I think are the ones that endorse blanket surveillance, or torture, or tough-on-crime policies that get our convictions (and our prison population) to over 50% innocent are probably more treasonous and dickheaded than Snowden for revealing to the public what some of the treasonous dickheads are doing.
The US is now a torture state and a surveillance state and a corporate police state. Treason towards such a state is, as Jefferson's seal suggests, obedience to God.
They've always been conspicuously quiet about the second amendment.
I'm not saying it's right, but from what I've encountered of activist fronts, they seem universally unable to unconditionally hold to their philosophical ideals in the real world. In most cases, it appears in the way they triage their cases.
I learned this by working for certain fronts to promote specific bills only to discover they've ceased endorsing that bill (such as when gay marriage was controversial in California).
In the case of the second amendment, yeah it sucks that gun-owners rights are left by everyone else to let the NRA handle it. And the NRA is, in turn, represents the cause with a conspicuous lack of finesse or decorum.
If you put those vets with PTSD (or, really, anyone with PTSD) into an oppressive work environment, yeah, some might pop off. I can't speak in regards to the work environment in your typical precinct. I hear that one has a margarita machine.
While we've seen some studies about military forces in other parts of the world being used for police operations, and ending with less-than-optimal results, I can't speak to the correlation between the hiring of vets and, say, the police brutality problem in the US. More likely, that's just because cop is a great career path for bullies with anger-management problems, and human beings love authority so much that we find it hard to sustain oversight.
Am I saying vets with PTSD are unemployable? Of course not. But most of the PTSD victims I know (some action-hardened vets, some not) are really into not taking any shit from anyone, including bosses.
And we have a lot of folks who are denied rights and services for less. It's the Hustler / raunchy porn free speech rule: when we protect outrageous or offensive speech, it demonstrates that less offensive speech is protected.
When we protect the rights of those of us who are most despicable and offensive, it means that the rights of us who are less so are also protected.
...since Red Bull tastes conspicuously like Shock Tarts* which is a product of Nestle Corporation.
...No I don't. This kind of trademark defensiveness is really dickish and insecure. Good thing I don't like Red Bull, or taurine-based energy drinks generally, because now I find Red Bull as a company, a product and a concept even more annoying.
...our version of a democratic system to elect people who govern with integrity and wisdom does not work, given that our only choices, our only options are reduced to people who lie to cover their own asses and believe the law does not apply to themselves.
We'd be better off with a Social Security number lottery.
No-one cares at this point since no-one uses the metro, but yeah, in order for your App to be Win8 compatible, it has to past Microsoft Windows Certification, which precludes anything Microsoft has decided might squick an eleven-year-old.
At first, even M-rated games were outlawed outright, but the cert guidelines were loosened to allow M-rated games that didn't have sexual content. And then it became a non-issue when all the desktop users disabled the Metro and bought third-party start menus.
But yeah, the big companies all want their own walled gardens where they can decide which porn is acceptable and which isn't, and which news that disparages their company is fit to print, and which is not.
I've noticed that that our society in general, and police specifically, are interested in busting people they can label as pedophiles or pornographers, but these institutions have statistically little interest in curbing child sexual abuse, tracing and intercepting child trafficking or prostitution rackets.
Our law enforcement and department of justice wants to imprison you for looking at a picture of a naked child, and maybe intercept the distribution of pictures, but couldn't care less about the welfare of the child in question, or about halting production of further pictures. Or halting vectors by which children are captured and indoctrinated into the black-market sex industries.
Incidentally, child sex slaves average a service life-span of seven years. That's around seven years after they are captured and broken in. Most, by far, die as slaves, and their masters are rarely discovered or face justice.