For doing something questionable but lawful? Let's try something: let's suppose you are a cartoonist and you specialize in drawing erotic content that's somewhat violent and you create a cartoon that depicts rape in it's all, uncensored and explicit glory. I may find it questionable, tons of moral police govt folks might find it questionable. You keep creating such material over and over and making it public on your site. Should you be arrested because you are doing stuff that people think it's disgusting and generally sleazy?
So don't be so fast to condemn when it's not explicitly criminal under the law. I'm with you when you say they are sleazy bastards but I don't want pseudo-laws being wielded around to arrest people because it may be turned against me.
Re: Your usual legalisms in favor of sleazy grifters.
Please cite the law that makes it illegal. Remember they are PUBLIC information. If they refused to remove anything no court in the US would be able to force them. So if they are going to lose content then they might as well charge for the process.
It must be added that I'm not defending their actions. It's slimy and disgusting as hell but it's not illegal. If you are uncomfortable with it then go talk to your legislators and see if a law can be put on the books to avoid such behavior. A Constitutional law of course.
Interesting. I gave you the first word because your argument is very reasonable and it's very easy to dismiss the severity of this just because they are acting in a very sleazy way. I was surprised with a little warning in yellow when I was about to grant the FW to you that said your comment has been flagged quite a few times and that if it is hidden I may 'lose' my credit.
It was a very didactic moment for me and I wanted to share with you and the rest of the community. I can understand those flagging your comment. The behavior these people are displaying is disgusting, it feels like extortion for sure and they come out of this generally looking bad. But we should not let that feeling of "they got what they deserve" swipe our reason. They have not committed any crime under current laws and they are protected by the Constitution. As you said, it leaves a foul taste like when I remind people that ACLU protected despicable kkk members on 1st amendment grounds and won. Thankfully. And I say thankfully with a very bad taste in my mouth. But if we want to make sure we preserve our freedoms and our protections from government overreach we should devote special care for the cumbags of the world that are despicable but deserve the same protections. Because when we decide that somebody doesn't deserve them it's a situation where everybody loses.
I urge my fellow readers who flagged the comment to take a moment and rethink it. That One Guy is not defending the scumbags. He is defending our collective freedom of speech. Sadly but fortunately it is valid to the scum of the world as well.
That sure is dumb. If they wanted to focus all attention at the issue and smear it all over they succeeded wonderfully. But this is just the tip of the iceberg. The current science denial state not only the EPA but most of the scientific bodies of the got are is alarming, worrying and disgraceful.
I don't vote and my purpose wasn't to have any clue. It was to use the same tactics Sessions used. I have no doubts that many of the problems we are seeing with Trump admin are only possible because his predecessors either paved way or didn't do a thing to put an end to such problems. It still doesn't give Sessions the right to spew bullshit.
Considering the time frame where crimes began rising again, maybe crimes are increasing because for the first time in many years the bigoted morons that would love to punch and kill find themselves represented by the equally bigoted Cheeto-in-power?
Pai couldn't care less about anything that doesn't fit his agenda. So expect lousy excuses and lies in an eventual reply. The executive will keep acting like it's the law as long as the legislative doesn't grow a spine an starts pushing back along with the judiciary. Simple as that.
And the Govt has the natural power to break monopolies, sue and get them to keep their obligations when they earned tax incentives to build a network, offer incentives so the private sector will serve more remote or poorer areas etc etc etc. The people can also be angry at their abuses and support Govt efforts to do what I mentioned before.
Sure, they are free to do as they please. But they will have to face the consequences.
Capitalism is just as bad as Socialism. Murdoch is one of the prime examples of why it's bad. The real solution lies somewhere in the middle. And reining in the power mega corporations have over the Government is one of the first things we should be tackling.
What's the difference of an encrypted iphone that cannot be decrypted in any way and a destroyed iphone?
The evidence that *may* be contained within them is lost. And either way law enforcement has the duty of investigating and finding other means. And in the absence of any way to find a solution to the puzzle, well, though luck. In any case what they should be doing with the utmost care is FOLLOW THE DAMN CONSTITUTION and respect citizens rights.
Let's face it, there are very few crimes where the human(s) behind them didn't leave any breadcrumbs that could be followed. We are fallible beings. But the very few cases where it's not possible via decent investigative means then though luck, let's move ahead and hope the means present themselves via technological advancement (like the DNA thing we read a while back) or accept the criminal was good.
On the post: Mugshots.com Operators Arrested For Letting Money Influence Editorial Decisions
Re: They should've left CA alone!!
For doing something questionable but lawful? Let's try something: let's suppose you are a cartoonist and you specialize in drawing erotic content that's somewhat violent and you create a cartoon that depicts rape in it's all, uncensored and explicit glory. I may find it questionable, tons of moral police govt folks might find it questionable. You keep creating such material over and over and making it public on your site. Should you be arrested because you are doing stuff that people think it's disgusting and generally sleazy?
So don't be so fast to condemn when it's not explicitly criminal under the law. I'm with you when you say they are sleazy bastards but I don't want pseudo-laws being wielded around to arrest people because it may be turned against me.
On the post: Mugshots.com Operators Arrested For Letting Money Influence Editorial Decisions
Re: Blackmail-- can two legal acts be combined to make a crime?
On the post: Mugshots.com Operators Arrested For Letting Money Influence Editorial Decisions
Re: Your usual legalisms in favor of sleazy grifters.
It must be added that I'm not defending their actions. It's slimy and disgusting as hell but it's not illegal. If you are uncomfortable with it then go talk to your legislators and see if a law can be put on the books to avoid such behavior. A Constitutional law of course.
On the post: Mugshots.com Operators Arrested For Letting Money Influence Editorial Decisions
Re: Them today, you tomorrow
It was a very didactic moment for me and I wanted to share with you and the rest of the community. I can understand those flagging your comment. The behavior these people are displaying is disgusting, it feels like extortion for sure and they come out of this generally looking bad. But we should not let that feeling of "they got what they deserve" swipe our reason. They have not committed any crime under current laws and they are protected by the Constitution. As you said, it leaves a foul taste like when I remind people that ACLU protected despicable kkk members on 1st amendment grounds and won. Thankfully. And I say thankfully with a very bad taste in my mouth. But if we want to make sure we preserve our freedoms and our protections from government overreach we should devote special care for the cumbags of the world that are despicable but deserve the same protections. Because when we decide that somebody doesn't deserve them it's a situation where everybody loses.
I urge my fellow readers who flagged the comment to take a moment and rethink it. That One Guy is not defending the scumbags. He is defending our collective freedom of speech. Sadly but fortunately it is valid to the scum of the world as well.
On the post: DHS Fusion Center Gets Request For Documents On Extremists, Decides To Hand Over Mind Control Docs Instead
On the post: EPA's War On Journalists Is Not A Good Look
On the post: The Attorney General Thinks Police Having To Follow The Constitution Leads To Violent Crime Increases
Re: Re: Technically correct, the best kind
On the post: Facebook Moderation Ramps Up In Germany And Everything Keeps Getting Worse For Its Users
Re: Pull out of Germany
On the post: The Attorney General Thinks Police Having To Follow The Constitution Leads To Violent Crime Increases
Re: Re:
On the post: Facebook Moderation Ramps Up In Germany And Everything Keeps Getting Worse For Its Users
Re:
On the post: The Attorney General Thinks Police Having To Follow The Constitution Leads To Violent Crime Increases
See? I can haz correlation.
On the post: Many Of Those Desperate GDPR Emails You've Been Getting Are Violating A Different EU Regulation
On the post: Senators Ask FCC Why It Did Nothing To Stop Their Names From Being Fraudulently Used During Net Neutrality Repeal
On the post: FBI Admits It's Been Using A Highly-Inflated Number Of Locked Devices To Push Its 'Going Dark' Narrative
Re: Color me surprised.
FBI lies to push it's own agenda. Shocked.
FBI fabricates its own terror plots to push its own agenda.
FBI engages in parallel construction to bolster its numbers.
When the executive goes rogue you have a big problem.
On the post: Copyright Being Used To Prevent Actress From Showing Her Own Demo Reel
On the post: Verizon Begins 'Testing' DSL Usage Caps It Refuses To Call Usage Caps
So Verizon is trying their hands at comedy now?
On the post: Verizon Begins 'Testing' DSL Usage Caps It Refuses To Call Usage Caps
Re: Verizon can do what it wants
Sure, they are free to do as they please. But they will have to face the consequences.
On the post: Rupert Murdoch Believes In The Free Market... Until His Company Is Struggling: Then He Wants To Regulate Competitors
Re: Re:
On the post: Rupert Murdoch Believes In The Free Market... Until His Company Is Struggling: Then He Wants To Regulate Competitors
On the post: Real Security Begins At Home (On Your Smartphone)
The evidence that *may* be contained within them is lost. And either way law enforcement has the duty of investigating and finding other means. And in the absence of any way to find a solution to the puzzle, well, though luck. In any case what they should be doing with the utmost care is FOLLOW THE DAMN CONSTITUTION and respect citizens rights.
Let's face it, there are very few crimes where the human(s) behind them didn't leave any breadcrumbs that could be followed. We are fallible beings. But the very few cases where it's not possible via decent investigative means then though luck, let's move ahead and hope the means present themselves via technological advancement (like the DNA thing we read a while back) or accept the criminal was good.
Next >>