That'd be cool. Whenever I'm sharing a YT link, I'm always a bit suspicious of what info the youtu.be URL is hiding, so I paste it into a browser to get a clean URL.
Maybe this is silly, but I'd be cool to do that automatically.
[This change] would also make candidates in elections liable to criminal prosecution for making any false statement to win votes.
While I think this is amazing and should be the standard everywhere, it's also quite hard to prove intent beyond a reasonable doubt in this sort of scenario. It just means politicians need to maintain some amount of plausible deniability.
As much as I'd like to see corrupt politicians in jail, I have to wonder if somehow making it a civil offence rather than criminal wouldn't be better, since it would only require proof on the balance of probabilities, rather than the higher standards of beyond reasonable doubt.
At least the criminal liability seems to also be on top of code of conduct violations which could lead to retractions or a suspension.
Only difference being a gun can't say no. The complicity of the grunt who carries out the order gives them a portion of the responsibility. That's certainly no absolution to Melon, though.
Symbolic appropriation is the modus operandi of fascism. That's why the swastika, a former symbol of peace, is now one of the most widely known symbols of hate on the planet.
Isn't the issue that regardless of the rule of law, Trump can always appeal, and the supreme court can grant a writ of certiorari to hear the appeal. So if the supreme court is corrupt enough then anything goes?
I'm not American, so I might be misunderstanding how the appeals process works.
I suppose this'd still be true with or without that previous ruling as well, but it does seem lay groundwork for further expansion, and the SC probably would want their rulings to look somewhat plausible so the lower courts don't rebel en masse.
Reminds me of an all evil campaign I played in once.
I recall "heroically" leading the towns militia into a wererat den on the night of the full moon, only to lock them all in together and finish off the stragglers on both sides afterwards. Turns out militiamen's scalps look awfully similar to those of reverted wererats, and we turned quite a profit.
I'm oversimplifying here, but it's because it requires conformity. Everyone has to change themselves to fit the system, and if they can't or don't, then they are generally not treated very well.
The polar opposite problem is when there's too much individual freedom and people are allowed to harm others with impunity, so once again some people will be treated very poorly.
My guess is that nobody wants a nazi-mobile, stock prices are crashing through the bedrock, and they need imaginary sales on the books to appear to be less of a radioactive hot potato.
I mean, I'd be happy enough to cede our allegiance as a commonwealth colonial power, as it's kinda gross. But since we still are, we might as well use it to our advantage.
If we can broker some favour and some sort of potential defense pact from the rest of the commonwealth nations against the US's declared hostile intentions, then why not use it to our advantage?
Wilson said that for the past five years he had asked 300 first-year criminology students to raise their hand if they had watched a beheading video online. “All of them have,” he said, adding that this prevalence was reflected in an increase in these crimes.
Yeah, this passage in particular was a bit of a head scratcher. Like, you could pick any societal change since the adoption of the internet and say the same thing. If anything it indicates the opposite.
That'd be cool. Whenever I'm sharing a YT link, I'm always a bit suspicious of what info the youtu.be URL is hiding, so I paste it into a browser to get a clean URL.
Maybe this is silly, but I'd be cool to do that automatically.