[ home ] [ pony / townhall / rp / canterlot / rules ] [ arch ]

/townhall/ - Townhall

A place for civilized animals
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
File
Flags  
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

 No.10532[Reply]

File: 1643997841825.jpg (50.99 KB, 960x640, 3:2, e2nescqzwqf81.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

So, out of curiosity, what's going on there?
Texas has taken a very conservative stance against abortions.
There's been that entire discussion in schools about racism and what is labled as "CRT".
Now there appears to be a wave of banning of a lot of classical literature from schools.
And then I go on reddit and there's news of book burnings happening.

Is this a new disturbing trend? or has this been going on for a long time already and it's now only catching the eye of the internet?
Do you think this is also going to move northwards?
39 posts and 2 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.10587

>>10585
I've given no hatred at any point in this thread. I've not even expressed a personal belief on such matters, not that you'd care to even know.

All you can do is lie.

 No.10588

>>10587
I'm kind of bored with you, to be honest, but if there's any more conservative bile that you want to let loose, please do go ahead.

Seeing you conservatives behaving as you do helps a lot in terms of my own sense of trying to be pro-equality and pro-tolerance: it's helpful to know what I'm against.

 No.10590

>>10588
I've literally only said your unproven claims provided without evidence are untrue.
That's hardly "conservative bile".
Hell, it's outright apolitical.

Sorry that I have the audacity to detest liars who make up things about me


 No.10558[Reply]

https://youtu.be/YDVhGHo1HVc

https://youtu.be/y2ua3F_yVP0

So you may have heard of this, but I still feel like it is important to share. The Lacey Act is being passed in another bill, and what it basically does is ban the import, export, or across state lines, of almost all exotic animals and pets. And what I mean by that, is ANY animals that is not a cat, dog, or livestock.

My opinions aside on how I feel about this, I think it's important that everyone know about this because it is a gross overuse of power and not backed by, seemingly, any common sense or science. Even if you don't care about pets in general, this will DEVASTATE many peoples livelihoods and even a lot of conservation efforts.

Please take the time to watch the videos and share them, or look into it on your own. Thank you.

 No.10568

I'm concerned about the government making animal rescue efforts more difficult.

Context: https://www.wbay.com/2022/02/13/new-congressional-bill-potentially-restricting-exotic-pet-rescue-options/


 No.10520[Reply]

File: 1643571555115.jpeg (46.9 KB, 600x314, 300:157, b5gPERRv.jpeg) ImgOps Google

A new poll found that 76% of Americans disapprove of Biden's plan to engage in racial discrimination in selecting a Supreme Court nominee.  What do you think Biden should do, and why?

https://twitter.com/ABC/status/1487792676317577217
https://abcnews.go.com/US/majority-americans-biden-nominees-supreme-court-vacancy-poll/story?id=82553398
3 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.10524

Racial discrimination is wrong, regardless of whether you consider it "positive" or not

 No.10525

>>10522

The proclamation gets him voter points.  It's actually entirely possible he simply doesn't choose a black woman now that he's already elected, but at the time it increased his chances of being elected by some unknown number.

 No.10553

The best way to approach things would have been for the President to have said: "I'm going to take into account personal backgrounds in terms of individual ethical character and diverse life experiences in order to prevent the Supreme Court from being bogged down into groupthink and cognitive bias from arguments that're excessively beholden to tradition".

And then, after appointing somebody (perhaps, yes, an African-American woman), remarking: "Her character and experience will make her an invaluable asset to the Court."

At least, that's what I think.


 No.10517[Reply]

File: 1643333787826.png (390.48 KB, 800x533, 800:533, medium.png) ImgOps Google

A good pony is a pony who values state violence.  Probably a pony who is helped by state violence.  Probably a pony who would not even think the first sentence -- a good pony feels no impulse to analyze their goodness, they need only condemn badness.

I don't think I'm a good pony. I don't think I can become one.  It's too late.

I'm sorta stuck.  Maybe the best I can do is to not bother anypony.
6 posts omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.10531

File: 1643934007841.png (67.33 KB, 250x250, 1:1, thumb.png) ImgOps Google

>>10530
>You've assumed the state defines good and bad.
Right, I've not attempted an argument because I don't have one that's genuine.

I can give you four conventional arguments for state power, if you like.  See if any appeal:

1) State leadership is divine.  Or for a secular state, experts.

2) The state might not be perfect, but it protects you from the next worst thing that would fill the power vacuum if the state dissolved.

3) The state's morality is linked to the morality of the majority of individuals.  You have to trust the state accuracy carries out the will of the majority and that the majority have good sense, of course.  Applies to democratic states.

4) In making use of state services or occupying state territory, you have bound yourself in respect and obedience toward state power.  You consented.

 No.10536

>>10531
Save for the first, none of these guarantee universal morality in the state.

A state can, for instance, become worse than the alternative. Thus the plethora of revolutions and rebellions throughout history, seeking alternative to exactly that.

Likewise, the 'majority of individuals' depends heavily on where you are, not to mention states have a nasty habbit of working hard to ensure unelected members of the government gain power and no longer have to answer to the people anyway.

And of course, consent can be revoked.

 No.10543

>>10536
>Thus the plethora of revolutions and rebellions throughout history, seeking alternative to exactly that.
Good point.  Most believe the American Republic is/was better than the British Empire.  Maybe that's PR, I don't imagine the British are much more upset with their government today than Americans are with theirs.  But if revolution is valid, it calls into question any state.

>no longer have to answer to the people anyway
Right.  America isn't even suppose to be a democracy anyway.  It's democratic, which I gather means the citizens may provide some input by voting.  But the actual majority needn't decide things.  And this was by design -- few of the founders trusted majority rule, and explicitly not rule by the majority of subject humans.

>And of course, consent can be revoked.

Right.  Locke and Hobbes wrestle with this problem.  People might consent to government when no great sacrifice is involved, but how do you hook subjects into fighting a war or paying taxes?  You need a social contract that is hard to revoke.  Probably you need a bit of a threat to maintain leverage.

-

I suppose I can admit, while I can poke holes in other systems of ethics, I don't have a explicit ethical system for myself.  Maybe asking a state to justify the violence is unfair.  I do not attempt to justify my actions.

I know people don't want me to criticize the state.  States exist nearly everywhere because people like them and feel they are a source of authority.  But I don't feel good about violence and it's hard to know what to do with the unsettled feeling.  I try to be a good, respectful person/pony.


 No.10508[Reply]

File: 1642963743943.jpg (105.79 KB, 1024x683, 1024:683, 20200830_191415.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

I'm surprised none of all you alls with your politics and your opinions are talking about the Chinese dumping on the US for interfering in their domestic affairs by supporting Lithuania.

Per various party representatives and state media outlets, "Lithuania stands against universal principles and justice" and that Lithuania is "a mouse or even a flea" that “will pay a heavy price" and "shall be relegated to the garbage bin of history" as it had “gone its own way in defiance of the will of the 1.4 billion Chinese people.”

https://www.dawn.com/news/714015/eu-china-in-soft-diplomacy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soft_power_of_China

 No.10509

I suppose China doing awful things just doesn't feel like news.  There isn't really a discussion to be had about whether China's doing awful things.  It's been happening for about as long as I can remember and it'll probably keep happening forever and there's nothing anyone can do about it.  Probably not even the Chinese.

 No.10510

Now I'm curious, what's Russia's take on this?


 No.10493[Reply]

File: 1641861922622.png (253.81 KB, 1156x1024, 289:256, large.png) ImgOps Google

Through pretty much my whole childhood and early life, I was considered smart.  Someone said I was probably the smartest person to graduate my school.  The implication, of course, is that I'd go on to some kind of greatness.

I feel like I've spent a good deal of energy trying to undo this expectation.  I don't think I'm *that* smart, and even if I am, looking back and nearly always seeing my productivity or progress as below par is not helping.

I'm writing here because I think this might be a shared concern and it's hard to write about this without feeling like I'm bragging somehow (this is one case where not having a name is kinda nice).

I need to stop being "smart."
7 posts and 3 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.10501

File: 1641949278283.jpg (54.82 KB, 1249x1024, 1249:1024, large.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>10500
I think I agree with most everything you say.  It is good to get a sense that I'm not alone.

> I hope to continue with my higher education and achieve career goals that, I guess, would fit with the stereotype of being a "smart person".

Wish you the best of luck.  :)  What are you studying?

My experience with college was pretty mixed.  While this may not be acceptable to everyone, I've found college is not my route to a career.  My life has become more "who is going to stop me," rather than "who approves."  I think I'm happier that way, seeking the approval of others is a questionable project anyway.

 No.10502

>>10501
I'd prefer not to talk about my plans in depth when it comes to studies and whatnot right now, honestly, since things are rather in flux.

Regardless, I'm glad that you're achieving real happiness now, and I hope that I and others here will be the same.

 No.10507

File: 1642631548628.jpg (261.83 KB, 1304x917, 1304:917, Screenshot_20210427-100954….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

Success in life is much more a matter of luck than most are willing to accept.

Opportunity is not evenly distributed around the world, nor is it infinite, and many are explicitly barred from access to opportunities.

And even if exploiting opportunities would require effort and skill (once you have access to opportunities of course), the gains one makes from those opportunities does not necessarily depend on the skill or intellect required to take advantage of thise opportunities. Plenty of average or below average people can be (and have been) momentously successful without even really needing to be geniuses or gifted (or even understand how they are successful for that matter) and plenty of highly competent people flounder in life, because of that fundamental unequal distribution of gainful opportunities.

Competency doesn't really matter that much when the universe is fundamentally unfair and more chaotic than we are comfortable accepting.


 No.10504[Reply]

File: 1642207703789.jpg (101.89 KB, 835x657, 835:657, 2715092.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

What current data do you think will be important in the future?  Especially data that you might be able to collect and store yourself?

Sometimes I think if you could put a Go Pro on a typical person from 3000 years ago for 24 hours or something, that would be a trove of information for historians.  So one answer to what additional data might be important is in terms of long-term posterity.

Now a lot of data is collected about us and the environment already.  Maybe too much, so it's possible there is no answer to the question, or a better question is what data should we delete to help future people understand what was really relevant.

Another way of answering the question would be in terms of your future self or family.

I'm struggling to state what I mean clearly.  In some part, it's about predicting what will change in the future, both long term and short term -- what we consider obvious today that will be obscure in decades or millennia.  Or just what might be fun to reminisce about.

 No.10505

File: 1642214245688.jpg (367.38 KB, 2500x1563, 2500:1563, wuhan-inst-vir.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>10504
>What current data do you think will be important in the future?
Data relating to the Wuhan Institute of Virology and the origin of SARS-CoV-2.

 No.10506

>>10505
That does sound interesting.  I am ordered to take a test for SARS-CoV-2, which is connected to this topic a bit.  I am a long way from this facility, though.


 No.10455[Reply]

File: 1640219840735.jpg (154.65 KB, 563x1024, 563:1024, large.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."

I was listening to the radio on the way home from my parent's place, and I think it was Tucker Carlson.  He was talking like China was America's enemy.

If China were an enemy, we'd no longer be able to legally offer any citizen of that Republic Aid and Comfort.  You could give them Aid or Comfort -- "I'm sorry you're having a bad day."  But if you do both, you are of course a traitor.

So the question is: who gets to decide who America's enemies are?  Radio talk show people?  Democratic consensus of American citizens?  The President?

And question two: who's on the list?
25 posts and 7 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.10489

>>10488
>If I help out an elderly Asian neighbour, I deserve to be executed?
Only if (1) the neighbor is an agent of an enemy state, (2) you actually help the neighbor in his capacity as an enemy, and (3) your intention was to help him in his capacity as an enemy.

>>10488
>People who support minorities tend to be seen, for example, as traitors.
Depends what you mean by "support".  Ultra-far-right white nationalists have said things like "Miscegenation is betraying your own race", but they are a tiny portion of the population.

 No.10490

>>10487
Looking for a list of the current enemies of the US.  My assumption is the list is not empty, and that being such an important matter, it should exist.

>>10488
>traitors deserve the death penalty
Usually.
>speak of traitors in the more ideological sense
While the constitution should have added "in their capacity to make war" or something, I gather the intent in defining treason was to prevent people being executed for wrong-think.  I suppose the right wing is just using hyperbole, though.  Executing people in hyperbole is acceptable.

I don't think it's a valid political position of either party to have prejudice against protected minorities.  Other kinds of minorities may be hated, yes.

 No.10491

>>10488
I suppose to you the left wing reaction to the January 6th protest just it didn't happen, then?


 No.10429[Reply]

File: 1638792229941.jpg (21.52 KB, 500x261, 500:261, 9b35280744059c374c7e9dd6cd….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

Opinion:
I hate that for weight concerns you get referred to a dietician charging 100 dollars per session just to take your weight and tell you you need to eat more greens and less sugar.
Or you get referred to a personal coach where you pay to set up an exercise session and a step counter or get the advise to sign up for a gym membership that costs even more money.

I feel like you can get a lot more people motivated to watch their diet and exercises if there would be a promoted dedicated schedule to meals and exercise, freely available, trustworthy and adjustable to the needs (time consumption and low on expenses and if possible a little mindful of the comfort) for the individuals.

I would guess those are already readily available, but I haven't really seen anyone being forwarded to those.

Show that losing weight can be manageable, comfortable and still light on the finances. You could really tackle the issue with obesity that way.
14 posts and 4 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.10453

File: 1639733840171.png (245.39 KB, 425x422, 425:422, is this another interventi….png) ImgOps Google

>>10452
> Nutrition is very complicated.  
One of the extra reasons why I find dieting "hard". You think you found some food that is good for you and tastes great and then some article comes along to tell you that that food item is the worst and here's why.
All the more reason, I feel, to have ready access to a diet plan and/or exercise plan from a reliable source.

> or example, low-fat yogurt
I have always wondered what to do with creamy yoghurts like Greek yoghurt. I like the taste of its creaminess and I suppose if it doesn't taste sweet, it isn't completely enriched with added sugars. But the texture does tend to feel like it may not be totally okay.
I suppose that is the fat yoghurt vs low fat yoghurt debate.
I have been informed one time that in cooking cream you better pick soy / low fat variations over the fatter ones.

 No.10475

File: 1640681367313.jpg (66.05 KB, 192x218, 96:109, 8788.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

It's one of those things where it gets harder to do the worse it is for you, which is unfortunate. Like, for me, I've kept myself in decent shape, I'm relatively active and fit, and my genetics so far have let me eat as much as I want without ever having to worry about getting fat, but there's people who put on weight a lot easier, obviously. As you put on weight, you become less inclined to work out, the less healthy you are, the more working out feels like a burden, and the more actual risk it poses to you. E.G. damage to your knees or having heart problems from over-exertion. So it's kindof of momentum problem.

And yes, there's scummy people who will prey on those looking to find solutions. Such, unfortunately, is life.

I wish more people had access to swimming. Swimming is a great way to work out if you're not in good shape. It's astronomically easier on the joints, it keeps you cool while you work out, it's a balanced workout, it's just great. Pools are expensive tho, and not everyone is in places where it's warm enough to do comfortable, so that's a real shame. Most important thing imho is just finding something that burns calories that you enjoy doing. Doesn't matter if it's not super efficient or whatever, the fact that you'll actually do it is the key.

There's some interesting new data about how gut biome effects cravings, too, which also leans into that vicious cycle. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-gut-bacteria-tell-their-hosts-what-to-eat/
The more you eat crap, the more you crave crap, but it can work the opposite way as well.

Ultimately, calories in, calories out for loosing weight. It's not that simple, obviously, but it's a very practical approach for the vast majority of people. Also eat better food.

 No.10476

File: 1640872826428.png (30.52 KB, 313x350, 313:350, Screenshot from 2021-12-30….png) ImgOps Google

>>10429
Fortunately I burn a lot of calories.

Unfortunately, my diet is a lot of junk.  A few years ago I recorded everything I ate with MyFitnessPal and sodium was through the roof.  Sugar was pretty high, too.

I made some changes after that, but now I'm back to old habits.  Probably need to chart it again.  I find just having to record everything makes me make *slightly* smarter choices.  But it's hard to stick with it.

Sounds like maybe you're looking for something like a weight-loss mentor.  I'm not quite sure.  I do feel a bit overwhelmed when thinking about trying to eat healthy.  It's like, every food has someone who will tell you it's wrong.

When it comes to bringing salt down, I usually end up eating rice and beans, with some vegetables and low-sodium condiments.  Salt has no direct bearing on weight loss, so we have somewhat different goals, true.


 No.10467[Reply]

File: 1640421295605.jpg (210 KB, 1024x1024, 1:1, large.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

Merry Christmas, Friendly Beasts of Townhall


 No.10329[Reply]

File: 1638059009458.jpg (64.64 KB, 734x1024, 367:512, large.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

I find myself thinking a lot about the idea of judging a person's value or skill based on their salary.

I think about it because in the fields of science and open source software, there is no clear market for the product, at least your production you share publicly.  When people make money, it's through side arrangements, and many greats in the field did not gain a great salary as a direct result of their work.

The other issue is that salary is typically confidential so even if you want to judge, you are judging based on a guess.  Which can get circular.

Perhaps the problem is these fields are simply weird.  If you trade stocks, I can imagine your return on investment is an acceptable measure of skill, although this is only a factor in salary and you'd need enough data to work out luck as an explanation.  But enough to say, where something is a great deal about money, you'd want to mimic people who are skilled in earning.

I guess my question is, where is judging people based on salary appropriate?  Maybe I'm not giving this strategy for assessing others its due.
9 posts and 3 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.10442

>>10440
>That something has greater utility doesn't make the books balance any better at the end of the quarter.

Is this contrary to the notion that people are paid based on how much money their labor earns for their firm?  Company policy perhaps is meant to imply something arbitrary, like the color of a uniform?

 No.10443

>>10442
>Is this contrary to the notion that people are paid based on how much money their labor earns for their firm?  
The value of the employee to the company is an approximate upper bound on the salary.  But if other people are willing to do the job for less money, then the position will be paid less.

 No.10456

>>10443
>The value of the employee to the company is an approximate upper bound on the salary.
I can agree that if a company pays more out in wages than they make in profits, they will have a year of loss.  Few firms will do that for long.


 No.10325[Reply]

File: 1637705066722.jpg (52.6 KB, 698x588, 349:294, 1637597916177.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

Do you think that Kyle Rittenhouse has any viable defamation claims against those who falsely claimed that he was a white supremacist?

As a general matter, drawing a false conclusion is not defamatory as long as the factual basis is stated and true.  For example, saying "Kyle drank beer with members of the Proud Boys, and therefore he is a white supremacist" is protected speech.  But if the speaker implies the existence of undisclosed facts, the conclusion can be considered defamatory.  For example, if a speaker says "I have read Kyle's private diary, and from that I have concluded that Kyle is a white supremacist", but the speaker lied about reading the alleged diary, then there might be a viable action for defamation.
29 posts and 4 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.10371

>>10365
Truth is an absolute defense to a claim of defamation, so ideally, defamation lawsuits should only suppress lies, not truths.  Of course, in practice, sometimes wealthy persons use the threat of defamation lawsuits to suppress the truth, but defamation lawsuits are also be used to fight back against malicious lies.

 No.10436

>>10371
Yea, hardly matters if you've "won" if you've gone bankrupt from needing to pay legal fees with a middle/lower class income... The wealthy have already won by inflicting emotional and financial suffering upon their victims.

 No.10439

>>10436
True, but overly frivolous suits can get you the money for your legal expenses.

Though in this case anyway, Kyle isn't some wealthy financier.
The media corporations he'd be going after have far more money than he does.


 No.10333[Reply]

File: 1638073384311.jpg (60.15 KB, 474x414, 79:69, The_Power_of_Learning.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

In the discussion about school curriculum and current efforts by political conservatives to change not just what gets taught but also what books are allowed to be available in school libraries, the question keeps getting raised about "teaching the other side" in a much broader intellectual sense (beyond the whole Democrats versus Republicans angle).

Many people of the political center, left, and right alike have the general understanding that it's good and proper for schools to present an admittedly slanted view of history in which the U.S. armed forces are "the good guys" and oppositional forces such as the Confederates, the Kaiserreich, the Nazis, et al are "the bad guys". U.S. troops are presented in a manner often that describes them in positive terms as courageous individuals sacrificing for the greater good of promoting democracy and liberty. Enemies on the battlefield are often depicted negatively, with emphasis put on war crimes and other such acts. Both Democrats and Republicans have taken this viewpoint.

Critics of the American idealism approach have frequently brought up the case of adversaries such as the Confederacy and asserted that the demonizations aren't justified. Multiple Confederate leaders are said to have displayed significant intellectual talent and physical courage. Slavery is said to have been not as bad as commonly understood. The same applies to World War I and World War II: perhaps revisionist history has a point in saying that American children need to learn more about the positive aspects of those fought by U.S. troops, with those killing American soldiers admittedly having their own understandings of what freedom means.

Do you think that U.S. schools should work to maintain a kind of detached objectivity when discussing conflicts against the Confederates, the Kaiserreich, the Nazis, and others? How important is the perspective of those fighting against Americans? Or is it proper in terms of promoting democracy and liberty among the younger generations to teach a morally idealistic, liberation-minded view of history where "bad guys" and "good guys" exist? Can those taking up arms in defense of the Holocaust or of slavery really be said to have points of view worth delving that much into, risking muddling the ethical waters in instructing the young about right and wrong?
12 posts and 2 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.10428

>>10333
Schools should be teaching facts, not making moral judgements to begin with.
Nobody ought be taught to be the "good guys" or the "bad guys".
The facts are more than enough

 No.10433

>>10426
Yes, many instances of slavery are such that analyzing it now the conditions seem to be like active torture to the point that death might be preferable, the case of mining that you brought up being a good one.

 No.10437

>>10425
The founding Americans of the south were often passionate about the subjugation of the black race to white masters.  Notable people were careful that the new government did not obstruct the practice of slavery in any serious way.


 No.10335[Reply]

File: 1638075717223.jpg (1.55 MB, 2442x1661, 222:151, Wanda-Cooper-Jones-AP-Imag….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

Bucking a trend of bigotry, discrimination, and prejudice going back over a hundred years, in my opinion, a posse of white men who lynched an innocent black man for traveling in the wrong neighborhood and thus being considered a dangerous criminal have been found guilty in Georgia. The deceased's name was Ahmaud Arbery. He died in February 2020. His life mattered.

It's not only a devastating defeat for the American conservative movement that demonized that innocent black man and his defenders just as they've demonized black victim after black victim in the past, in my view, but it's also a victory for both the Arbery family and the Black Lives Matter movement, clearly. I'll happily go beyond that and say that when it comes to the terminal cancer patient that is America, a country stuck in the midst of twenty years of sharp decline with no sign of that stopping, this represents a kind of eye in the hurricane of hatred to me. For once, democracy won. Freedom won. Justice won. Liberty won. The underdog with the world stacked against him whipped the odds in true Hollywood miracle fashion. That's my take.

A detailed article going through the entire case is here: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/wanda-cooper-jones-ahmaud-arbery-murder-justice-48-hours/

What are your thoughts? Do you agree with my take? Do you disagree? Do you sympathize with the defense being mounted that the killers were only acting in self-defense and that they've been railroaded in some fashion? Perhaps the men found guilty deserve light sentences? Or long ones? And what does this mean for future cases in the endless, waterfall-like flow of American situations in which white men claim to have killed minorities in self-defense?
46 posts and 4 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.10421

Given the time of day will likely be a bit until it's deleted or locked.

 No.10422

>>10400
>I wish beyond words that you weren't such a brainless partisan ideologue who can't see reality outside of your bubble. God. What can one say?

So the whole thread was pretty questionable, but this is very obviously out of line.

 No.10423

>>10413
>Personally, I'm of the stance there shouldn't be a 'hate crime' standard, as murder is murder. But I also feel the same for terrorism
I tend to agree, especially when it is used to cirumvent the rule against double jeopardy by letting both the federal government and  a state government prosecute someone for the same acts.


 No.10216[Reply][Last 50 Posts]

File: 1637358538861.jpg (128.23 KB, 1535x1023, 1535:1023, ritten-verdict-49.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

I feel that this is a victory for the presumption of innocence and self-defense rights!  Do you agree?  [Edited in response to >>10217]

Edited to add (in response to >>10217): In this thread, please feel free to discuss:
(1) The Rittenhouse trial
(2) The presumption of innocence -- is it better than 100 guilty people walk free than 1 innocent be sentenced to death or life in prison?
(3) The right of self-defense, including what counts as provocation.
(4) Bicubic and bilinear scaling of images used as evidence in criminal trials.
(5) Any other related topics.
98 posts and 17 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.10321

>>10314
If you're interested in the facts, you could always check out the trial itself.
Most the videos I had posted prior were also shown there.
There were a few livestreams of the event as it went on, which turned up as evidence. Part of why the attempt at prosecution seems so egregious to many, the video existed early on and seemed to clearly show self defense

 No.10323

>>10322
I suppose getting banned repeatedly for inflammatory and obviously inaccurate rants doesn't serve much a lesson for you,  huh?

Conservatives aren't invested in utopian nonsense.
That's directly contrary to the term to begin with.
I'm sorry the idea of your political enemies having rights offends you so much.

 No.10324

File: 1637702500899.jpg (63.71 KB, 650x844, 325:422, 1002098144-photo-u1.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>(1) The Rittenhouse trial
Shouldn't have gotten this much publicity, nor gone on this long. Was pretty clearly self defense. Should he have been out there? Not really. But the people attacking a kid with a gun should've known better than to attack.

>(2) The presumption of innocence -- is it better than 100 guilty people walk free than 1 innocent be sentenced to death or life in prison?
Weird wording. Guilty of what, jaywalking? Possession of an ounce of cocaine? Sure, not really equivalent to a life. But because no perfect system exists we have to hope a jury of our peers makes the proper choice in these matters. That without a reasonable doubt the person is guilty. If the prosecution can't prove it then that's on them. Personally I hate any type of prosecutor that relies on emotion than actual evidence. Had to deal with Jury Duty twice with that.

>(3) The right of self-defense, including what counts as provocation.
Do I consider a kid helping put out fires and washing graffiti with a gun at his waist provocation? No. Did the protestors? Probably. But even if he did, they shouldn't have chased after him.


>(4) Bicubic and bilinear scaling of images used as evidence in criminal trials.
No.


[]
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
[ home ] [ pony / townhall / rp / canterlot / rules ] [ arch ]