Whenever stories like that pop up, I'm not sure how I should feel about it.
Should I applaud the goal and purpose, or should I worry about the methods?
This is a witch hunt with modern technology. Remember who started it when on the next BLM riots the extreme rights are using the same methods to hunt down black people who want equal treatment. Or when the evangalists use it to hunt down people who bothered them on their anti-abortion rallies. Or when the chinese government uses it to find protesters in Hong K
Is that what you called it when you got a speeding ticket? It's a witch hunt, officer! What about when you shoplifted a VCR back in the 80s and got caught? It's a witch hunt your honour!
Getting caught after committing a crime is many things, but a witch hunt isn't one of them.
[Since many people here are imperious to hyperbole, I mean you in the general you as a rhetorical device. I' not accusing you personally of shoplifting a VCR]
If they try to give me a speeding ticket by checking on everyone who drove that road that day, then yes, that's a witch hunt.
And if instead of using the speed cam picture and sending me a ticket they plaster my face all over the Internet and write "do you know this man, he was speeding?" then that's hardly fitting the crime, too.
Ah yes: the right wing party of rule of law think it's a witch hunt if they get caught.
Funny, I'm not in any right wing party. I'm in fact not even in the US.:-)
No, the point I object to is the public search. Over here in Europe, you only do that for serious criminals like terrorists.
A speed camera is not a witch hunt, you're just whiny. Also stop speeding, asshole.
*sigh* there was a time when/. was the place on the Internet where people didn't go down to ad hominem when they didn't immediately win an argument. So sad.
Using violence (which killed several and seriously injured dozens) or threats of violence to achieve political ends (overthrowing an election) is the *very definition* of terrorism.
Again, that may be the definition, but is that the actual charge against these people? Are they wanted for terrorism? Or are they wanted for unlawful entry and rioting?
Because I begin to feel REALLY uneasy if we go around dealing with people based on what WE, PERSONALLY think they are, not what a court has decided after due process.
Always remember to turn it around. You can apply the very same statement to the BLM riots. There was violence, there were threats of more violence, and there was a political goal
No, the point I object to is the public search. Over here in Europe, you only do that for serious criminals like terrorists.
We're getting so off topic it's hard for me to know what you're talking about. But speed cameras work the way described in Europe - everyone gets a ticket.
But if we're talking about using them to deal with the Capitol violence: we're talking about a group of people who tried to overthrow the government using violence. In Europe, in the US, in any country, that's a very, very, serio
But if we're talking about using them to deal with the Capitol violence: we're talking about a group of people who tried to overthrow the government using violence. In Europe, in the US, in any country, that's a very, very, serious crime.
Has any court issued a warrant saying so? Is anyone being charged with staging a coup?
Because so far the charges I've read about aren't saying that. So, legally speaking, these people are NOT wanted to terrorism or overthrowing the government. That may be your opinion, but it's not a legal fact and if you want to live in a country that runs by the rule of law, that difference matters.
There is no reason not to use the information publicly available to get them.
But there is a reason to not be ok with anyone with an axe to grind or a research paper to write going about it. This is the
So, where is the court-issued search warrant that says so? Because the arrests I have read about so far are for disorderly conduct, breaking and entering or entering a restricted area and such like. I haven't seen terrorism as a charge yet. So you labelling these people as terrorists is merely a personal opinion and not a legal fact.
Or does due process only matter when it is about people on our side?
One way to make your old car run better is to look up the price of a new model.
not sure... (Score:5, Insightful)
Whenever stories like that pop up, I'm not sure how I should feel about it.
Should I applaud the goal and purpose, or should I worry about the methods?
This is a witch hunt with modern technology. Remember who started it when on the next BLM riots the extreme rights are using the same methods to hunt down black people who want equal treatment. Or when the evangalists use it to hunt down people who bothered them on their anti-abortion rallies. Or when the chinese government uses it to find protesters in Hong K
Re: (Score:2)
This is a witch hunt with modern technology
Is that what you called it when you got a speeding ticket? It's a witch hunt, officer! What about when you shoplifted a VCR back in the 80s and got caught? It's a witch hunt your honour!
Getting caught after committing a crime is many things, but a witch hunt isn't one of them.
[Since many people here are imperious to hyperbole, I mean you in the general you as a rhetorical device. I' not accusing you personally of shoplifting a VCR]
Re: (Score:2)
If they try to give me a speeding ticket by checking on everyone who drove that road that day, then yes, that's a witch hunt.
And if instead of using the speed cam picture and sending me a ticket they plaster my face all over the Internet and write "do you know this man, he was speeding?" then that's hardly fitting the crime, too.
Re:not sure... (Score:0, Troll)
If they try to give me a speeding ticket by checking on everyone who drove that road that day, then yes, that's a witch hunt.
Ah yes: the right wing party of rule of law think it's a witch hunt if they get caught.
A speed camera is not a witch hunt, you're just whiny. Also stop speeding, asshole.
Re:not sure... (Score:5, Insightful)
Ah yes: the right wing party of rule of law think it's a witch hunt if they get caught.
Funny, I'm not in any right wing party. I'm in fact not even in the US. :-)
No, the point I object to is the public search. Over here in Europe, you only do that for serious criminals like terrorists.
A speed camera is not a witch hunt, you're just whiny. Also stop speeding, asshole.
*sigh* there was a time when /. was the place on the Internet where people didn't go down to ad hominem when they didn't immediately win an argument. So sad.
Re: (Score:2)
You wouldn't know Ad Hominem if it called you a frosted fuckbag.
Ad Hominem is where you say "your idea is invalid because of (unrelated thing)"
Just tossing insults because you don't like someone's behavior is not Ad Hominem.
Re: (Score:2)
get educated. you are on the internet. there is no excuse for being this uninformed
Ad Hominem [google.com]
I'm sure -- it was terrorism. (Score:2)
Using violence (which killed several and seriously injured dozens) or threats of violence to achieve political ends (overthrowing an election) is the *very definition* of terrorism.
Re: (Score:2)
Again, that may be the definition, but is that the actual charge against these people? Are they wanted for terrorism? Or are they wanted for unlawful entry and rioting?
Because I begin to feel REALLY uneasy if we go around dealing with people based on what WE, PERSONALLY think they are, not what a court has decided after due process.
Always remember to turn it around. You can apply the very same statement to the BLM riots. There was violence, there were threats of more violence, and there was a political goal
Re: (Score:2)
Using violence (which killed several
I agree, that's very serious. Who did the people listed on that site kill?
Re: (Score:2)
We're getting so off topic it's hard for me to know what you're talking about. But speed cameras work the way described in Europe - everyone gets a ticket.
But if we're talking about using them to deal with the Capitol violence: we're talking about a group of people who tried to overthrow the government using violence. In Europe, in the US, in any country, that's a very, very, serio
Re: (Score:2)
But if we're talking about using them to deal with the Capitol violence: we're talking about a group of people who tried to overthrow the government using violence. In Europe, in the US, in any country, that's a very, very, serious crime.
Has any court issued a warrant saying so? Is anyone being charged with staging a coup?
Because so far the charges I've read about aren't saying that. So, legally speaking, these people are NOT wanted to terrorism or overthrowing the government. That may be your opinion, but it's not a legal fact and if you want to live in a country that runs by the rule of law, that difference matters.
There is no reason not to use the information publicly available to get them.
But there is a reason to not be ok with anyone with an axe to grind or a research paper to write going about it. This is the
Re: (Score:2)
Ah yes: the right wing party of rule of law think it's a witch hunt if they get caught.
Funny, I'm not in any right wing party. I'm in fact not even in the US. :-)
No, the point I object to is the public search. Over here in Europe, you only do that for serious criminals like terrorists.
Domestic terrorists are still terrorists. And before you go there:
terrorism
noun " the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims."
And yes, members of congress are civilians.
Re: (Score:2)
Domestic terrorists are still terrorists.
Yes, they are.
So, where is the court-issued search warrant that says so? Because the arrests I have read about so far are for disorderly conduct, breaking and entering or entering a restricted area and such like. I haven't seen terrorism as a charge yet. So you labelling these people as terrorists is merely a personal opinion and not a legal fact.
Or does due process only matter when it is about people on our side?