At this point I'm more surprised they just didn't waive the requirement for testing, as long as you donated to some fund the President's approved up like the one for his new Balls.
Seems like a strange time, but maybe they think the government is open to it now, and prepping for a change this year. However if GOP takes power next year, I can see them going silent again.
It's no suprise this happened in Evansville, which was the headquarters for the state Klan in the 20. There have been dozens of articles written about how bad this police department is.
Confused, the start of the article says that the 5th district ruled he had qualified immunity, and then the end of the article it says that he will face charges, which is it?
So this is something I've been toying with.
Either the 1rst and 2nd amendment shall not be infringed/abridged and its a Binary matter, or they can both have reasonable restrictions placed on them in specific circumstances.
Trying to explain to a 1rst amendment "no compromise" individual how their want to punish Social Media companies for kicking people off its platform ties into the 2nd amendment, and that they are hypocritical for arguing for one and not the other. Requires to many mental gymnastics.
I agree that this law is too vague and could be abused, its a bad law, but we have other restrictions on speech like Yelling fire in a crowded area, just as we have restrictions on Firearms. One could also say that Firearm safety training is part of the 2nd amendment in maintaining a militia.
It's unreasonable restrictions that need to be watched. This being one of them.
I think this should be allowed to go through and get precedence going for the idea that shit like this does not hold water. We have congressman that think that websites should be held responsible for what other people say on them, this needs to make national news for the sole purpose of deterring more people, and if it drains the finances of an idiot, so much the better.
He seems to have stumbled on Heisenberg's encryption principle in which the better the encryption the data, the less access to law enforcement and criminals, and vice versa. The data can't exist in both an unencrypted and secure state at the same time.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Seananon.
Why even have it
At this point I'm more surprised they just didn't waive the requirement for testing, as long as you donated to some fund the President's approved up like the one for his new Balls.
Misreading
I misread the title and thought originally this was about banning chemicals... And I still thought it was plausible.
Timing
Seems like a strange time, but maybe they think the government is open to it now, and prepping for a change this year. However if GOP takes power next year, I can see them going silent again.
correction
20s, need to fix that.
no suprise
It's no suprise this happened in Evansville, which was the headquarters for the state Klan in the 20. There have been dozens of articles written about how bad this police department is.
To much in orbit
FCC should have denied the request. Reason: Musk already has to much bullshit in his orbit. We don't need to add more.
Wire or Shield, doesn't matter ACAB
Someone called up Aceveda and had them bring down the Mackey to intimidate the recorder.
Confused, the start of the article says that the 5th district ruled he had qualified immunity, and then the end of the article it says that he will face charges, which is it?
Unintended Consquences
Wouldn't this just slow down their troll farms distributing misinformation?
Are they threatening the rest of the world with a good time?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Wow
So this is something I've been toying with. Either the 1rst and 2nd amendment shall not be infringed/abridged and its a Binary matter, or they can both have reasonable restrictions placed on them in specific circumstances. Trying to explain to a 1rst amendment "no compromise" individual how their want to punish Social Media companies for kicking people off its platform ties into the 2nd amendment, and that they are hypocritical for arguing for one and not the other. Requires to many mental gymnastics. I agree that this law is too vague and could be abused, its a bad law, but we have other restrictions on speech like Yelling fire in a crowded area, just as we have restrictions on Firearms. One could also say that Firearm safety training is part of the 2nd amendment in maintaining a militia. It's unreasonable restrictions that need to be watched. This being one of them.
I don't remember how the yearly awards are made, but the sheep comment I'd put for insightful and funny for the year!
Banned
So are the president's press conferences now banned in Puerto Rico
Won't somebody please think of the SHAREHOLDERS!!
Allowing it
I think this should be allowed to go through and get precedence going for the idea that shit like this does not hold water. We have congressman that think that websites should be held responsible for what other people say on them, this needs to make national news for the sole purpose of deterring more people, and if it drains the finances of an idiot, so much the better.
In this climate
In the climate where you have Roy Moore who almost won a senate race, who was removed from his supreme court twice. This makes perfect sense
Heisenberg's encryption principle
He seems to have stumbled on Heisenberg's encryption principle in which the better the encryption the data, the less access to law enforcement and criminals, and vice versa. The data can't exist in both an unencrypted and secure state at the same time.