I mean, yes, good luck getting to their closed communities and enwalled houses with panic rooms, personal bodyguards and police / law in their pockets. Did we even have any famous billionaire assassinations in history so far?
I would personally prefer to sentence anyone with a net worth of over $1B to a lifetime eating $100 bills until they’ve literally eaten their fortune. Show them the real value of their monopoly paper, you know?
Well, we know that the Jan 6th "protesters" are getting 6 months, or maybe a year. The longest I've seen was 18 years to stupid ass Stuart Rhodes. How is what this woman did 9 years worth of time worse?
This fucker did so much damage here, y'all have no idea, and that's not even a fraction of what he deserves, but it's great news. Last year's election day was a nightmare, we barely made it.(having everything counted and announced day of is fun and zappy, but nerve-wracking)
Better for her if what her lawyers are seeking comes to pass.
Sentencing is scheduled for September 8, according to Dunedin District Court. While the maximum jail sentence is 10 years, Penwarden said her lawyers are asking for “discharge without conviction.”
I'm so frustrated by the powers who put persons like her in prison while genuine and true corruption is permitted to continue unabated.
Seriously. Why the fuck is it even a possibility for ten years of prison over something like this? It’s crazy to me that a nonviolent crime could be punished so severely. I mean, why do we have prison? Is it to remove dangerous people from society? That’s certainly how I think it should be, but these sorts of punishments really show that it’s all about sating the bloodlust of victims.
If you are a powerful person than an activist is the most dangerous person to you and your position. So in a fucked up way the sentencing disparity makes perfect sense.
Look, forgery can be a serious crime and having a max penalty of 10 years seems okay to me.
In this instance though, max sentence definitely isnt deserved! From what I know of our justice system, I think discharge without conviction is a real possibility and seems the best possible outcome.
What purpose does throwing someone in prison for ten years do though for something like forgery? Would it not be better if they were forced to do community service and lost access to the tools that led to them committing forgery? Why pay money to remove someone from society for a decade? Is it to teach any other potential forgerers a lesson? Is it to teach the forgerer themself a lesson? Is that really a lesson that needs to be worth a decade in a cell to learn? The world’s justice systems have generally erred too much on the side of retribution instead of rehabilitation. It’s especially sinister when you consider how much our capitalist systems place more value on things like capital over people’s lives and wellbeings. To be clear, I consider myself to be a capitalist, but a social democrat that believes in heavy regulations on our capitalist systems. I think our retributive, excessively pro-business justice system is a clear example of what happens when you let capitalism go unfettered and bleed into every aspect of our lives. Forgery is not violent. Most of the time it is not actively dangerous. Why don’t we come up with more creative and proactive ways of punishing people that would benefit people at large rather than ruin the criminal’s entire life? Even in a case where I am not on the criminal’s side I find myself pretty appalled that ten years could even possibly be on the table in a forgery case.
I’m going to guess that the upper end of the sentencing for forgery is probably for situations like human trafficking (forging documents) or smuggling endangered species, ivory, etc. At least that’s the level it should be for.
Also, in what world is ‘modify’ not an equivalent word to ‘transform’? The literal DEFINITION is “verb. [‘ˈmɑːdəˌfaɪ’] cause to change; make different; cause a transformation.”
Remember “If Roe falls, we riot!” slogans, and then when it happened, there seemed to be a collective “meh” from mainstream liberals?
The fucking Biden admin and Congress had a solid month from the leak of that decision, and a trifecta, to pass legislation to ensure reproductive rights. And they sat on their fucking hands and let it be struck down.
To be fair, in the aftermath of summer 2020, many states made it super easy to charge protesters as domestic terrorists (see what’s happening in Georgia, e.g.).
I honestly don’t know what it’s going to take at this point. Conservatives are waging a fascist takeover of states, courts, and federal agencies. And Dems in Congress are fucking sleepwalking, letting it happen.
Being completely transparent I don't care if there are any health risks associated with it for the greater population. I am just allergic to it and it gives me the worst shits possible, so if we could stop putting it in things that would be killer. It's in every gum now so I just can't buy gum anymore.
Not any list. A government provided domain blocking list.
A reasonable way to balance safety and freedom could be to require including some malware blocking list, and let browsers choose whether to offer this as opt-in or opt-out.
This way users could easily protect themselves, or just disable it if there's over-blocking. Browsers could choose which blocking list provider they include (government or independent provider).
But of course. In the same way that you don't make a test easier for the student that gets bullied.
The criteria and rules to enter the EU have been created through decades of small changes, ensuring that every element in our norms and values is covered. Skipping some of these steps will only result in further misalignment in the future, causing friction. Look for example at Hungary. I am not sure if they took this train of thought/direction recently or if their stance towards the EU was always like this, but if it is the latter, then the EU failed to judge that in the joining process.
My personal take on this is that the EU has already become too big. It used to be small at first, with countries that shared similar beliefs and culture. I think the EU today is way too polarized to be effective. Sure, it is now bigger on the world stage, making a larger fist for our policies. But has also become more difficult to draft policies, due to the cultural and economic differences of its members.
news
Newest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.