Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt

Techdirt

from the cops-and-comebacks dept

This week, after Larry Lessig weighed in on the DOJ’s case against Kim Dotcom, one commenter tried to dismiss it on the basis that he was paid by Dotcom’s defense team. While it is always wise to know who’s paying in these situations, DB won most insightful comment of the week by explaining why in this case that fact is not immediately damning:

Lessig is a constitutional law attorney, one of the top ones in the country. He wouldn’t weigh in, paid or not, unless there was an important point to be made.

He’s not like the lawyers advertising on Criagslist for work that will write anything that you pay them to.

For second place, we look at the NYPD union president’s snarky argument that the public cannot judge the police. That One Guy offered up a thorough rebuttal:

AN OPEN LETTER TO ALL OF THOSE INCLINED TO JUMP TO CONCLUSIONS

Like, oh I dunno, cops who assume that if someone looks vaguely similar to a suspect for a totally non-violent crime they need to be tackled to the ground, roughed up, and left handcuffed? That kind of ‘jump[ing] to conclusions’?

To all arm-chair judges:

If you have never struggled with someone who is resisting arrest or who pulled a gun or knife on you when you approached them for breaking a law, then you are not qualified to judge the actions of police officers putting themselves in harm’s way for the public good.

Yeah, regarding the ‘in harms way’ bit. Do police put themselves in harm’s way, sometimes on a regular basis? Yes, because that’s their gorram job. Don’t like it, or can’t handle it in a reasonable manner? Do everyone a favor: Quit.

Imagine if other dangerous jobs were similarly staffed by cowards.

Firefighter: “Well I know my job is to put out fires, and save people from them, but running into a burning building is dangerous, so I think I’ll stay outside, and if people get burned alive, well, better them than me.”

Lifeguard: “True, it is technically my job to save people from drowning, but they might flail about too much, and put my life in danger in the process. No, I think I’ll sit right here and just watch.”

Doctor: “I know I’m supposed to treat people with injuries and illnesses, but some of the things they have are contagious and dangerous. As such, I think it would be much better for everyone, but mostly me, if those that were sick stayed as far away from me as possible.”

Soldier: “While theoretically we’re only supposed to shoot enemy combatants, it can be pretty difficult to tell at times. As such, I find it much more easy to just shoot everyone I come across, just in case.”

Hmm, no, pretty sure the same logic he’s arguing, applied elsewhere, would be immediately rejected as cowardly, pathetic, and idiotic.

If someone isn’t willing to risk their safety, then they don’t get to go into a dangerous line of work and whine about how it’s dangerous. Leave, and let the position be filled by those with working spines.

For editor’s choice on the insightful side, we start out on our post about the intelligence community’s latest strategy in the battle for encryption backdoors: waiting for another terrorist attack to get everyone nice and scared. Capt ICE Enforcer proposed an alternative:

How about this, if there is another terrorist attack. The intelligence community loses it’s budget and they get fired for failing to do their job. Along with gross negligence and government spending fraud.

Next, we head to story of Ahmed Mohamed, which has been dominating the news this week, and give one more nod to That One Guy for teasing out the real message of what happened:

Repeat after me students: ‘The Authorities Are Never Wrong’

His ‘crime’ wasn’t building a bomb, which he clearly didn’t do, it was making those in charge look like cowardly chumps and refusing to follow along with the narrative that had been pre-determined before they ever saw or talked to him.

I think it’s pretty obvious that they had determined before they ever talked to him that he was guilty, and they just wanted to trick and/or coerce him into ‘admitting’ it so they could use it to justify their actions. He seemed to have refused, and stuck to reality, which naturally just made them even more angry, hence the threat of ludicrous charges and the handcuffs through his school, punishment for not going along with the scenario they had already decided on.

They had decided on his guilt, how dare he contradict them and claim to be his innocent? /s

Over on the funny side, both of our top comments come from our post about police dropping charges against Mohamed, where some commenters decided to have some fun at Texas’ expense. Limbodog kicked things off and took first place:

Roll it back to zero

Number of days since Texas was a national embarrassment: 0

Another commenter suggested that Texas had only purchased the zero card when obtaining that imagined sign, leading an anonymous commenter to expand on the idea and take second place for funny:

Texas actually bought thousands of “0”s. When asked why it bought so many, Texas said “well, we still have to change the number every day, right?”.

For editor’s choice on the funny side, we start by returning to our post about the NYPD union president, where Jeremy Lyman built on our second-place insightful winner with his own set of non-police analogues:

NYPD Firefighter: knocks down buildings that might catch on fire, says they fit the profile.

NYPD Lifeguard: chases people away from beach wearing riot gear; drownings down 5%, concussions up 300%.

NYPD Doctor: gives random people on street chemotherapy, blames them for looking like cancer patients.

Finally, we head to our post about the crazy permission-asking scrum that falls on anyone who posts a news-worthy photo on Twitter. One anonymous commenter was clearly taken by our coverage:

Smart article, Mike, as usual, and funny too. Do you mind if I…?

That’s all for this week, folks!