If he was legally compelled to fall silent in his warnings, whoever silenced him should be jailed for involuntary manslaughter or at least criminal negligence causing death. There should be equal consequences both for yelling "fire!" when there is none, and for yelling "no fire!" when there is.
It's hard to avoid thinking that this case looks a bit like the Salem Witch Trials, but recurring as farce rather than tragedy. Since Classical Athens, there have always been societies that have an undercurrent of gynophobia and repression of women in general. Rather than apply this proposed test, at vast expense, what we need is for all legal staff involved in the prosecution of cases where there is a sexual element to undergo psychiatric screening to ensure that their desire to prosecute women and girls isn't, itself, a sexual perversion.
Finally, a word of advice to the kiddies: the law might be stupid, but you should probably follow it. To the letter. Many on/. will probably revile the idea that we ought to follow such stupid laws, but you have to chose your battles (something the DA ought to learn) and this one just doesn't seem worth taking a stand for.
No, NO, NO.
NEVER follow an illegal law.
To follow an illegal law is a tacit acceptance of said law. Do not allow these unamerican perverts to get away with what they're doing.
Get arrested. Speak out. Make them pay for their perversion and their perverted laws.
Fight it out in the courtroom. Cry. Yell. But DO NOT GIVE IN.
If you don't exercise your rights for fear of legal repercussions, you don't have any rights. You have the freedom to sexual self expression. These laws are illegal. If you feel the need to express yourself, do so, and be prepared to fight a noble and honourable fight against totalitarianism and religious interference.
If, in fact, their actions have consequences, then I suspect that the kids will learn about them soon enough, no need to impose artificial ones. If they don't turn out to, then there is no need(or ethical reason) to impose any. Their parents should definitely have the "doing stupid things is a bad idea" talk with them; but the DA can GTFO.
To hell with GTFO. The DA can die in a fire.
To assault kids in the name of protecting them will earn them a special place in hell (if such a place exists). There are times I wish I was religious...
Liars, telling them that all drugs are the same, and all drugs are dangerous.
"Predators" apparently seeking to rape them (according to the media, anyway).
Cops trying to assault and jail them for self expression, sex crimes against themselves, underage drinking, and curfew violation.
School administrators making them pass through metal detectors, move at the sound of a bell, search them and their lockers, and threaten them at every available moment.
Parents praying that they don't explore what nature tells them to explore.
TV telling them the world's about to end, and that they should drink Coke and eat McDonalds, that intellectual pursuits are lame, and that sports rule everything.
Bullies pushing them around, and occasionally shooting up schools.
Busybodies telling them to stop playing, and stay indoors, so they don't get hurt.
Really? Teenagers having sex and taking naked pictures of themselves is now a nationwide problem?!
No. Millions of people losing their jobs is a nationwide problem. Teenagers taking naked pictures of themselves is a non-issue.
You answered your own question.
From Office Space:
So you take money that's not yours?
Well, it becomes ours.
The best way to address a nationwide problem is to find a different problem to replace it with. If the TV tells them teenage sex is a bigger problem than the economy, teenage sex IS a bigger problem than the economy. And if you disagree, you're just a pedo.
CNN has been going on about the War on Drugs and what's happening along the Texas border with Mexico. Every tyme I see something about it I think it wouldn't be a problem if drugs were not made illegal. Legalizing drugs would cut down on crime. And practically empty the prisons in the US, the US has the largest prison population in the world and half of the prisoners are there for drug offenses. Setting free those who were convicted of non-violent drug offenses then many will become tax paying employees and would help with the budget deficit. As would taxing drugs.
All factually correct.
What you're forgetting, however, is that the people who control the media and upper echelons of government are not the recipients of this new money. They are the recipients of drug trade money.
The top 50 people who truly set the policy in the United States have configured the system to direct massive amounts of drug war profit to them, and those they support. The hundreds (or thousands) of black-ops operations (Iran Contra, Central America, etc., and today Mexico) are financed with money from these drug wars.
On the other hand, prison money, enforcement agency money, anti-drug advertisement money.. all of this comes from the taxpayer willingly. Why does the taxpayer support it? Because they problem of drug abuse is multiplied by 100 times when prohibition is violently enforced. People see the result, but not the cause, and with the help of a little TV education, vote for governments which promise to "get tough."
If you've seen the STTNG episode (and I know you have:)) where the Enterprise was caught in a spacial anomaly, and every time they increased power to shields, the gravity wave became stronger (eventually nearly tearing the ship apart) - that is an (intentional) analogy. It took a computer (data) to realize the relationship, and drop the shields. We, as a society, are now waiting for this moment.
.. and it will come. In the meantime, we'll continue our tradition of secret wars, prison, misery... and drug addiction.
I am so scared of the government abusing anti-sex laws to control the population and regulate the Internet, that I am starting to think it would be better "for the children" to form an alliance with the evil, hated pedos.
It's not that I approve of their sexual desires, but honestly - we are facing some of the most dangerous legislation in recent history - and using child exploitation as an excuse. The thing is, when I do have kids, I will be far more afraid of legislators and police assaulting/jailing them than run-of-the-mill child molesters.
In the interest of protecting freedom, perhaps its time to start scaling down the hate and anger towards this group of people. If we don't, we could all - including the kids (like those in this article) suffer terribly for it.
Now is not the time to be teaching religion in the public education system. America needs to teach proper science if she expects to survive the next 20-50 years.
This isn't a game! The Chinese are working hard to build a first world nation - one with an economy that will shortly dwarf the US economy. If the US abandons proper education, there is no way it will be able to compete in the 21st century. Someone please shut down these religious nutballs before they do any more harm.
Does anyone else here find it ironic that a country with such strong anti-naziism laws doesn't use them against politicians who seek to embrace one of its main tenets?
Government censorship/speech control is never the solution. It is always the problem. Didn't the rise of the NSDAP teach them anything?
I'm an excellent driver (10 years driving daily, no at-fault accidents; I've been hit twice by drivers who lost control near me.. no moving violations of any kind).
Multiple cars burning the red on a non-protected left just makes sense. It's the way it has to be. It's safe, because drivers on the other side of the street were stopped (and won't accelerate into another car, obviously). And when you have a situation with heavy traffic, it is a requirement that a reasonable number of cars complete the turn. Otherwise you end up with massive traffic jams. And the simple fact is that sometimes, during the red is the only time you can make the turn (in heavy traffic).
Consider the alternatives - blast through the gaps in traffic, or don't turn at all (and possibly end up stuck in the intersection or across the crosswalk).
Of course the correct answer is to protect the lefts in major intersections. But when they're not, "running the red" is a safe, effective, and (in heavy traffic) required approach.
It's one thing to know that the ugly side of the world exists. It's another thing to take few measures to stop your kids from participating in it out of curiosity.
Just out of curiosity, were you thinking of sex when you wrote that? Or things like war, crime, and politics?
For most of my adult life it felt like we were constantly taking steps backward. It's nice to see freedom win over "safety," for a change. May this be the first of many rulings that empower people and encourage the academic spirit.
Those against net neutrality represent the gravest threat the Internet has faced. The Internet routes around damage, yes. But if concerted, simultaneous attacks occur by various governments around the world, Internet freedom can be defeated.
Not to sound overly melodramatic, but our children's children will judge us based on how we react to these assaults, today. If we successfully defend the Internet from those who wish to corrupt it for political, religious or profit reasons, we will have provided the greatest gift humanity has ever received - a free, open, and entrenched global communication network. A step in the evolution of our species.
If we fail in our duty, and the Internet is globally subverted, becoming yet another one-way broadcasting network for advertisers and propagandists, we will have left our descendants to another hundred years of suffering and misery.
Consider some of the things the Internet threatens:
- War: The Internet connects people in warzones with people outside the warzone. This makes it difficult to perpetrate a war without upsetting the aggressor's citizenry, as they will be exposed to the consequences of the war. Youtube, blogging from Baghdad, and english.aljazeera.net are just the start.
- Police brutality: Videos can circle the globe within minutes. The watchers are now watched, and this has a powerful effect on their behavior.
- Propaganda:.. is far less effective when the citizenry can check the facts
- Financial scandals: Anonymous communications help whistleblowers uncover financial scandals-in-progress
Now consider some of the things the Internet enables
- Global scientific collaboration: For both amateur and university-scale scientists, the Internet permits the free exchange of ideas
- The liberation of "intellectual property": (not so good for the profit-seekers, but ultimately necessary for humanity)
- Force multiplication for sellers: individuals can sell their products with the same efficiency and legitimacy as a large corporation, enabling more competition and a true free market (ie. ebay)
All of this has a negative effect on entrenched players, explaining our current situation. And this is the reason we need to fight, and fight hard. Because if we don't, we, and our descendants, will lose.
Slashdot Mirror
I submit that only a terrorist would build such a surveillance society.
/. readers are significantly more intelligent (on average) than the general population, so I pose this question:
Does anyone here fear CP more than they fear government censorship?
If so, why?
If he was legally compelled to fall silent in his warnings, whoever silenced him should be jailed for involuntary manslaughter or at least criminal negligence causing death. There should be equal consequences both for yelling "fire!" when there is none, and for yelling "no fire!" when there is.
We need to fire the retards in our government. Bush was a first good step. This prosecutor would be a good second.
We don't need to fire people like the prosecutor. We need to throw them in a mental ward.
Honestly. Prosecuting a young person for exploring their sexuality? Someone's got some screws loose.
In the United States (and, more and more the UK and Australia), children are the enemy.
Why?
Easy target. Young people can't defend themselves.
It's hard to avoid thinking that this case looks a bit like the Salem Witch Trials, but recurring as farce rather than tragedy. Since Classical Athens, there have always been societies that have an undercurrent of gynophobia and repression of women in general. Rather than apply this proposed test, at vast expense, what we need is for all legal staff involved in the prosecution of cases where there is a sexual element to undergo psychiatric screening to ensure that their desire to prosecute women and girls isn't, itself, a sexual perversion.
You so perfectly hit the nail on the head.
Finally, a word of advice to the kiddies: the law might be stupid, but you should probably follow it. To the letter. Many on /. will probably revile the idea that we ought to follow such stupid laws, but you have to chose your battles (something the DA ought to learn) and this one just doesn't seem worth taking a stand for.
No, NO, NO.
NEVER follow an illegal law.
To follow an illegal law is a tacit acceptance of said law. Do not allow these unamerican perverts to get away with what they're doing.
Get arrested. Speak out. Make them pay for their perversion and their perverted laws.
Fight it out in the courtroom. Cry. Yell. But DO NOT GIVE IN.
If you don't exercise your rights for fear of legal repercussions, you don't have any rights. You have the freedom to sexual self expression. These laws are illegal. If you feel the need to express yourself, do so, and be prepared to fight a noble and honourable fight against totalitarianism and religious interference.
You/we're one in a million. :( Thanks, though. In hundreds of years someone will read these words and know at least someone understood.
If, in fact, their actions have consequences, then I suspect that the kids will learn about them soon enough, no need to impose artificial ones. If they don't turn out to, then there is no need(or ethical reason) to impose any. Their parents should definitely have the "doing stupid things is a bad idea" talk with them; but the DA can GTFO.
To hell with GTFO. The DA can die in a fire.
To assault kids in the name of protecting them will earn them a special place in hell (if such a place exists). There are times I wish I was religious...
Here's the thing, if I can get arrested for looking at it, she should be charged.
Two wrongs don't make a right.
The answer to an unjust law or prosecution is not another unjust law or prosecution. Fix the bug. End of story.
Liars, telling them that all drugs are the same, and all drugs are dangerous.
"Predators" apparently seeking to rape them (according to the media, anyway).
Cops trying to assault and jail them for self expression, sex crimes against themselves, underage drinking, and curfew violation.
School administrators making them pass through metal detectors, move at the sound of a bell, search them and their lockers, and threaten them at every available moment.
Parents praying that they don't explore what nature tells them to explore.
TV telling them the world's about to end, and that they should drink Coke and eat McDonalds, that intellectual pursuits are lame, and that sports rule everything.
Bullies pushing them around, and occasionally shooting up schools.
Busybodies telling them to stop playing, and stay indoors, so they don't get hurt.
We are a truly screwed society in 20 years.
Really? Teenagers having sex and taking naked pictures of themselves is now a nationwide problem?!
No. Millions of people losing their jobs is a nationwide problem. Teenagers taking naked pictures of themselves is a non-issue.
You answered your own question.
From Office Space:
So you take money that's not yours?
Well, it becomes ours.
The best way to address a nationwide problem is to find a different problem to replace it with. If the TV tells them teenage sex is a bigger problem than the economy, teenage sex IS a bigger problem than the economy. And if you disagree, you're just a pedo.
Pedophilia is not a crime, and has never been one. It is a sexual orientation, or mental disorder. Take your pick.
CNN has been going on about the War on Drugs and what's happening along the Texas border with Mexico. Every tyme I see something about it I think it wouldn't be a problem if drugs were not made illegal. Legalizing drugs would cut down on crime. And practically empty the prisons in the US, the US has the largest prison population in the world and half of the prisoners are there for drug offenses. Setting free those who were convicted of non-violent drug offenses then many will become tax paying employees and would help with the budget deficit. As would taxing drugs.
All factually correct.
What you're forgetting, however, is that the people who control the media and upper echelons of government are not the recipients of this new money. They are the recipients of drug trade money.
The top 50 people who truly set the policy in the United States have configured the system to direct massive amounts of drug war profit to them, and those they support. The hundreds (or thousands) of black-ops operations (Iran Contra, Central America, etc., and today Mexico) are financed with money from these drug wars.
On the other hand, prison money, enforcement agency money, anti-drug advertisement money .. all of this comes from the taxpayer willingly. Why does the taxpayer support it? Because they problem of drug abuse is multiplied by 100 times when prohibition is violently enforced. People see the result, but not the cause, and with the help of a little TV education, vote for governments which promise to "get tough."
If you've seen the STTNG episode (and I know you have :)) where the Enterprise was caught in a spacial anomaly, and every time they increased power to shields, the gravity wave became stronger (eventually nearly tearing the ship apart) - that is an (intentional) analogy. It took a computer (data) to realize the relationship, and drop the shields. We, as a society, are now waiting for this moment.
.. and it will come. In the meantime, we'll continue our tradition of secret wars, prison, misery... and drug addiction.
I am so scared of the government abusing anti-sex laws to control the population and regulate the Internet, that I am starting to think it would be better "for the children" to form an alliance with the evil, hated pedos.
It's not that I approve of their sexual desires, but honestly - we are facing some of the most dangerous legislation in recent history - and using child exploitation as an excuse. The thing is, when I do have kids, I will be far more afraid of legislators and police assaulting/jailing them than run-of-the-mill child molesters.
In the interest of protecting freedom, perhaps its time to start scaling down the hate and anger towards this group of people. If we don't, we could all - including the kids (like those in this article) suffer terribly for it.
China is pushing for a new world currency.
Now is not the time to be teaching religion in the public education system. America needs to teach proper science if she expects to survive the next 20-50 years.
This isn't a game! The Chinese are working hard to build a first world nation - one with an economy that will shortly dwarf the US economy. If the US abandons proper education, there is no way it will be able to compete in the 21st century. Someone please shut down these religious nutballs before they do any more harm.
...good point.
You don't drive, do you? :)
Get some years on the road under your belt, and we can have this discussion again.
Does anyone else here find it ironic that a country with such strong anti-naziism laws doesn't use them against politicians who seek to embrace one of its main tenets?
Government censorship/speech control is never the solution. It is always the problem. Didn't the rise of the NSDAP teach them anything?
I take issue with this.
I'm an excellent driver (10 years driving daily, no at-fault accidents; I've been hit twice by drivers who lost control near me.. no moving violations of any kind).
Multiple cars burning the red on a non-protected left just makes sense. It's the way it has to be. It's safe, because drivers on the other side of the street were stopped (and won't accelerate into another car, obviously). And when you have a situation with heavy traffic, it is a requirement that a reasonable number of cars complete the turn. Otherwise you end up with massive traffic jams. And the simple fact is that sometimes, during the red is the only time you can make the turn (in heavy traffic).
Consider the alternatives - blast through the gaps in traffic, or don't turn at all (and possibly end up stuck in the intersection or across the crosswalk).
Of course the correct answer is to protect the lefts in major intersections. But when they're not, "running the red" is a safe, effective, and (in heavy traffic) required approach.
On behalf of society, thank you for being a good parent. :)
It's one thing to know that the ugly side of the world exists. It's another thing to take few measures to stop your kids from participating in it out of curiosity.
Just out of curiosity, were you thinking of sex when you wrote that? Or things like war, crime, and politics?
For most of my adult life it felt like we were constantly taking steps backward. It's nice to see freedom win over "safety," for a change. May this be the first of many rulings that empower people and encourage the academic spirit.
Religious hate is not racism.
Religion is a choice. "Race" or ethnicity is not.
Those against net neutrality represent the gravest threat the Internet has faced. The Internet routes around damage, yes. But if concerted, simultaneous attacks occur by various governments around the world, Internet freedom can be defeated.
Not to sound overly melodramatic, but our children's children will judge us based on how we react to these assaults, today. If we successfully defend the Internet from those who wish to corrupt it for political, religious or profit reasons, we will have provided the greatest gift humanity has ever received - a free, open, and entrenched global communication network. A step in the evolution of our species.
If we fail in our duty, and the Internet is globally subverted, becoming yet another one-way broadcasting network for advertisers and propagandists, we will have left our descendants to another hundred years of suffering and misery.
Consider some of the things the Internet threatens:
- War: The Internet connects people in warzones with people outside the warzone. This makes it difficult to perpetrate a war without upsetting the aggressor's citizenry, as they will be exposed to the consequences of the war. Youtube, blogging from Baghdad, and english.aljazeera.net are just the start. .. is far less effective when the citizenry can check the facts
- Police brutality: Videos can circle the globe within minutes. The watchers are now watched, and this has a powerful effect on their behavior.
- Propaganda:
- Financial scandals: Anonymous communications help whistleblowers uncover financial scandals-in-progress
Now consider some of the things the Internet enables
- Global scientific collaboration: For both amateur and university-scale scientists, the Internet permits the free exchange of ideas
- The liberation of "intellectual property": (not so good for the profit-seekers, but ultimately necessary for humanity)
- Force multiplication for sellers: individuals can sell their products with the same efficiency and legitimacy as a large corporation, enabling more competition and a true free market (ie. ebay)
All of this has a negative effect on entrenched players, explaining our current situation. And this is the reason we need to fight, and fight hard. Because if we don't, we, and our descendants, will lose.