Cattress 's Techdirt Comments
Latest Comments (173)
-
On the post: Florida Republican Gov’t Officials Bend Over Backwards To Tell Everyone That, Yes, Absolutely, They Are Punishing Disney For Its Speech
-
On the post: Florida Republican Gov’t Officials Bend Over Backwards To Tell Everyone That, Yes, Absolutely, They Are Punishing Disney For Its Speech
Cattress ( profile ), 25 Apr, 2022 @ 08:10pmWhat is this "gender ideology"? Do you mean people who don't believe that all humans must conform to current and local expectations of gender expression determined by inspection of their genitals or genetic material? I mean, if anyone is an ideologue, it's you genital wardens. I have no problem with live and let live, I don't need to see a birth certificate, genitals or blood test to accept that a person is whoever they present and claim themselves to be. I don't feel the need to tell people that they must dress themselves as the sex I presume they are, or even make an assumption or investigate what the sex of someone who does not clearly fit into my preconceived ideas of how any one gender or sex is likely to appear. Its not my business and does not change how I interact. I don't think I have the right to tell someone what name or pronouns they must use for themselves or respond to. I don't think I have the right to dictate to a newlywed what last name I will address them by. If you think you have the right to determine such things, you aren't stating the truth or the science or whatever else you penis/testicle auditors claim, you're just being an asshole. The only time I see any reason for discussion is potentially when someone transitions after natural puberty and there may be a need to assess whether physical strength and size creates an unfair competitive advantage or needs to be accommodated. I don't think there is one size fits all rule that is universally fair, it's far too nuanced. These discussions must be done with sensitivity and compassion, with the goal to determine the best possible outcome for all parties that they all agree on. No one chooses to be trans to gain some sort of advantage so we need to stop pedalling that nonsense. But you frank&bean counters are the ones losing your shit and demanding that biological males continue to perpetuate the patriarchy. You make no secret of how much lesser you consider the female sex and associated femininity; slurs and insults you sling at insufficiently masculine men often are words that are associated with women and being female. You are the one demanding active compliance to your ideas of sex and gender, even if it continues to hold the entire nation back from a better life for everyone. I'm the one that just wants people to be their authentic self and for you panty sniffers to stop degrading others and forcing your uptight ideology on everyone else.
-
On the post: Florida Republican Gov’t Officials Bend Over Backwards To Tell Everyone That, Yes, Absolutely, They Are Punishing Disney For Its Speech
Cattress ( profile ), 25 Apr, 2022 @ 01:59amLeftist corporate bootlicking? I thought the leftist were: the party of cancel culture, socialist, communist, Marxist... You know, trying to destroy capitalism and America? Disney has been slow, hesitant and pretty late to the game in speaking up marginalized people. This isn't so much about defending Disney as it speaking up about the government punishing someone for expressing their constitutionally protected views. And gee what a surprise, more utterly stupid (and I wish I could come up with a better way to get within range of how epically ignorant the right is on the subject of grooming, but nothing is nearly strong enough) fear mongering coming from hippocritical moral degenerates on the right. Make up a bogeyman that's going to get the children. Spend prescious time telling tales of this fake monster, and how the left/democrats/liberals are out laying children flavored candies like a breadcrumb trail right up to wherever the children gather. Every fucking election cycle. First, the more society represses healthy, ordinary discussions about sex and withholds information that everyone has a human right to know, the higher the occurance of all sex crimes, the higher the spread of STI, the more unplanned pregnancies, the lower the gender equality, which means the lower the quality of life, especially for women and children. The fact that about half of the states do not require comprehensive, scientifically accurate sex education be taught without exception to all students before highschool is actively causing harm to generations of people, all because of a bunch of uptight controlling idiots are abusing religion and government like a spiked mace to beat their corrupted morals into everyone else. First, if you think this law will in any remote or teensy tiny way prevent a teacher from grooming your child, you are a idiot. If you think your child's teacher would try to groom your child if it wasn't for this law, you are an idiot who has apparently does nothing to protect you child from someone you think is a sexual predator. If you think that an entire classroom can be groomed with class discussions, you are profoundly ignorant; a key component of grooming is making an individual child feel special, finding ways to isolate them from others, and get them to tell you specific information in order to use it later when intimidating or coercing them. Groomers look for kids without a lot of friends, not much confidence, without attentive or supportive families. These people are predators and they select specific targets because they cannot maintain enough control over a large group of children. And the secrecy, discomfort and taboo around the subject of sex, which comes from generations of the same stupid message that sex is bad and dirty, is used by these same scumbags to maintain silence. Kids that can't articulate what happened because they dont even know the proper names of parts of their own bodies. Kids that have learned to associate parts of their bodies, or certain subjects/phrases with shame. Kids that are told not to question authority, that they don't have any say over their own body, who's pain or discomfort is ignored or dismissed. Who don't understand a reaction their body had and is ashamed or embarrassed. There was no curriculum in Florida or anywhere else in the US that teaches the mechanics of human sex/sexual activity in elementary school, let alone 2nd graders. Kids don't even get an explanation of puberty and all of the anatomy until 5th grade, which is too late and parents can still opt out in most places. And sorry but no, the parents "rights" to withhold information do not supercede the child's right to know about their own body. It's not about giving school (government) power over parenting decisions, it's about respecting the rights and needs of children, so fuck off with noise. Parents that don't want their kids to know about their own bodies are not supported on religious grounds either. Learning about puberty and sex in school is not taking it away from parents either, they can and should teach their own expectations and morals at home. Lessons in school can generate those necessary talks, and allow them to focus on the emotional, social, spiritual aspects of sex without the uncomfortable attempts to explain the physical parts. It should all be taught, gradually and age appropriately by 5th grade, just like it's done in Western Europe. Kids who have accurate information, people they can ask questions and get answers cannot be so easily manipulated and shamed into secrecy. And they are still innocent children without sex being a poorly kept secret from them. Instead of shaking off centuries of unnecessary shame and trying something other than the same failed garbage, we double down on shameful stupidity. This "parents choice" or don't say gay law doesn't actually do either, and it doesn't change formal curriculum, or do anything prevent grooming. What it does is create landmines for teachers. They have to tiptoe around answering certain questions, which crushes inquisitive and rich learning environment and creates a barrier, where the teacher is yet another adult not taking them seriously. It prevents teachers from addressing bullying that involves slinging certain homophobic phrases and accusations; it prevents the teacher from affirming to an LGBTQ child that they are worthy and deserving of dignity. This means that they have to be extremely careful leading pretend play activities,or even having a dress up box; what if a boy wants to wear the princess dress or be the nurse, does the teacher allow it or not? What if a girl want to read a boys character in a play? What if the teacher doesn't object, but another student does, citing that girls's can't be boys or vice versa, does that kid get to decide what another child can or can't do? And what if a kid opens up to the teacher about anything in the verboten subject, like having a crush on someone of the same sex, but asks the teacher to keep their confidence? Instead of teachers making decisions based on what is in the best interest of the child in the current situation, they have turn away kids that need more trusted adults, let gender stereotypes restrict imagination. All because a bunch of jackasses can't come up a platform that people like, so they make up scary stories and bullshit acts of heroism to save the kids from non-existent threats and nitwits trying to analyze textbooks and children's literature who have no qualifications to make any useful contributions to the conversation. The fucking right these days, dumb and dangerous.
-
On the post: Florida Republican Gov’t Officials Bend Over Backwards To Tell Everyone That, Yes, Absolutely, They Are Punishing Disney For Its Speech
Cattress ( profile ), 24 Apr, 2022 @ 10:49pmI'm pretty sure that if that was the case, then unions and their associated groups would be sueing states that give special tax benefits to companies like Amazon to attract them to their state, would be getting sued for financing anti-union speech. Just as an example. One would only need to do a cursory search of the corporate welfare handed out to all the big businesses and then check social media and contributions made to charities or political candidates and the civil court system in every state would have decades worth of cases to hear. The reason that doesn't happen is that the corporate welfare (tax breaks) is not contingent on, or in exchange for giving up the right to free speech. Do you think any NFL team would have allowed kneeling to occur more than once, considering the hefty tax breaks that build stadiums and team facilities? The special Disney district was probably mutually beneficial, and I suspect that this hasty knee jerk decision to end it is going to cost the state, taxpayers and most of the tourism industry more money than it will Disney. And it's probably going to be more of a headache for the counties than they bargained for.
-
On the post: Florida Republican Gov’t Officials Bend Over Backwards To Tell Everyone That, Yes, Absolutely, They Are Punishing Disney For Its Speech
Cattress ( profile ), 24 Apr, 2022 @ 10:10pmI'm cracking up, why did you list Pornhub repeatedly? Are you that uptight that you think accusing an adult male (or anyone for that matter) of watching porn is offensive? Are you hoping someone will ask you for examples of non corporate small time porn sites so that you can demonstrate what a porn snob you are? Why is Ben & Jerry's in there, because they are Jewish, or because they spoke up against Israel? Oh, and you'll keep Target out of mouth if you know what's good for you.
-
On the post: Florida Republican Gov’t Officials Bend Over Backwards To Tell Everyone That, Yes, Absolutely, They Are Punishing Disney For Its Speech
Cattress ( profile ), 23 Apr, 2022 @ 03:49pmI hate to say this, but there oughta be a law... A law that forces the individual members of legislating bodies and executives to pay out of pocket when they hastily write poorly thought out laws with the stated purpose of violating the constitution. I don't know how Florida is going to stay such a low tax business friendly state when they actively move to hobble their largest employer, tax generating and overall economic driver. The legislature was in such a hurry that they said the folks of the two counties that would suddenly be tasked with maintaining this district can voice their opinions next year, after this takes effect. Although I guess they can't really give an opinion when how the law will actually be executed since no one knows how this is going to effect their community yet. I mean, what are they planning to with this reclaimed power? Are they going to rewrite all the regulations, including those relating to structural safety to reflect the same shitty ones across the state that allowed a building to partially collapse with residents inside while the condo board argued about how to finance emergency repairs for a few more years? Or that footbridge that collapsed onto a roadway not long ago? Or the retention pond that leaked into the ocean causing a deadly red algae bloom? Are they going to pay for the specialized crew and equipment and architects to perform work near& under the rides and attractions? I mean, not exactly an encouraging idea for parents with precious little children. Are they going to make Disney go through ridiculous bureaucracy that take months or years for minor work to be approved, all the while deterring park visitors due to an inconvenience, not just to the park, but to the entire state? How long can the tourism industry take another drop in visitors because the state is fucking around with park operations to punish the company for their speech? Disney weighed ignoring their employees and the LGBTQ community, and tried it on for a little while. Seems like they figured out that wasn't good for business. This is just cutting off your nose to spite your face.
-
On the post: Florida Republican Gov’t Officials Bend Over Backwards To Tell Everyone That, Yes, Absolutely, They Are Punishing Disney For Its Speech
Cattress ( profile ), 23 Apr, 2022 @ 02:30pmFeeling a little schadenfreude? A little smug maybe? Like you are pointing out yet another example of the left's hypocrisy? Yes? Then go back and actually read the article, because, well, bless your heart littlecupcakes.
-
On the post: Fascinating New Study Suggests (Again) That Twitter Moderation Is Biased Against Misinformation, Not Conservatives
Cattress ( profile ), 22 Apr, 2022 @ 01:36pmAnd here's the problem with vigilante "justice" and dispensing the death penalty for the most offensive and disgusting crimes: https://apnews.com/article/virginia-sexual-assault-500ef04e63672214e2e262d1338370ea Now of course if this guy had actually done these awful things to his children I would be hard pressed to muster some merciful feelings towards him. He could have been tortured and violently killed by guards behind bars, with hours of footage of brutality for evidence, and I doubt anyone would be fighting to hold guards accountable. But this man didn't do those awful things to his kids. He was convicted with at least a semblance of defensive legal representation, which some people didn't think he deserved based on the accusations. It's the kind of case that makes defense attorneys seem like the scummiest of lawyers. (They aren't, ambulance chasers are) I hear this kind of rhetoric (feed the pedos to the woodchipper) from my husband and some of his friends, and I know that they mean well. But they are dead fucking wrong, and I tell them that. It's ALWAYS wrong to execute people. And while you pretend that you mean the worst imaginable cases, like what that father was accused of, nothing changes the fact that death cannot be undone. Or that there will continue to be reckless accusations of evil, based on homophobia and ignorance. Or that you really do mean anyone queer or supportive the community. Taking permanent, non-revokable actions like execution aren't Christian values, or so-called western values or offering any protection nor justice to children. Frankly, it sounds ridiculous that you claim the evangelicals are holding folks back from their bloodlust, because the evangelicals are rife with pedos! (Which is not an attempt to smear evangelicals, just pointing out that sexual repression and patriarchal structure enables those in power to victimize those without power by undermining their creditability and casting out anyone challenging them) In reality, this is advocating lynch mobs. This renewed movement to brand LGBTQ and any one supportive, because be honest that's the goal, as pedophiles and child abusers actually puts children in danger and enables abusers. And speaking of, all this bullshit about how any mention of gender, biological sex, or human sexuality to little kids some how corrupts, or primes them for sexual abuse, is exactly that, bullshit. In Western Europe kids in kindergarten are given at minimum proper terminology for male & female bodies, and in some places simplistic explanation of human reproduction. Kids over there have already gotten compressive sex education by the time kids here get sex segregated uncomfortable lessons on puberty, about 5th grade, which is after some girls have gotten their first period. The US has higher rates of sexual violence, STI, unplanned pregnancy, teenage pregnancy, while lower rates of sexual satisfaction and less gender equality for women. When are we, especially the suburban moms like me, going to figure out we handle the subject of sex all wrong. It would be a lot easier to demolish this hate filled rhetoric if kids, yes little kids, already learned basic information about their bodies and sex openly and honestly instead of keeping it a dirty secret.
-
On the post: Fascinating New Study Suggests (Again) That Twitter Moderation Is Biased Against Misinformation, Not Conservatives
Cattress ( profile ), 19 Apr, 2022 @ 11:48pmI think we are having a discussion in good faith. Even though we don't see exactly eye to eye, we agree it's better to counter the bad speech with more good speech, yes? The problem is when repeated attempts to engage those spouting election lies, claims about masks causing harm or drugs useless against covid, or attacking another's humanity, that no amount of consistent, prolific good speech is going to deter, change the mind, or chase off a troll. Or bot for that matter. Trolls are getting shits and giggles out of generating responses to their long debunked garbage. These people are not having a good faith discussion, they don't care what you say. And unfortunately, despite the "adults" claiming kids can't separate fact from fiction without more guidance, it's the adults that desperately need media literacy. And some of those adults are in leadership, or legislative roles, responsible for making decisions and law, while lacking a firm grasp on the facts because people they trust (other "adults", some trolls too) have been lying or misinforming them. Consequential decisions, ones that can effect our liberty, or lives, the future of democracy, must be based on evidence in reality. So the trolls got told to go play under some other bridge. They weren't bringing anything of value to any conversation, they were looking for people to exploit,confuse and radicalize. They sought to drive out good speech by being frustrating assholes. See the difference?
-
On the post: Fascinating New Study Suggests (Again) That Twitter Moderation Is Biased Against Misinformation, Not Conservatives
Cattress ( profile ), 19 Apr, 2022 @ 11:07pmWell, less anti-Semitic but more Islamophobic? There are plenty of Jewish people who do support Israel unconditionally, who may or may not have an understanding of the experience of the Palestinians, and who may/not care. These are not secretly rabid anti-Semites. There is also this, in my opinion weird, connection between Evangelicals, Trump, and Israel. I don't think it's the source of much anti-Semitism, (though plenty of ignorant stereotyping) where support of Israel in unconditional, having to do with the rapture, which Trump is some kind of prophet of God- I don't know the specifics, it's not a rabbit hole I'm exploring. Again though, this same grouping has excessive hate and especially fear of Muslims. I'm not entirely sure much of the white nationalist manosphere pays much attention to something like BDS, but there's value to sowing more division for them, but they are more likely to swing against BDS because that's the right wing position. Someone like Ilhan Omar has said a couple things that could be interpreted as antisemitic, and she was quick to apologize & delete her tweets, that show how tricky the conversation can be. I mean, money/greed is a universal human faultline, but because of stereotyping, it's almost impossible to bring into this subject regardless of relevance. I didn't even know that Jewish people were accused of using, uh dark magic? As part of their "trickery", so I learned a little history there. Regardless, the imperative to me is respecting mutual humanity to live at least in peace if not harmony. Or some hippy free love shit like that, you catch my drift.
-
On the post: Fascinating New Study Suggests (Again) That Twitter Moderation Is Biased Against Misinformation, Not Conservatives
Cattress ( profile ), 18 Apr, 2022 @ 11:01pmWhy shouldn't these platforms have moderation, aren't they entitled to decide who they do not wish to associate with, or messages they do want to carry? Moderation is free speech too. I also think it's necessary to point out that the election lies, covid mis/dis info was causing significant real world harm, which was being felt by the real people in these companies and caused users to put significant pressure on these companies to do something about. Can't expect to stay in business with half your user base boycotting due to bad info circulating, while the other half is dying, going to prison or off grid because of that same bad info. Now I see your point about the risk losing socially valuable points of view to moderation of thoughts outside of accepted convention. For instance, it can be difficult to criticize the state (government) of Israel without risking an appearance of being anti-Semitic, we have seen a flurry of anti-BDS bills pop up all over as a supposed stand against anti-Semitism. This is certainly an area where moderation can get tricky, and there are going to be mistakes and arguments. I think we have to just keep calling out mistakes and engaging in discussion. And hopefully those discussions and arguments can at least respect humanity on all sides so that it is productive and remains something that can be discussed on such a wide reaching platform.
-
On the post: Supreme Court Deals Blow To Lying Cops, Lowers Bar For Malicious Prosecution Lawsuits
Cattress ( profile ), 18 Apr, 2022 @ 08:54pmIt's been some times since I read the details of Grey's case, so I could be a bit fuzzy. But I seem to recall that it was the bike cop that decided to chase him because Grey turned and hauled ass the other way when he saw the cops. His record was kinda lengthy, but no serious harm to others like murder, rape, and I don't think armed robbery/hold up type of crime. He was a young guy, though he was asthmatic (which is more common in city neighborhoods that lack green space and trees, one of those long term effects of city planning with racist intentions from generations before us). If I remember correctly he was having some trouble breathing, probably in relation to running, which he was allowed to do because there was no probable cause to demand that he stop and chat with those cops. He was denied his request to get, or have a family member bring out his inhaler. I don't believe there was any dispute about how they tossed this young man into the back of the paddy wagon without securing him in place with a seatbelt, as was protocol. Another person in the van I believe said he heard Gray say he couldn't breathe. At some point on the excessively long ride (I do remember the route looked like little Jeffy's day in a Family Circus cartoon), he was checked on. I don't know if that was before or after the neck injury, but obviously they didn't secure him at that time either, leaving him cuffed behind his back. It didn't likely matter that he complained of trouble breathing, we hear cops all the time acting like they are qualified to determine someone's medical condition because they refuse to believe that a medical emergency could actually occur during an arrest, it can only be a lie in their opinion. (Speaking of, pretty disturbing story of cops tasering a teenager while she was having an epileptic seizure, and later her mother who came rushing to the scene when called, causing her to urinate on herself in public. Or the woman experiencing a diabetic attack, during a traffic stop, and for anyone that doesn't know, when a Type 1 diabetic sugar has dropped dangerously low, they lose control over their physical and mental faculties, it's very scary to witness, but easy to recognize and needs immediate treatment, which gets more difficult the more combative they become, the longer treatment is delayed. Obviously for a cop with no training or experience in this type of emergency, you can see how fast violence is used, but voluntary compliance is impossible to give) Anyway, Grey arrived at the precinct or jail and he had broken neck. Not really anything anyone can argue. Even the bullshit excuse that the protocol to secure people in transport in seatbelts being new doesn't fly for someone like me, it's inexcusable that it's even necessary to formally make it a rule since the cops are responsible for the safety of those they transport. They don't cooperate with getting belted in, then you wait until they do. Good time to work on de-escalation, talk to the person like a human being. Stop acting like people are only being difficult just to fuck up your day.
-
On the post: Supreme Court Deals Blow To Lying Cops, Lowers Bar For Malicious Prosecution Lawsuits
Cattress ( profile ), 16 Apr, 2022 @ 05:26pmI know flight is a crime. And I don't want to see officers killed any more than suspects (and there are some horrible, horrible examples of both that challenge my stance against the death penalty) That's why officers should be stepping back, making commands from a distance, give a reminder that choosing to run is only going to make their problem worse and complying ensures that no one gets hurt during this encounter. Let people who are not clearly a threat to others run. Use technology the right way; deploy drones to an area to search for a dangerous suspect (as I have no doubt they have more drones strategically placed or doing illegal surveillance that could be called into an actual legitimate purpose) or call a team to look through all those cameras they have access to. Don't make the situation a heat of battle moment, they can be caught later. And in the heat of real battle (which is what occurs with enemies of your country, which you are a formal member of the military and not applicable to the encounters between the police and non police because they are not in the military,it's not a fucking battlefield, and it's a damn mindset that creates the idea of us vs them and dehumanizes people the cops deal with) mistakes are not acceptable nor tolerated. That's why the military trains so hard, to prevent mistakes that happen when process isn't basically second nature. Cops are creating the chaos and uncertain situations that put themselves in danger and it shouldn't be acceptable protocol. If tasers are not effective in gaining compliance, or being misused (which I was just reading how they aren't really supposed to be used so close because you can't aim in a way get a good latch with the prongs) then get better equipment, training or ditch them. Just like body cameras falling off or being activated/deactivated "conveniently" timed so that important moments are missed, are also the simplest of solutions; attach cameras with loops sewn into uniforms and Velcro straps, make them activate when their patrol car door opens and unable to be shut off until they are back inside and recording equipment inside the vehicle activates. They should be just as accountable for how they spend every minute of the day as anyone working in a call center or Amazon; they can have an app or icon on their computer to log time in the restroom for their own privacy, to log start and end times for each encounter with a citizen, which would make reviews by supervisors and requests for footage much easier to locate. And the software to constantly and securely monitor employees is abundant.
-
On the post: Supreme Court Deals Blow To Lying Cops, Lowers Bar For Malicious Prosecution Lawsuits
Cattress ( profile ), 16 Apr, 2022 @ 03:30pmYes, I agree that more gun laws won't change the behavior of criminals. However, they will affect lawful gun owners, turning some into lawbreakers, and put up barriers to legal gun ownership and pretty much always at a disproportionate effect on Black folks. Gun control was created specifically to disarm black communities, because of racist fears and goals. Don't want black folks to vote, but the law says you have to? Terrorize them with lynch mobs and have armed groups "guard" the polls. When they dare stand up for themselves and fight back, well just make it illegal or impossible for certain people to own guns (word guns is interchangeable with the word "voting" in this context). How? Make it prohibitively expensive and time consuming (permit and licensing applications and fees, taxes, surcharges, fees added onto the purchase price, regulate who can sell guns, how many they can sell and how many dealers and guns can be sold in a geographic area, the manner in which guns are sold) Make requirements of expensive training and storage which also, can only be obtained through a heavily regulated (ie politically connected) sources. Make it very easy to lose gun rights, but impossible or nearly so to get them back (again, voting is also applicable) and then have the the original slave catchers, union busters, enforcers of racist laws and most unaccountable form of government next to the prison system be in charge of who is a candidate for losing that right. And the thing is, it doesn't matter if the person advocating for gun control, against drugs or sex work, is doing so with the purest intentions, the way they will be enforced is always going to against the most marginalized people with the least means to fight back. Blacks and whites use drugs at similar rates, yet Blacks are arrested at much higher rates and receive much longer prison sentences. Black people are pulled over more often, were stopped and frisked more, yet were less likely to have an weapon than whites. Places with more gun laws do not have lower crime rates (nor is the converse true) because these laws do nothing to address the driving factors like poverty, economic inequality. Gun control and more cops are lazy thinking and easy buzzwords (it's the kind of shit that got Trump elected, someone suggesting tough guy easy to understand solutions that the masses can feel smart when they hear someone else say it) Ideas like background checks and red flag laws seem like good common sense regulations. But we all need to recognize that government is a massive machine, with dysfunctional parts, with neglected parts, where maintenance of information systems has been given about as much funding and attention as lead leaching water lines and crumbling bridges. Florida can't tell you how much you owe so you can pay and get your right to vote back. NY can't seem to create a searchable inventory of seized (forfeited) assets for multiple millions of dollars to pay for it. The military failed to report an incredibly violent man to NICS who went on to massacre a church. Kids who are aging out of foster care can't get their own damn birth certificate so they can get ID because the necessary information was never gotten or preserved when they entered. Cops show up at the wrong house, arrest people with similar names who otherwise don't match any known details of a suspect. The most accurate predictor of violence is poverty. That doesn't mean that the poor lack values, judgement, or intelligence, or that they need more supervision, control, or policing. It means that they lack access to the tools and resources and opportunities that are needed to create stability. And that is so much more difficult to create truly meaningful change, especially since most people think poor people (which is a kind of euphemism for Black) are lacking morally or intellectually and require supervision (policing), and many or most whites are not willing to accept that we are not a post racial society, reparations are necessary (and will ultimately help everyone because racism squanders economic opportunity; also must be made to Native Americans) and that anyone fighting diversity is a complete moron. Techdirt talks a lot about bad legislation that solves nothing (or makes things worse) and is often for the purpose of doing "something". Some problems don't have easy answers. Prohibiting things, be it encryption, drugs, guns, will always cause the most harm to marginalized people. It always creates more danger, and opportunities for bad actors to exploit desperation.
-
On the post: Supreme Court Deals Blow To Lying Cops, Lowers Bar For Malicious Prosecution Lawsuits
Cattress ( profile ), 15 Apr, 2022 @ 12:42pmAs barely a novice when it comes to guns, though very pro 2A, bump stocks are the term I'm familiar with. I just did a very cursory search to get an idea what Glock switches are, which is essentially the same purpose as the bump stock but for the most common semi handguns. People who, like me, grew up without any exposure to guns or gun owners, tend to scare easily our lack of knowledge leads us to ideas about gun control that aren't effective at combatting violence. During that cursory search I did see a lot of reports of an increasing number of modified guns and ease of accessing the tiny devices used for the mod. Outside of a few instances, like in Sacramento and the Boog boi who wrote boogaloo in his own blood on the trunk of a car, looks like fun crimes, ie murder, is still by and large done with regular semi automatic handguns. And just as history has proven time and again, prohibition doesn't work usually increases violence around the prohibited thing. Drugs, guns, prostitution, all made more dangerous by prohibition and over regulation. That's not to say that I think we should eliminate laws against things murder and rape because they still occur, because those things always have a victim, where as drug use or prostitution can and do occur largely without any direct victims. (Sex work does not equal trafficking). Trying to regulate/eliminate tools used for criminal purposes doesn't stop the crime. People just find new ways around the laws, which can also mean an increased risk tolerance. And when the risk of going to prison goes up, and supply is thereby artificially lowered, the profitability for those willing to take the risk goes up, and the motivation to use violence to succeed goes up. How do you think the drug cartels came to be? People paying more for drugs they couldn't make or grow or buy legally, which increased competition in a black market with no legitimate means to settle disputes. Territorial battles instead of basic storefronts, create a criminal hierarchy and blood feuds. Communities that have been pushed into margins, where legitimate business, personal wealth (home ownership), and the ability to climb out of poverty have been regulated out of possibility, foot soldiers are born out of necessity. Gang families form where blood families have been torn apart. Which brings everything back to the need to address the systemic racism caused by over a century of laws and regulations designed to regulate anyone not white, Christian, het, that doesn't conform to traditional conservative values out of existence. Most of our social ills are the direct result of attempts to control the "others" (and lessers, like women, children, the elderly, the disabled). Even where attitudes have changed, we are born into fundamentally broken system that does not afford equal opportunity for all.
-
On the post: Supreme Court Deals Blow To Lying Cops, Lowers Bar For Malicious Prosecution Lawsuits
Cattress ( profile ), 15 Apr, 2022 @ 10:41amGood cops sell copy too, don't give me that shit. The difference is that cops already enjoy the default view as a hero/good guy; I mean hello, look at what Hollywood has done for their reputation (how many of us think of Jack McCoy, detectives Benson and Stabler as sort of friends in our head, who we still want to think of as a typical prosecutor or detectives?) The stories that need sunlight are the ugly ones, like cops breaking/dislocating the arm of a little old lady with dementia, then watching video with other cops an laughing at the sound of the pop. People need to know that their beloved dogs will be shot dead running around in their fenced yard or happily running up to greet the stranger approaching who happens to be a cop. George Floyd's murder was framed as a fucking medical event during arrest; the video was the necessary sunshine. People need to know that cops are not capable of handling people in any sort of crisis, with neuro-divergent conditions, people with mental or physical disabilities, children & young teens, or addicts. That's how we get cops more training (if they will take it) and resources devoted to alternative ways of responding to situations that should never have been foisted in the cops in the first place. It's in the public's interest to know that oftentimes cops aren't getting sufficient mental healthcare themselves, that they have higher rates of being domestic batterers, and that they use their power to commit and cover up a lot of sexual crimes, including against children. There is little public interest in making sure a cop gets sufficient accolade for diving into dangerous water to rescue a kid, they are supposed to do that sort of thing if the situation presents itself. However, it is vital that the public knows that cops transporting vulnerable female suspects during a hurricane lack the a) common sense b) respect for warning or advice coming from lowly road maintenance crews or other professionals c) respect for the lives of anyone else when they decide to drive around a damn road block into flood waters and ultimately drown 2 vulnerable women trapped in the van that cops made it out of just fine. This is exactly what character is all about, doing the right thing even if no one is watching. Cops making bad press for themselves have no one to blame but themselves.
-
On the post: Supreme Court Deals Blow To Lying Cops, Lowers Bar For Malicious Prosecution Lawsuits
Cattress ( profile ), 15 Apr, 2022 @ 04:29amI'm pretty sure there has been significant comparison of the weight and feel of holding gun versus a taser. Kind seems like it would be incredibly reckless for the taser company to not make distinguishable feel to the handle of the taser from that of a gun. Also, right and left, there are standard positions of which side the gun and taser go. That's why she got convicted. Also, the initial stop was pretextual, the rookie she was training said so when describing why he was pulling the kid over. She escalated the situation, she could have put some distance between her and the kid, ordered him out of the car and onto the ground, produced a copy of his warrant for the missed court date to explain to this kid exactly why he was being arrested since he was clearly confused and upset about why he was being pulled over and subsequently arrested. Just a minimum understanding and empathy for someone obviously scared and confused. And for fucks sake, let Brooks go! No need to get into an altercation, let the man run. They had all his info and his car;catch him another day. Another case of a black man shot in the back of the head for some bullshit vehicle tags traffic stop in MI or MN I think, a use of force expert said that while he needed to examine more evidence to give a final opinion, there was no reason to chase after the man for running from the car. It happens time and again, cops chase somebody down and slaughter them for no other reason than contempt of cop for making them run. Like Freddy Grey in Baltimore, he ran after supposedly making eye contact with a bike cop! That's it, ran because he saw some cops, wound up being tossed in a van and given a rough ride to death. For fucks sake stop chasing people who aren't clearly a threat.
-
On the post: Supreme Court Deals Blow To Lying Cops, Lowers Bar For Malicious Prosecution Lawsuits
Cattress ( profile ), 15 Apr, 2022 @ 03:56amIt's not snitching, it is doing the moral, ethical, and legally right thing. That said, it's fair to acknowledge a legitimate fear of speaking up. The Intercept has a great, very long article from 5 years or so ago, that tells what happened when 2 cops in Chicago spoke up. But that fear or real danger doesn't excuse ignoring criminal cops. If you have have any moral fiber, you at minimum quit the job. Otherwise you are complicent, an apple spoiled by the rottens. And I acknowledge that not all police departments are structured so that officers would necessarily be exposed to bad acts of other officers. But if you want me to buy this idea that not all officers are the same, to then you need to buy into the idea that not every suspect or person interacting with the police is the same and some how motivated to cause physical harm, or fabricate a lie against an officer. Officers are corruptible human beings like everyone else. If you think every suspect complaining of unreasonable force or worse, is lying to save his own ass, you have to realize that cops can and will do the same thing. Good character is not a unique trait possessed by law enforcement at some significantly higher concentration than the rest of the population. Cops are human beings, not super heroes. I can accept that they will make mistakes, some that will be fatal to another human being. I can accept that not every situation is cut and dry, that some times there are no good options. I understand that there are racist intents behind the laws they bound to enforce. But I'll be damned if I'm going to be a reasonable person when cops and their criminal unions fight every attempt at the barest minimum of accountability, guardrails for what is acceptable use of force, changes to racist laws, improved training focused on de-escalation tooth and nail. The Bill of Rights lays out the rules the government is bound to, the things the founders had suffered under the monarchy. Yet some how cops, ie the government, some how get their own personal bill of rights in some states, that essentially supercede the legitimate Bill of Rights. The fuck if I have any reason to give cops any benefit of the doubt when they rig the system in their favor.
-
On the post: Supreme Court Deals Blow To Lying Cops, Lowers Bar For Malicious Prosecution Lawsuits
Cattress ( profile ), 15 Apr, 2022 @ 02:38amBasically rigging a bump stock, since they have been administratively "banned"? Something that pretty much everyone who didn't have at least a hobbyist interest in guns had never heard of until the Vegas shooter. And something that really hasn't been discussed since then, which I assume is because they are so infrequently used. I wonder if they are so infrequently used is because they don't make hitting a target any easier or more accurate? Hmm, maybe that's why the military only uses fully automatic function of their rifles as suppressive fire rather than to kill enemy combatants. As someone with no military experience, no exposure to guns until I went shooting the first time with my hubby 7 years ago, and yet I'm not fooled by davec fear mongering.
-
On the post: Eleventh Circuit Strips Immunity From Deputy Who Saved A War Vet From Self-Harm By Breaking His Neck
Cattress ( profile ), 14 Apr, 2022 @ 11:22pmExcept not all Americans have the same access to the ballot. Some voices are watered down by gerrymandering. Laws, some as old as the reconstruction period, were written to disenfranchise Black voters. The incumbents, the uh "winners" of previous races get to write the regulations for their own future competition. They decide who can vote, what disqualifies you from voting, if & how you can get your right to vote back, how the elections are funded and run. They set the policy for how and where to acquire an ID, which can be a nearly impossible for young people aging out of foster care, which are also disproportionately young Black adults. Not everyone voted for
It is not a fig leaf. While intersex individuals are only a tiny part of the population, they are not insignificant and do not deserve to be dismissed or diminished into non-existence. Furthermore, the medical and biological factors that currently designate someone as intersexed are based on current understanding and research, and not exhaustive research that has yet to be completed. There may very well be a "gay" or "trans" gene or other biological factors yet to be discovered; likewise, research may not ultimately shake out a specific biological factor. That still does not rule out the possibility of other organic explanations that we may or may not come to understand. A strict binary set of definitions of sex is over simplified and possibly premature. Don't say semantics don't matter when you are trying to diminish the existence of certain human beings, but feel the word "boy" must be used before "penis" on educational diagrams of male reproductive organs. Let me guess, you also want to make sure that educational diagrams about reproductive organs use an asterisk next to anus if it's included, so that the anus is specifically described as an exit portal for waste, or some kids could get the idea that it might also be for sex.