some news outfit is reporting on it and not mentioning the articles linking vaccines and autism have been debunked thoroughly by the scientific community then they are open for enforcement."
Here's a better way; find some way to remove or dilute the sheer competitive leverage of clickbait. Educate people better and to higher standards.
Shit like this doesn't fly in Europe - or anywhere else, really. It takes a citizenry beholden to magical thinking, already steeped in the idea that science is a religion, before a nation can become held hostage to grift like we keep seeing in the US.
Legislative measures won't help. You need to change the fundamental mindset. Until americans én másse stop being gullible morons eager to fall for any good-sounding con affirming their personal articles of faith, there is no cure to be found.
On the post: New Jersey Cop Facing Charges After Hitting A Man With His Car And Driving His Body To His Mom's House
Re: Play Stupid Games, Win Stupid Prizes
"Sounds like the system is working as intended, then. A couple of guys committed some crimes and they're gonna have to pay the price for it."
A pair of trained law enforcement officers demonstrated neither of them had a clue what to do when they performed a hit-and-run vehicular homicide. Then asked for what amounts to help in disposing of the body while covering up their crime. And ended up driving around with the body stashed in the trunk of their car.
No, the system did not work as intended when it manages to hand the right to enforce the violence monopoly to morons of this caliber. The closest comparison I can envision would be the fire department indeed sending firefighters to the scene where one of their numbers stands gazing at a burning building with a silly grin and mumbling "The fire. It speaks to me" while holding an empty gas canister.
This is not a single acceptable mistake. It's a long string of incomprehensible decisions so outrageously dumb the worst cop parodies in comedy won't measure up to them.
"...how is this newsworthy here?"
The literal blog description might offer you a clue there;
"And "hindering one's own apprehension"? Wouldn't that apply to literally every criminal?"
That and about a hundred other charges, probably, if the prosecutor feels mean that day, Loitering With Intent or Being Bloody Stupid.
The US practices a much higher degree of prosecutorial discretion than most other countries (common visavi civil law). Thus the standard US prosecution involves throwing the book at any suspect and then convince said suspect to fess up to what'll get them five to ten in the slammer rather than a total sum of about three lifetimes worth. From the pov of the prosecution this saves valuable court time since all they need to do is to file the accused's plea of nolo contendere to crimes A, B and C.
From the pov of the suspect it usually means "not doing time until they're 80".
I always feel a certain cognitive dissonance when I, a european, know standard US prosecutorial conduct better than the average american. You really shouldn't have to ask that question.
One of the key issues with this aspect of common law is that it in practice means the prosecutor can almost invariably secure the condemnation of an innocent person by way of intimidation, without the case ever going to trial.
On the post: New Jersey Cop Facing Charges After Hitting A Man With His Car And Driving His Body To His Mom's House
"“(The suspects) returned to the scene multiple times before Santiago loaded the victim into the Honda and removed him from the scene,” [Essex County Prosecutor Theodore] Stephens said. “Santiago then took the body to his home in Bloomfield where he, his mother and Guzman allegedly discussed what to do with the body.”"
How could this sad sack of unadulterated moron even pass police training let alone remain an officer?
Or that's what I'd ask if similar deranged nonsense didn't come out of the US every week...
On the post: New York Times Lies About City's Murder Rate, NYPD's Clearance Rate To Sell Fear To Its Readers
Re: Re: Re: Re:
"The problem is fundamental to the premise: when you put someone in control of a system you necessarily enforce corruption of the system. The corruption doesn't become a possibility, it becomes a command as certain as gravity."
I am grieved indeed I have but one "like" to give for that insight.
On the post: New York Times Lies About City's Murder Rate, NYPD's Clearance Rate To Sell Fear To Its Readers
Re:
Causation isn't correlation. Yet the US in particular seems fertile soil for any grifter able and willing to sell someone a bridge. Always has been.
P.T. Barnum owes much of his success to the willingness to fall for a grift seeming to be an intrinsic part of the american cultural identity.
On the post: New York Times Lies About City's Murder Rate, NYPD's Clearance Rate To Sell Fear To Its Readers
Re:
"It is obviously a very sensitive issue but I'd argue we need media regulation. I mean, a huge outfit like NYT flat out lies (I'm not going to mention Fox because it's like mentioning water is wet) or distorts data and nothing happens."
Why?
We don't have this issue in most places in Europe, despite the US and us having more or less the same publishing laws in this regard.
Over in our neck of the woods when a newspaper gets caught lying - not just dropping their own pov, but deceiving - the readership tends to be quick on noticing, criticizing, and the other newspapers catch on to it quickly and the result is noticed in dropping subscription rates.
All you need is a well educated and highly critical readership unwilling to accept all their news from one and the same source and able to exercize critical thinking.
Oh, wait...this is america we're talking about. You in trouble, people...
"I'm not sure how regulations could be enacted without leaving openings to abuse but we should start discussing this to come with feasible ways."
It literally can not be done. And that's not for a lack of trying - various versions of regulating the press has been tried for millennia, ever since the first time some roman senator grew irate of the pundits gossiping about him in the forum romanum.
What you can do is make sure the population is less inclined to believe everything they read. And that's a tall order to make of a nation which is the eldorado of grift and conmanship, where magical thinking is on par with that of the aforementioned roman empire...
On the post: Devin Nunes Retires From Congress To Spend More Time Banning Satirical Cows From Trump's New Social Network
Re: A Professional Manure Superspreader
I think Mr. Nunes's cow left something other than milk on top of those mushrooms. Just saying.
Next >>