Neurodivergent and terminally online.
Neurodivergent and terminally online.
They tried that with me once, but I showed them and got a different job.
Government can throw you in jail.
Should be fine. I’ve even had it recommended from pros. Not sure if that’s because it’s cheaper or more available or better for some reason, but anyway it should be fine.
Yes, or lemmy.
Yeah it’s more the idea, the potential for abuse or use of this as a strategy.
Given where we are now, it seems obvious that you would let the delegates pick the candidate, but it’s sort of strange that The People don’t actually get any say in who the candidate is. Kamala will get the nomination from the ruling class alone. It’s an option that could be used to circumvent the democratic process. Something to keep an eye on.
Concentration camps? Do you actually believe that or have it based on anything?
A bunch of people were saying that it wasn’t even a mask, but it obviously is. His mom even said that he wears one to cover some scars he is embarrassed about. I was just pointing that out.
Also I don’t think mask wearing should be illegal. I think it’s a big government over reach. Maybe I’d be fine with an additional penalty for wearing a mask while committing a crime, or something like that, if you really wanted to go after masked people. No way you should be able to be arrested for that. I don’t think it would even hold up to court challenges as a viable law. I am confident that we will see these laws overturned.
Well, it looks like you can pull it up over your face. He just has it pulled down.
Edit: I’m not even defending mask laws. I don’t see how they could possibly be constitutional and disagree with them fundamentally. I just think this guy was clearly wearing something that covers his face. It’s a mask that he uses to cover his face.
Fear seems like the go-to strategy when you have the weaker candidate. During the Obama elections, the only thing Republicans could do was try to scare people into voting for them, since they knew they couldn’t beat him. The strategy turns from focusing on the strength of your own candidate to focusing on the flaws of the opposing candidate. Democrats entire strategy at this point is maximizing fear of Trump. Not sure why it’s so hard for them to get rid of Biden and put up a real candidate, but it looks like a flaw in the nomination process.
There are 115,000 schools in the united states. 107 incidents halfway through the year, so 214 approximately by the end of the year, comes out to .19 percent chance of this happening at your school, but that’s only if you assume that it’s evenly distributed, which it certainly is not. I’d guess that if you are in an inner city school with the associated higher crime rates, then your risk is much higher.
But also if you look at numbers of deaths, school shootings isn’t even on the charts. Homicide deaths in general are in second place (but close to suicide deaths) at 10 out of 100,000 kids, and school shootings are a tiny fraction of that. There are 43 million adolescents (10-19) in the united states, so 29 deaths are about .7 percent of the total homicide deaths. Or put another way, your kid is 150 TIMES more likely to die from a regular homicide than from a school shooting.
But still, there is some small risk of a shooting happening and you wanting to know if your kid is safe. So I guess the question is if the tradeoff is worth it. Seems to me like that would not be a good reason not to ban cell phones. Like there might be reasons a cell phone ban is a bad idea, but that isn’t really one of them.
I feel like school shooters are rare enough that a policy about cell phones wouldn’t need to factor them in.
For the sake of discussion, voting rights should belong to everyone the laws apply to. If you go by a different set of laws (tribal or territorial), why would you have a say in laws (by voting) that apply to everyone but you? Similarly, if you demonstrate that you won’t follow the laws, then why should you get a say in making them?
His wife flew the flags, supposedly. Which could be true or could be just his excuse. The pine tree flag is being turned into a right wing extremist symbol specifically to attack Alito. It has never been an issue before, and has been flown all over the place, including San Francisco’s city hall. It’s very weird and should be very concerning to everyone. I’m not even speaking to his credibility or fitness for the position he has, but the fact that someone is making a concerted effort to rewrite history in order to attack the Supreme Court is crazy.
But at this point, the damage is done and a flag that actually meant something has become tarnished in public opinion to the point where it’s lost it’s meaning and value.
People aren’t thinking about consequences when they commit murder, so it doesn’t really matter how severe they are.
Death penalty isn’t necessary at all anymore, as there isn’t any risk to society in keeping them imprisoned. In the past we were sometimes forced to execute because there weren’t viable long term prisons. That’s the only legitimate need for the death penalty to exist in my opinion.
I can’t imagine it works as a deterrent given the psychopathic nature of these crimes.
I suppose it could bring some kind of peace to a victim of aggravated rape, that their rapist had paid the ultimate price so that would be nice. I’m not sure it works that way though or if it’s a healthy coping mechanism.
Overall it feels like it should be a relic of the past.
I’m not sure if these people are propagandists or just dumb. It seems like a very obvious non story if you actually read what happened.
The charges were about collusion, and not about whether or not the Russians tried to interfere.
Uhh… Terrorism where innocent citizens are targeted is worse than specific targeting of terrorists themselves.