politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. 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.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. 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.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
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.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
The sheriff cannot shut off my security cameras.
Your security cameras are not bulletproof, they will shut them off
That would imply they can aim...
The police aren’t gonna shoot cameras. Also, there are several. Inside, outside, good luck getting away with anything in my house.
https://youtu.be/0bNy7XO-SCI
Have you ever been in an interaction like that with the police?
Because I've found that a lot of the time, people are somewhat more confident before they see just how disgustingly and openly corrupt these assholes can be.
Yes, my camera set up is very similar to that.
"Good luck getting away with anything in my house" still implies that you think that as long as you've recorded a police doing something illegal, he'll face consequences for that.
That is extremely naive.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/afroman-pushes-back-cop-lawsuit-recent-music-video/story?id=101520072
The cops actually sued Afroman, after breaking his shit and having it videod that they broke shit and stole from him.
I don't think you understand just how perverted "justice" usually is. Especially when you're trying to get consequences for law enforcement for having broken the laws themselves.
They sued him for making a music video of the footage. I would not be making a music video. So, what are they going to sue me for?
I do understand how bad the cops are. But as long as they don’t shoot me—a different topic—they cannot get in and out of my house unnoticed. This is my only statement.
This is very much not mutually exclusive with "getting away with things".
You're too optimistic about the justice system.
English must not be your first language.
And you must be on really shaky grounds with any sort of an argument, meaning you probably have literally zero experience with the justice system. Bringing me back to how cops being able to get away with things they do in your house and you noticing them in your house aren't mutually exclusive. (In this sentence, the preposition isn't needed. But in the first one, the way it was formatted, it did call for a preposition. See example 3: "Time and Tru Midi Slip Skirt Comfort and style are definitely not mutually exclusive with this midi skirt.")
I bet you’re very popular.
With people I might have made feel stupid? It is rare, yeah, but on occasion. Shows a lot of character when it happens, though.
Perhaps they feel stupid in your presence, but I doubt that’s because you are smart.
Good, some doubt. Now apply that towards the justice system.
You’ve taken the conversation and turned it into something that allows you to argue online to make yourself feel better about yourself.
I feel sorry for you, because nothing you say could ever hurt me, but you keep trying so hard.
I'd say nice try, but it isn't.
I keep making the same point. You can't let go and stop replying out of like... spite, or something?
Nothing to it. I'm not trying to insult you, but guess you are me.
You can stop too 🤷♂️
I'm not trying to change th3 subject mr "cops won't get away with anything in my house"
Now I realise it's a different country, but here's my personal experience.
https://www.hs.fi/suomi/art-2000009654524.html
In Finland. And no-one fucking believes me here. Despite having supreme court documents to show. And that's only a part of the illegal shit I got them on, as they forcibly prevented me fron filming.
I see. It’s a language barrier, and you took the “get away with” as a serious statement of getting away with a crime when I mean it like: “people cannot get into my house without being on camera”
Problem solved.
You use "being on camera" to imply that since they're on camera, they'll face consequences for whatever they might do.
With law enforcement, that isn't nearly as probable as you think. I hope you have those feeds recording to a server that isn't located on the same premises, at the very least. Even if you have the material though, it usually doesn't mean a thing. Cops can justify pretty much anything in the US, and the justice system tends to go their way. Sure, you can show a few examples of cops actually sentenced, but for each one, there's at least a dozen cases of officers who got off scot-free or with a warning, and a hundred more who weren't even investigated.
And as to your pitiful attempts at insults with your assumption that your English is better than mine? I've more than likely used English longer than you. More than you. In addition, I speak another language on a native level and several others on a customer service level. How many do you speak?
No, you misinterpreted the statement.
Goodbye.
Ah, so... what exactly is the reason that you think having video of cops makes you safe?
You're trying to avoid seeming foolish. Like when you tried to correct my English.
So... how many languages do you speak?
I never said it made me safe, I just said I have a lot of cameras. You took my comment, added your own thoughts to it, and then attacked me to make yourself feel something inside.
If it wasn’t misinterpreted, then you’re just fabricating information because you desire an argument.
Kinda sad really.
You started this with "thats why it's important to have a lot of cameras", to which someone responded "so the cops can shut them off, like they did Afroman's?", to which you responded "cops wouldn't..."
Then I entered the conversation, because you've asserted what cops would and wouldn't do, showing just how much faith — wrongly, though — you have in the justice system.
You're just really hard trying to ad hoc what you said, but unlike in real life, what has been said is actually on record, so bullshitting your way out of this doesn't work as easily as with your mates in the pub.
Weird how you yourself commented on the "language barrier" and what you thought was an incorrect use of the English language, yet now have completely shut up about it, almost as if you're avoiding comparing your language skills to mine. Perhaps because you don't like feeling stupid?
I’m not reading any of this goodbye
It really is weird that you have this pathological avoidance yet obsess over replying here.
We both know you read it. We both know which of us has more language skills, and we both know what you meant at the start of the thread.
Projection.
Blocked.
Yes, that's why you can't respond with more than two words, but still have to reply, despite having to also avoid the topics of our language skills and what your comment at the start of this thread meant.
or duct-tape proof like the Secret Service did to that business owner in Mass. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/secret-service-kamala-harris-election-2024-b2595162.html