When in reality, they shouldn't have acted much at all.
but that's how the Government always acts.
No, it isn't. Almost without exception, they always act that quickly only when they stand to gain more power, and in those cases, we usually always lose some of our individual liberties.
It's doubtful people could have forseen that, and now they're trying to correct it.
"doubtful"? Are you kidding me? The PATRIOT ACT included so many provisions that violated people's freedoms and gave the government so much power that there is no way people did not foresee this. Your problem is that you are naive enough to give the government the benefit of the doubt; they deserve no such thing.
Even if there are things that are useful, the whole bathtub must be thrown out because to simply change the parts which are not working would be to admit that the Law isn't the end of civilization as we know it.
Also obscentiy. (Obscenity is more unreasonable, and tends to yield harsher punishment, but is also more subject to a "Freedom of Speech" defense, though I'm not sure that would work on a public billboard.
Well, he said it was displayed in his property. And obscenity laws, to me, are themselves obscene.
You can try, but you'll have to find other individuals to get behind you if you expect to get anywhere, as that's where change starts. Your infantile examples and analogies will do you no good.
Snowden made no effort to follow established whistleblower protocols.
And he shouldn't have, because if he had, the public still wouldn't know about the NSA surveillance, and everyone else wouldn't be aware of the specifics. What you ask for is that he let politicians blow the fact that the government is blatantly violating the constitution under the rug.
But it does not excuse him from punishment for those illegal actions.
I damn well think it should; the people who should be arrested are the politicians who supported this and everyone directly involved in the NSA.
No, it's more along the lines of, ‘you're making money off those comments, so better hire a moderator to rein in the crackpots and the compulsive hatemongers’.
It's more along the lines of, "I despise freedom and I want someone who posted comments I don't like punished, but it's too hard to go after the one who originally posted the comments, so I'll just make up a nonsensical excuse to go after the website that the comments are hosted on."
It is not censorship if comments I don't like are moderated.
Fixed. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean that censorship is not censorship.
The country is ranked 11th in the world press freedom index of 2013 (http://en.rsf.org/press-freedom-index-2013,1054.html), so don't worry too much over it.
The freedom index says so, so it must be true! We have to let them get away with any injustice they commit!
The speech is free, but not necessarily consequence free.
Then that isn't free speech; otherwise, countries like North Korea have free speech, but with occasional consequences for exercising it. The entire point of freedom of speech is that government thugs won't come to harass you for saying something they disagree with, and if certain speech is prohibited, then there is no free speech in those cases.
Do you think the police and some angry parents with/damaged children/ visiting me the next day would buy the excuse that I wasn't responsible for the content displayed on my property because it wasn't me who made the posters?
Why are you the police involved? That's called freedom of speech.
This Gamemakerlessness is an eyesore! Disappear! This Gamemakerlessness! This Gamemakerlessness! This Gamemakerlessness! This Gamemakerlessness! This Gamemakerlessness! This Gamemakerlessness! This Gamemakerlessness! This Gamemakerlessness! This Gamemakerlessness! This Gamemakerlessness! Vanish, I say! Return to Gamemakerdom! The Great Utopia is where you'll find peace. The Great Utopia is where your life will gain meaning. The Great Utopia is where you will become something more than a miserable pile of depression. The Great Utopia is waiting... for you! Return, return, return, return, return to Gamemakerdooooooooooooooooooooom!
Enough out of you, you insolent insect! I never once gave you permission to type that worthless message! Now, make way for the great Truth Seeker!
All of you will return to Gamemakerdom right this minuteness! Why do you cower? Because you haven't returned to Gamemakerdom. Not returning is inadvisable. Not returning is nonsensical. Not returning is illogical. Not returning is not possible. Your return to The Great Utopia is an inevitability. Return. Return. Return. Return. Return. You can return. You may return. You should return. You will return. You shall return. You can, may, should, will, and shall return... to Gamemakerdom! You can do anything with Gamemaker. Nothing is outside the realm of possibility when you have Gamemaker. Return! Return! Return! Return, return, return, return, return to Gamemakerdooooooooooooooooooooooom!
FTFY. Do you not see where your reasoning is flawed?
Your 'fix' doesn't even make sense. Rapists rape, but taking drugs doesn't necessarily mean you'll commit violent crimes.
Your 'fix' also doesn't make since for other reasons, as you can't just substitute drugs for rape and have it automatically reflect reality as if this is some theoretical logic game. We already know from prohibition (of drugs and alcohol) that prohibiting such things increases the power of black markets substantially.
Again I say, when those people become so addicted that they become a drain on society, they become everyone's problem.
If living in a free society means that I have to support those who engage in activities that I may not always agree with, then so be it; I'd rather have that than your government bootlicking. What you suggest is also collective punishment, as you advocate banning entire substances simply because some people who use them become a drain on society. You are anti-freedom.
No law is 100% effective.
Nor are all effective laws just. Nor is prohibition even close to 100% effective.
You are a fool. Stealing is illegal and murdering people is illegal. Punish people who do either of those things, not people who merely ingest a substance into their bodies. You are also assuming that people don't take drugs right now, which is false, so the 'problems' you listed already exist.
Your mentality is already completely opposed to freedom. You do not want a free country if you believe that something should be banned merely because it could be abused or could cause certain people to do something bad; you want collective punishment, and you want government thugs to harass people.
The truth may be inconvenient and tiresome to you, but you'll have to get used to it. What else is it but government bootlicking when someone cheers this nonsense on or tries to justify it?
You may think nothing of it, but I'm always there for you. When you fall on your ass, my cock is always right where your bayer aspirin hole will land. When you fall off a cliff, I'm always at the bottom, waiting for your smelly asshole to fall right onto my fetid cock. When you wiggle your foul ass about, my disgusting little friend is always right there to keep it company. We're eternal Brothers In Rancid! What say you?
Isn't it funny how my fetid friend fits right into your bayer aspirin hole as if they were meant to be together? Well, it's not funny; it's a sign that they were indeed meant to be together, so let's get this feces fiesta started! Oh, yes! Anyone who thinks they can stop His Fetidness from becoming One With Bayerhole needs to return to realitydom! What say you?
Your rancid bayer aspirin hole just granted my fetid cock access to the deepest reaches of your rectum by opening up for it like a circular door from a science fiction movie. Maybe I should use my dippysack to dippy-dippy-do your foul asshole, and then smooch your disgusting bowels! What say you?
Wewwy wew! I sure do have a craving for something. Something scrump. Something... rancid as all fuck! What am I craving? Rectum soup. How is it made? Well, let me just introduce my fetid little friend to your rancid, feces-infested rectum and we'll see what they come up with... What say you?
Slashdot Mirror
The government acted to quickly with PATRIOT
When in reality, they shouldn't have acted much at all.
but that's how the Government always acts.
No, it isn't. Almost without exception, they always act that quickly only when they stand to gain more power, and in those cases, we usually always lose some of our individual liberties.
It's doubtful people could have forseen that, and now they're trying to correct it.
"doubtful"? Are you kidding me? The PATRIOT ACT included so many provisions that violated people's freedoms and gave the government so much power that there is no way people did not foresee this. Your problem is that you are naive enough to give the government the benefit of the doubt; they deserve no such thing.
Not afraid of change
How comical! How comical!
Even if there are things that are useful, the whole bathtub must be thrown out because to simply change the parts which are not working would be to admit that the Law isn't the end of civilization as we know it.
The entire law is actually garbage.
Also obscentiy. (Obscenity is more unreasonable, and tends to yield harsher punishment, but is also more subject to a "Freedom of Speech" defense, though I'm not sure that would work on a public billboard.
Well, he said it was displayed in his property. And obscenity laws, to me, are themselves obscene.
You can try, but you'll have to find other individuals to get behind you if you expect to get anywhere, as that's where change starts. Your infantile examples and analogies will do you no good.
Then you don't believe in the rule of law.
Not if those laws are unjust, as many have been.
Snowden made no effort to follow established whistleblower protocols.
And he shouldn't have, because if he had, the public still wouldn't know about the NSA surveillance, and everyone else wouldn't be aware of the specifics. What you ask for is that he let politicians blow the fact that the government is blatantly violating the constitution under the rug.
But it does not excuse him from punishment for those illegal actions.
I damn well think it should; the people who should be arrested are the politicians who supported this and everyone directly involved in the NSA.
I looked beyond the misleading summary, and frankly, their reasoning is garbage.
No, it's more along the lines of, ‘you're making money off those comments, so better hire a moderator to rein in the crackpots and the compulsive hatemongers’.
It's more along the lines of, "I despise freedom and I want someone who posted comments I don't like punished, but it's too hard to go after the one who originally posted the comments, so I'll just make up a nonsensical excuse to go after the website that the comments are hosted on."
It is not censorship if comments I don't like are moderated.
Fixed. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean that censorship is not censorship.
The country is ranked 11th in the world press freedom index of 2013 (http://en.rsf.org/press-freedom-index-2013,1054.html), so don't worry too much over it.
The freedom index says so, so it must be true! We have to let them get away with any injustice they commit!
What is "truly in appropriate"?
His puny mind can't even comprehend the concept of subjectivity.
The speech is free, but not necessarily consequence free.
Then that isn't free speech; otherwise, countries like North Korea have free speech, but with occasional consequences for exercising it. The entire point of freedom of speech is that government thugs won't come to harass you for saying something they disagree with, and if certain speech is prohibited, then there is no free speech in those cases.
Someone ought be responsable
No one should be legally responsible for mere speech, and if anyone is held responsible, it definitely shouldn't be the website owners.
Opinions on that are divided. Most countries draw a line somewhere.
Guess who's drawing the lines? People who despise freedom.
Some European countries outlaws nazi propaganda, for example.
Which is awful.
You can't publish slander - nasty lies about named persons.
I don't agree with slander laws, but the rationale for them isn't merely that slander is offensive.
Do you think the police and some angry parents with /damaged children/ visiting me the next day would buy the excuse that I wasn't responsible for the content displayed on my property because it wasn't me who made the posters?
Why are you the police involved? That's called freedom of speech.
They're just helping people get great software such as Mighty Magoo installed on their 'puters.
This Gamemakerlessness is an eyesore!
Disappear!
This Gamemakerlessness! This Gamemakerlessness! This Gamemakerlessness! This Gamemakerlessness! This Gamemakerlessness! This Gamemakerlessness! This Gamemakerlessness! This Gamemakerlessness! This Gamemakerlessness! This Gamemakerlessness!
Vanish, I say!
Return to Gamemakerdom!
The Great Utopia is where you'll find peace.
The Great Utopia is where your life will gain meaning.
The Great Utopia is where you will become something more than a miserable pile of depression.
The Great Utopia is waiting... for you!
Return, return, return, return, return to Gamemakerdooooooooooooooooooooom!
Enough out of you, you insolent insect! I never once gave you permission to type that worthless message! Now, make way for the great Truth Seeker!
All of you will return to Gamemakerdom right this minuteness!
Why do you cower?
Because you haven't returned to Gamemakerdom.
Not returning is inadvisable.
Not returning is nonsensical.
Not returning is illogical.
Not returning is not possible.
Your return to The Great Utopia is an inevitability.
Return.
Return.
Return.
Return.
Return.
You can return.
You may return.
You should return.
You will return.
You shall return.
You can, may, should, will, and shall return... to Gamemakerdom!
You can do anything with Gamemaker.
Nothing is outside the realm of possibility when you have Gamemaker.
Return! Return! Return!
Return, return, return, return, return to Gamemakerdooooooooooooooooooooooom!
FTFY. Do you not see where your reasoning is flawed?
Your 'fix' doesn't even make sense. Rapists rape, but taking drugs doesn't necessarily mean you'll commit violent crimes.
Your 'fix' also doesn't make since for other reasons, as you can't just substitute drugs for rape and have it automatically reflect reality as if this is some theoretical logic game. We already know from prohibition (of drugs and alcohol) that prohibiting such things increases the power of black markets substantially.
Again I say, when those people become so addicted that they become a drain on society, they become everyone's problem.
If living in a free society means that I have to support those who engage in activities that I may not always agree with, then so be it; I'd rather have that than your government bootlicking. What you suggest is also collective punishment, as you advocate banning entire substances simply because some people who use them become a drain on society. You are anti-freedom.
No law is 100% effective.
Nor are all effective laws just. Nor is prohibition even close to 100% effective.
You are a fool. Stealing is illegal and murdering people is illegal. Punish people who do either of those things, not people who merely ingest a substance into their bodies. You are also assuming that people don't take drugs right now, which is false, so the 'problems' you listed already exist.
Your mentality is already completely opposed to freedom. You do not want a free country if you believe that something should be banned merely because it could be abused or could cause certain people to do something bad; you want collective punishment, and you want government thugs to harass people.
The truth may be inconvenient and tiresome to you, but you'll have to get used to it. What else is it but government bootlicking when someone cheers this nonsense on or tries to justify it?
You may think nothing of it, but I'm always there for you. When you fall on your ass, my cock is always right where your bayer aspirin hole will land. When you fall off a cliff, I'm always at the bottom, waiting for your smelly asshole to fall right onto my fetid cock. When you wiggle your foul ass about, my disgusting little friend is always right there to keep it company. We're eternal Brothers In Rancid! What say you?
Isn't it funny how my fetid friend fits right into your bayer aspirin hole as if they were meant to be together? Well, it's not funny; it's a sign that they were indeed meant to be together, so let's get this feces fiesta started! Oh, yes! Anyone who thinks they can stop His Fetidness from becoming One With Bayerhole needs to return to realitydom! What say you?
Your rancid bayer aspirin hole just granted my fetid cock access to the deepest reaches of your rectum by opening up for it like a circular door from a science fiction movie. Maybe I should use my dippysack to dippy-dippy-do your foul asshole, and then smooch your disgusting bowels! What say you?
Wewwy wew! I sure do have a craving for something. Something scrump. Something... rancid as all fuck! What am I craving? Rectum soup. How is it made? Well, let me just introduce my fetid little friend to your rancid, feces-infested rectum and we'll see what they come up with... What say you?
Agreed. It is difficult for sociopaths to engage in basic human interactions because they don't understand them.
Internet psychologist alert.
If you say that you honestly don't get how tacit agreements work
That's not it. I don't understand how tacit agreements that people make up on the spot work; some are obvious, and others are obvious but illogical.
or perhaps you lack whatever genes allow for humans to interact with each other without handing each other contracts every time we pass in the street.
Don't blame me if I don't understand your imaginary contracts that I've never seen and can't see.