World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
I see, so when police violate an individual’s rights it’s malfeasance on their part. Yet when protesters that you happen to agree with violate those rights in a shockingly similar manner, it’s a disturbance and the individual should “get over it” and it’s their problem.
It was indeed a very simple question which you tried to side step. You seem to understand how an individual who doesn’t have a stake in your cause could feel victimized by actions that directly affect their safety and liberty. But you and the protesters don’t care about those particular victims, you want just the attention.
Ah, I see. You don't recognize any moral difference between a traffic jam and police detainment.
That's hillarious.
It is disingenuous to conflate a generic traffic jam that happens naturally, with intentionally blocking traffic and conspiring to detain people for the purpose of publicity.
The two are not nearly the same.
There's no such thing as a "traffic jam that happens naturally", they all have causes, ranging from individuals directly responsible for collisions to failures of design and implementation that cause congestion during normal use by daily commuters.
If they all get a pass for "causing traffic" then why are you singling out protesters as an exception?
What is the difference between involuntary manslaughter and murder?
Burden of proof. Involuntary manslaughter doesn't require prosecutors to demonstrate intent or malice aforethought.
Why don't highway engineers get charged with manslaughter when their designs result in death?
“doesn't require prosecutors to demonstrate intent or malice aforethought.”
The protesters displayed all of the traits you mentioned. By conspiring and planning to commit unlawful actions. The protesters displayed intent to break the law detain/disrupt the travel of innocent bystanders (illegal in itself) and potentially endangering their lives in the process (super duper illegal).
Highway engineers can be charged with manslaughter if they display willful ignorance, intent to break the law or have demonstrated that they were deceitful in acquiring a position they were not accredited for. Generally speaking that is very hard to prove in court especially when dealing with a large corporation with legions of lawyers to back them up. Hence why it is rare.
It is not so hard to prove with a dozen or so activists who have a history of such actions which are wildly unpopular and illegal. Hence why they are charged.
But there are examples such as the recent Boeing 737 Max disasters where criminal culpability for engineers and managers have been proven. I’d argue the punishment or rather the settlement isn’t enough in this particular case, but that wasn’t your question. Your question was why aren’t they charged.
Are you talking about conspiracy to commit murder or conspiracy to commit minor traffic violations? XD
So the protesters would be innocent of everything except minor traffic violations.
With what, "disturbing the peace"? XD
I answered all of your questions, yet once again you fall back on downplaying the seriousness of the crimes they were planning.
Putting “XD” at the end of every one of your statements doesn’t make them pithy, smart or relevant. It just shows me you’re pedantic to the point that you can’t string together a coherent argument without leaning on whatever the current zeitgeist is.
Hopefully the law will prosecute those activists and put them away for a long, long time.