If emails pop up showing that Mercedes' team planned on using the murals as background, does that change things? Is there a legal difference between just driving around, taking pictures and driving around to take pictures in front of certain places? Should there be?
How does this relate to things like Charging Bull and Fearless Girl?
Surely there must be a way for the government to have complete and total control without causing riots and rebellion? Bread and Circuses - the real reason government is so cozy with Hollywood. If only the Republicans would get on board with the social programs all their Orwellian wet dreams could come true.
First let me say that this whole thing is stupid and it is absolutely all about the fact that his name is "Ahmed Mohamed" and he has brown skin, and the police and school administrators should absolutely be held responsible.
That said, there are problems with Mark Bennet's analysis. In section a, he is ignoring: "knowingly" and "with intent"
The statute is clearly written to take intent into account. Section a is the meat of the statute and cannot be ignored.
Subsections 1 & 2 are not background definitions or footnotes - they are the specific points that focus a's generalities. They do not take away intent; they clarify what the intent has to be.
Ironically, in trying to make the Texas legislature responsible for what happened to Ahmed, Bennett is misreading the statute in the exact same way the cops do when they try to imply that it has bearing here.
Cops and prosecutors will always do this to try and justify their actions and it's wrong. We should not stoop to that level just to spread more blame around.
These guys don't believe that food, water, shelter, and not getting shot by police when you have brown skin are basic human rights. They certainly aren't going to support education and exposure to information from sources outside the corporate approved list.
No, see, the guys that run the broadband industry are experts in broadband, so why would you turn to someone else to make laws? No one else has their experience with the key players and technical doo-dad-ery. NO ONE! Who knows more than them about how to serve (up) customers? NO ONE! Why do you hate knowledge and expertise? Are you some kind of anti-elitist elitist?
Vladimir Putin commissioned a study to find out who the most awesome person in the world is and the results have just come back. Folks, he's as surprised as you are by this, but the answer is Vladimir Putin. This fair and completely objective assessment clearly shows that Putin is the most awesome person in the whole world. Kim Jong-un was a close second, followed distantly by Bashar al-Assad in third.
I usually only comment when i have something snarky or funny to say - the usual crowd does a pretty good job of trouncing trolls without my help.
I share techdirt stories when i see people interested in copyright, patent, etc. issues but without a lot of concrete knowledge, especially if they seem to be buying the spin without really understanding the issue.
Step 1, Set alert for #PGPDVice. Step 2, Register new twitter handle that seems plausibly official. Step 3, Prepare a bunch of celeb, politician, animal, clown, etc. photos for upload.* Step 4, When the alert goes off, make sure that hashtag is trending like crazy.
* This looks like a good source for pics: http://www.princegeorgescountymd.gov/sites/PoliceDepartment/AboutUs/Pages/default.aspx
If the law requires you to do ridiculously complex things then the law is clearly intended to discourage you from doing those things. For you to do them anyway is to show a complete disregard for the spirit of the law. Love is hate. War is peace. Obeying the law is breaking the law.