KoboldCoterie

KoboldCoterie, 1 year ago (edited 1 year ago)

You’re replying to someone asking if the victim pressed charges in the specific instance you cite. I’m replying to that. What is the disconnect here?

Yes, I understand that you want there to be certain requirements to use recorded footage. That’s not the issue at hand. You implied that an Indian immigrant shouldn’t have to report (or press charges, specifically) an incident, and implied that it should just… magically be prosecuted, I don’t know… that’s what I’m trying to figure out - how do you expect these hypothetical laws to be enforced, if not through the normal channels? Just because something is illegal doesn’t mean that anyone violating that legality is magically, immediately held to account for it. You’re objecting to the already-in-place process for making that happen, so what’s your desired solution?

Edit: To summarize the entire comment chain:

You, in OP: The law should work this way.

Reply: “In the UK, it basically already does.”

You: “Then how was this perceived violation permitted to exist?”

Reply: “Did the victim report it / press charges?”

You: “They can’t / shouldn’t have to do that for these reasons!”

Me: “So how is this law supposed to be enforced?”

You: “I already said that it should be illegal!”

That last comment, that’s the nonsequitur.

KoboldCoterie, 1 year ago

How are you saying it should work? Isn’t it pretty much standard that for a crime to be prosecuted, the victim needs to report it, and cooperate with police as part of their investigation?

(Also, ‘press charges’ does not imply suing someone. Also, citizens don’t press charges; the prosecutor presses charges; the ‘Do you want to press charges?’ question you hear sometimes is really just a shorthand for ‘If we press charges, will you cooperate with our investigation and provide us with the necessary information we need to do that, or would we be wasting our time?’ It’s possible that this works differently in the UK (I’m in the US), but I don’t believe it does. If I’m wrong, I’d be happy to be corrected.)

KoboldCoterie, 1 year ago

Maybe - just maybe - a private citizen shouldn’t be left in control of contracted military infrastructure at all…

KoboldCoterie, 1 year ago

It doesn’t have to be nationalized, but it doesn’t make any sense for a civilian to be able to unilaterally make decisions like that while under military contract. At the very least, any decision to change or influence the contracted service while the contract is active should require some sort of review and approval. Maybe there’s a good reason it’s the way it is, I’m just a layman, but every time I hear about this it just baffles me why it was even allowable for Elon to make the call he did, or any call for that matter.

KoboldCoterie, 1 year ago

So strong, being unashamed to proclaim your belief in the dominant religion in the country. So brave.

I wonder if they’d be so willing to advertise this if they were, for instance, in the middle east.

KoboldCoterie, 1 year ago

At least he’d be able to afford really good therapists.

KoboldCoterie, 1 year ago

If you go to the lemmynsfw instance and just pre-emptively block all of the communities, it mostly disappears. Folks are (at least on my feed) being pretty good about keeping it all there.