quindraco @ quindraco @lemm.ee

Posts

5

Comments

764

Joined

2 yr. ago

Yes, but also no - and be careful, you're asking this around people who absolutely do hold manufacturers morally responsible for what people do with products bought from them. See e.g. any discussion of gun control on here.

If you want to draw an analogy between traffic and the internet, the ISP is your provider of roads; your PC+router+modem is your car. So this is much, much closer to suing the state for building and maintaining the road the getaway car used.

Also, there's no cleanly analogous crime - "getaway car" sounds like a comparison to robbery, but no-one here was robbed. Sony's argument for damages would have been based on theoretical sales it didn't make, arguing that its government-issued monopoly on its IP automatically implies anyone pirating content would have paid them for it.

So here's an even closer analogy: you sell marijuana in a state with a fixed number of dispensary licenses, and you are the only person in your neighborhood with a license. You set up shop. Someone else shows up in a van and gives away pot for free; your sales go down. You sue the state for providing the road the van used to do this.

You... you voted for Hunter for President? When? How?

You've been eating bad jellyfish. It should have the texture of crunchy spaghetti.

She got seriously banged up in the process, so this accusation is particularly Big If True.

You can't just come onto Lemmy and state the objective truth, it's against social policy.

Have an upvote.

Scurvy? Are Brits refusing to eat plants now?

Have you ever seen a post/comment from/on Hexbear? They have zero tolerance for any opinion they disagree with.

Disabling is much harder than destroying, and these were unmanned, so disabling was not of much benefit. Pretty certainly destroyed.

The police opened fire after the mother did. It is notoriously difficult to negotiate with someone who is actively shooting - aside from needing absolutely every target to be in excellent cover, you have to make yourself heard over the gunfire.

You:

These aren't offenders who found out after the fact that they had HIV, they knew full well and decided to spread it.

The article, emphasis mine:

Tennessee is the only state in the United States that imposes a lifetime registration as a “violent sex offender” if convicted of engaging in sex work while living with HIV, regardless of whether the person knew they could transmit the disease.

This is a status offense; there is no requirement in status offenses that the perp has any knowledge of their status. The most famous example I can think of of a status offense is BAC limits on drivers: the prosecutor simply doesn't have to prove in court you knew your BAC was too high to drive.

In a Reddit thread about this, someone got so mad when I pointed out they were wrong about the Sandy Hook shooter owning his guns, even though that'a a critical piece to implementing saner gun control: checks on the purchaser would have accomplished nothing here, as his mother bought the guns. You'd need to take a different approach, like free public mental health care (or repealing the second amendment, but that's much harder). One of the first steps toward even attempting saner gun control laws here is working out what's going wrong. shaking my head

Anyway. You are right, but not right enough. We need people like Bernie Sanders in charge if you want to see meaningful change in gun control.

It has everything to do with cops if someone enforces those rules, though.

It's weird seeing OP posting positively about successful law enforcement, instead of the usual ACAB-posting.

The judge's arguments in this case are bogus - minors don't have any free speech rights, or e.g. public schools wouldn't be the free speech free zones that they are - but your argument is much, much worse, because it hurts adults and minors. You want to see where your argument leads, go look at the state of porn in Louisiana.

How Republican are these women? They're being asked to run on a platform of fewer rights for women, which is bound to be a tough sell.

Mazi Pilip appears to be pro-choice. That's hardly compatible with the party line.

The death toll stands at over 28,000 dead Palestinians at the hands of Israeli terrorism.

How are we defining terrorism? If it just means any killing we don't like, then it's just noise - we can drop it as a word and just say murder. If it means using fear as a weapon, it doesn't fit here - Israel is intent on violence for violent ends, not achieving victory through fear.

I have a less credible source, if that, uh, helps you. Scroll down for more claims with accompanying evidence, but as someone who doesn't know Arabic or what the leaders of Hamas look like, I honestly had no idea what I was looking at.

I don't think you know what "allegedly" means.

If we wanted to be serious about it, the ones that matter are the various ways our voting power has been suppressed. Examples:

1. Gerrymandering is legal.
2. The Senate exists.
3. The Electoral College exists.
4. Voting Day is not a Federal holiday.
5. The House is substantially smaller than the cube root of the country's population (approx 692).
6. We use First Past the Post. Note: multiple superior algorithms exist, so here are two example options: IRV, Ranked Pairs.
7. Votes are counted and partial results publicly released before Voting Day is over, so people in California potentially vote knowing at least some of the results in Florida.
8. In many jurisdictions, felons permanently lose the right to vote.
9. In many jurisdictions, voting by mail has roadblocks - e.g. in some states, you have to swear under oath you have an excuse on a list of valid excuses, instead of just being allowed to do it.
10. Citizens United.

And so on and so forth.

Of course he isn't. Did you click the link to the source I provided about actual Nazis in the Ukraine military?