|
i think they should enforce the laws on the books and dont need new ones - a person who doesn't know the law
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 08:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 21:27 |
|
|
Shadoer posted:You know, I wish governments would just enforce the laws already on the books. Yeah I'd think that too but there are a couple cases now of cops saying "well the laws on the books don't apply here" so something needs to be done about that I also don't think this is a big threat to free speech in the same way that in-person harassment laws aren't a threat to free speech. This isn't gonna cover me going "lol you nerd" here on the SA forums, it's gonna cover me spamming your inbox with death threats, tracking down your IRL information and posting it, sending stuff to your house, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 08:04
|
|
|
Jagchosis posted:lol you loving retard there was literally a supreme court case decision this term about cyber harassment Yeah the one where they overturned a conviction because of reasonable doubt. http://www.marketwatch.com/story/supreme-courts-facebook-ruling-is-bad-news-for-proving-online-harassment-2015-06-02 quote:The Supreme Court ruled that his posts — most of which were in the form of rap lyrics — did not show beyond a reasonable doubt that he knew he was terrorizing. Jagchosis posted:i think they should enforce the laws on the books and dont need new ones - a person who doesn't know the law Well I'm not strongly versed in american law, but I don't understand why "Cyber harassment" needs new laws attached to it. The best argument I've heard is that as it's much easier and arguably more dangerous to harass someone using the internet, a harsher punishment is necessary. Like how armed robbery is a more serious offense than simple robbery. Otherwise though, it's modifying the laws of harassment that are already on the books.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 08:06
|
|
|
Shadoer posted:Yeah the one where they overturned a conviction because of reasonable doubt. the decision wasn't about reasonable doubt it was about intent. the court held that the intent of the person posting the threats was the relevant standard for that statute, overturning the test used where the person being threatened felt like it was a legitimate threat. the reason that traditional harassment laws are insufficient for dealing with cyber harassment is the level of implied danger for interactions online versus actual in person ones edit: supreme court doesnt even decide whether something was beyond a reasonable doubt thats what the factfinder (jury) does
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 08:08
|
|
|
what the gently caress is cultural marxism supposed to be
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 08:12
|
|
|
sudo rm -rf posted:what the gently caress is cultural marxism supposed to be a bad thing™
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 08:13
|
|
|
Chantilly Say posted:Yeah I'd think that too but there are a couple cases now of cops saying "well the laws on the books don't apply here" so something needs to be done about that To be quite frank, I'd say most of the time it's a lazy excuse they've been using to get away with not having to do anything about it. Like the officers who were quoted in Last Week Tonight's episode about "Online Harassment" where the officer's excuse for not investigating was because they didn't know what twitter was. Like the police are always saying "hey if we had more powers and people ceded more rights, we'd totally get the bad guy." but usually this is an excuse for sheer laziness and incompetence. They already have sweeping powers on what they are able to do, and at this point it's hard to say that giving the even more is going to bring in more results. (I say this more with Canada in mind, I'm not sure the exact situation in the states) Chantilly Say posted:I also don't think this is a big threat to free speech in the same way that in-person harassment laws aren't a threat to free speech. This isn't gonna cover me going "lol you nerd" here on the SA forums, it's gonna cover me spamming your inbox with death threats, tracking down your IRL information and posting it, sending stuff to your house, etc. I'm not sure. It really depends on how the police enforce the law, although given history it's more likely police and others will use it to be assholes when convenient as opposed to a concerted effort to end free speech.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 08:13
|
|
|
Jagchosis posted:the decision wasn't about reasonable doubt it was about intent. the court held that the intent of the person posting the threats was the relevant standard for that statute, overturning the test used where the person being threatened felt like it was a legitimate threat. the reason that traditional harassment laws are insufficient for dealing with cyber harassment is the level of implied danger for interactions online versus actual in person ones I'm not sure exactly how the justice system of the states works in comparison to Canada, so I took the article at face value. Sue me. Still about the difference between traditional harassment and cyber, well that's adding on a penalty. Like I said, it's like the difference between robbery and armed robbery, the laws (at least in canada) aren't different except if you're armed it comes with a much stiffer penalty. The same thing should be handled for harassment.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 08:16
|
|
|
Jagchosis posted:the weirdest thing about this sass thread on zeitgeist is that they think he's a goon superstar or something. i was under the impression that almost everyone hated him who could hate zeitgueist, a good man who, like all true americans, enjoys kinky sex from time to time
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 08:32
|
|
|
lol at gamergate man arguing with jag about law
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 08:37
|
|
|
Cultural Marxism sounds sweet as hell, where do I sign up to usher it on in To tap it in. Just...taaaap it in.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 08:38
|
|
|
do we really need new laws????
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 08:39
|
|
|
PupsOfWar posted:who could hate zeitgueist, a good man who, like all true americans, enjoys kinky sex from time to time even when i agree with him he has a tendency to annoy the poo poo out of me. this post will be taken out of context somehow when quoted on something sensitive. anyway they're alleging something worse this time
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 08:40
|
|
|
Shadoer posted:I'm not sure exactly how the justice system of the states works in comparison to Canada, so I took the article at face value. Sue me. i mean i feel like american law is relevant since canada barely has the population of california and most the people being hosed with by gamergators are americans
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 08:42
|
|
|
Jagchosis posted:i mean i feel like american law is relevant since canada barely has the population of california and most the people being hosed with by gamergators are americans Your right American law is more relevant, just I can't claim I have a truly great grasp of American Law compared to Canadian law (which is mainly from basic courses, not like I have a law degree) Still even with American law, I don't know how a completely knew law regarding cyber harassment would make anything easier or better. People in the past were stalked and harassed anonymously through the mail system and through pay phones, albeit in less numbers. Arguably the only problem for law enforcement is that it's harder to find people who are engaged in criminal harassment online, but that would seem to be a problem of resources like technical expertise to track the person as opposed to a lack of the law.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 08:50
|
|
|
Shadoer posted:Your right American law is more relevant, just I can't claim I have a truly great grasp of American Law compared to Canadian law (which is mainly from basic courses, not like I have a law degree) well america has a void for vagueness doctrine. laws that are overly broad in proscibing conduct, especially, super especially in fact, criminal laws can be held unconstitutional either as they are written or as applied. so taking an outdated law and applying it in a manner never anticipated by the people who wrote it in a way that isn't evidently illegal from a textual analysis as drafted is at serious risk of being overturned. prosecutors don't like to lose, especially at the precedent setting level, because it fucks up their careers. so it's important that criminal laws are very specific about exactly what is illegal and extending existing laws is the kind of thing subject to that kind of challenge
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 09:00
|
|
|
Jagchosis posted:well america has a void for vagueness doctrine. laws that are overly broad in proscibing conduct, especially, super especially in fact, criminal laws can be held unconstitutional either as they are written or as applied. so taking an outdated law and applying it in a manner never anticipated by the people who wrote it in a way that isn't evidently illegal from a textual analysis as drafted is at serious risk of being overturned. prosecutors don't like to lose, especially at the precedent setting level, because it fucks up their careers. so it's important that criminal laws are very specific about exactly what is illegal and extending existing laws is the kind of thing subject to that kind of challenge Hey, I actually didn't know this so thanks!
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 09:07
|
|
|
the bill is kneejerk and bad in a fair few ways, but as far as i can tell it's the first time legislation has been made on incitement to suicide.sudo rm -rf posted:what the gently caress is cultural marxism supposed to be kulturbolschewismus. the parallels with gg are p cool The association of new art with Bolshevism circulated in right-wing discourse in the following years; it was, for example, the subject of a chapter in Adolf Hitler's Mein Kampf. Amid Hitler's rise to power the Nazis denounced a number of contemporary styles as "cultural Bolshevism," notably abstract art and Bauhaus architecture. After seeing a colleague beaten by Nazi supporters for comments sympathetic to modern art, typographer Paul Renner published an essay against Nazi aesthetics titled "Kulturbolschewismus?" Around the same time, Carl von Ossietzky mocked the flexibility of the term in Nazi writings: Cultural Bolshevism is when conductor Klemperer takes tempi different from his colleague Furtwängler; when a painter sweeps a color into his sunset not seen in Lower Pomerania; when one favors birth control; when one builds a house with a flat roof; when a Caesarean birth is shown on the screen; when one admires the performance of Charlie Chaplin and the mathematical wizardry of Albert Einstein. This is called cultural Bolshevism and a personal favor rendered to Mr. Stalin.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 09:11
|
|
|
Jagchosis posted:well america has a void for vagueness doctrine. laws that are overly broad in proscibing conduct, especially, super especially in fact, criminal laws can be held unconstitutional either as they are written or as applied. so taking an outdated law and applying it in a manner never anticipated by the people who wrote it in a way that isn't evidently illegal from a textual analysis as drafted is at serious risk of being overturned. prosecutors don't like to lose, especially at the precedent setting level, because it fucks up their careers. so it's important that criminal laws are very specific about exactly what is illegal and extending existing laws is the kind of thing subject to that kind of challenge Alright I can then see in that context needing specific laws in the american legal system. However outside of a stiffer penalty, I don't think these laws should go beyond the scope intended in the traditional laws except in terms of modernizing them to 21st century realities. SedanChair posted:Cultural Marxism sounds sweet as hell, where do I sign up to usher it on in Talk to this dashing conspiracy man here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fo5jLdJlgI
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 09:20
|
|
|
Jagchosis posted:the film is a story about a heavily implied romance between a young girl in a new town and a mysterious blonde girl the blonde girl is the ghost of her dead grandmother
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 09:21
|
|
|
Cardboard Box A posted:Wait what? Like are you sure you're not reading something into that? Did Studio Ghibli make their last movie a supernatural lesbian romance? i watched it with my wife after my friend and her boyfriend told me about the movie (and she was not enthusiastic, so i was curious cos ghibli normally owns) and all of us interpreted the movie as being a lesbian romance. i mean it might be an incorrect interpretation but we all read the film as being exactly that. the ghost stuff for the girl that is either her friend or her lover is 100% unambiguous canon edit: and im well versed in anime mind Homura and Sickle fucked around with this message at 09:34 on Jun 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 09:26
|
|
|
Jagchosis posted:i watched it with my wife after my friend and her boyfriend told me about the movie (and she was not enthusiastic, so i was curious cos ghibli normally owns) and all of us interpreted the movie as being a lesbian romance. i mean it might be an incorrect interpretation but we all read the film as being exactly that. the ghost stuff for the girl that is either her friend or her lover is 100% unambiguous canon So he's a new age nutjob. I actually did not expect that. Popular Thug Drink posted:The pope hat was a major meme, "Reclaim Mass Effect" was a major social media movement, and so was EA continued victories of worst company.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 09:41
|
|
|
cardboard box a, thanks for posting all of that incredibly tedious bullshit in the gg thread so i don't have to find it
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 09:44
|
|
|
I in fact celebrate the Doritos pope hat. Auto complete capitalizing Doritos 
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 09:45
|
|
|
I'm working grave tonight entertain me you bastards
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 10:02
|
|
|
what time is it sedan chair
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 10:07
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:I'm working grave tonight entertain me you bastards I don't know, what do you like to talk about aside from the Doritos Pope?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 10:09
|
|
|
Shadoer posted:I don't know, what do you like to talk about aside from the Doritos Pope? get out
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 10:13
|
|
|
*looks @ stylin timex* it's 2:14
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 10:14
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:get out Face it, we are stuck in this night together. We only have ourselves for entertainment.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 10:15
|
|
|
that's cool, it's 9:15 here watch this vid if u can, it's very good https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_tvm6Eoa3g
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 10:15
|
|
|
no thanks *sips on some Fanta*
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 10:16
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 10:23
|
|
|
Exclamation Marx posted:that's cool, it's 9:15 here you're european? problematic
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 10:25
|
|
|
9:15 in the pm
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 10:32
|
|
|
It's a nice sunny afternoon here with blue skies, scattered clouds, and temperatures only hitting 34 euro-degrees
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 10:42
|
|
|
Exclamation Marx posted:9:15 in the pm you're a weeaboo? problematic
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 10:46
|
|
|
Slept 6 hours in the last 48 hours. Can't sleep even though i was violently ill Monday and i'm exhausted. Persistence of the Lurk
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 10:50
|
|
|
And I'm as bored as sedanchair is, as the primary thread shows
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 10:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 21:27 |
|
|
SedanChair posted:you're a weeaboo? problematic 
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 11:04
|
|
