• mctoasterson@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    5 hours ago

    I think we need some kind of limiting principle applied to restrict what individual jurisdictions can do to fuck up national or global systems.

    Overzealous lawmakers in Michigan or Wisconsin shouldn’t be able to force global companies to operate their websites differently.

    California shouldn’t be able to force Glock to discontinue and re-tool its entire product line, etc.

    • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      The US can prohibit VPNs and encryption all it wants, doesn’t meant he rat of the world will

    • balance8873@lemmy.myserv.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      California isn’t forcing Glock to do anything. Glock wants the central valley and orange county market so they do what they need to do.

      (I actually have no idea about the specifics of this, but I’m assuming it falls in the general shape of California trying to restrict access to murder tools and the murder tool vendor responding by finding ways around the law rather than just admitting their hobby and business kills people)

    • BanMe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      By the same logic social issues would be distributed to the states, civil rights. Which is what’s happening now. The interstate commerce act is a stroke of brilliance tbh, it allows the states to work as a greater system without there being a patchwork of laws and regulations. I don’t think dropping it would be wise just because we’ve reached this level of stupidity… time to suffer consequences.