quindraco @ quindraco @lemm.ee

Posts

5

Comments

764

Joined

2 yr. ago

Name a fourth.

No. Are you?

Yes it does. Haven't you ever been bullied before? Lashing out is 100% expected behaviour, and highly recommended by Sun Tzu.

There are three possibilities, presupposing the threats are real:

1. The threats were not specific (the article never claims specific theeats were made), in which case the victims either don't exist or constitute every black person in America, and in either of those cases the victims could not be met with.
2. The threats were specific and the specific targets were not in the chat (the article never claims anyone was in the chat except for the racists), in which case the "victims" do not legally qualify as victims and there is no case here (for a threat to be illegal you have to communicate it to your threatened target).
3. The threats were specific and the targets were in the chat. That's the only way this makes sense, which means the article utterly failed to tell us both that the threats were specific and that the victims were in the chat.

So any way you slice it, this article is hot garbage.

Gulluni said he has met personally with the victims and their families.

This proves the article is garbage - if there are victims, the original described conduct of some racists having a group chat about racism can't possibly be true. There has to be more to the real story.

The sudden drop in quality was extremely noticeable. I didn't realize different people were making it - that makes so much sense.

And it still won't look like anything to them even after they find out the handgun wasn't registered to him. And after they find out the suicide note (pro tip: real suicides generally don't include a note) was written super-generically.

You don't need to be any more careful than when enforcing the rules on place of birth, age, or term limits.

Bad analogy, on multiple fronts. Better:

A truck is on its way to deliver gold to you (you have been told this is happening). When it gets to you, the driver hands you a gold bar. You say, "Thanks! Can I have another?" The driver hands you a second bar. Then you are charged with theft of the second bar, presumably because it was illegal to ask for it.

Israel's draft is co-ed.

If they're going to declare arbitrary subsets of the hostages, why stop at female? Why not demand only the short hostages, or only the ones with blue eyes?

Same (faulty) logic used to tell the oppressed not rise up against their oppressors. If you're going to conflate all killing with murder, be prepared to get into weeds like self defense and right to die. If you're willing to admit killing humans is more nuanced than that, then and only then we can have a real discussion.

People should stop murdering people so there is no need for the death penalty.

What need is that, exactly?

Keep in mind this guy thought it was fine to kill someone for $1000. Not any hatred or psychological issue or ideology. Just a bit of cash.

You don't know that. You think that, and there's evidence to support it, but you don't know it.

Female as an adjective is inoffensive everywhere, but you will run into problems in some contexts because its definition is currently in flux and different people will mean different things by it.

Female as a noun has the same changing definition deal, and also some online misogynists use it as a pejorative. It isn't one, but they use it as one. As a corollary, some others on the internet have chosen to be offended by the term.

Why allow the Olympic flag? That really seems like the odd flag out.

Meco did literally the opposite of what you're accusing them of: rather than take a claim on faith, they questioned. That's the polar opposite of religion.

In the general case, nothing. Not too long ago I was in a Ben & Jerry's that had closed its bathroom down, for example.

The bartender in question here committed battery; that's the underlying crime, not denying bathroom access. The hate crime rider on top is, by definition, an enhanced penalty for thinking illegal thoughts while committing some other crime.

What makws you think they can't? Reducing tariffs on imported toothbrushes is an excellent way to reduce the sale cost of domestic toothbrushes.

The Houthis are unlikely to stop any of the war crimes they were already committing before the genocide started, and appeasing terrorists by giving them what they want works approximately 0% of the time.

Note: I am not defending any genocide here - I'm only emphasizing how deeply stupid it is to think that appeasing the Houthis will lead to positive outcomes.

That makes no sense. They targeted a liberal woman, why cherry pick her liberal status over her female status for their motivation?

Besides, neither makes sense. They went after one of the staunchest liberals in the House by claiming she wasn't liberal enough. That was false and therefore absurd, but there's no evidence they hate liberals.

Far more likely they're just unfathomably stupid.