Jump to content

DRAGONMOUNT

A WHEEL OF TIME COMMUNITY

SinisterDeath

DM - Staff
  • Content Count

    17553
  • Joined

Everything posted by SinisterDeath

  1. Please note: I'm not arguing anything about the cop. I was merely showing that these laws vary widely state by state, and say very different things about what you are legally required to do, and when/how you are exempt from those laws. Florida only cares about sexual Assault. California only cares if you're a Minor. Minnesota/Wisconsin says anyone/any danger.
  2. Yes. Which is why calling emergency services is one of the first, generally risk free things things you can, and should do. It is is one of the easiest and most basic ways in which you can assist these days. Hell, they might even instruct you on what, and what not to do. These laws exist, to criminalize people who walk/drive away from a clearly deadly incident, putting lives at risk. Calling 911, is literally the least you can and should do with this law. The good Samaritan laws, exist to protect you, for not administering CPR or first Aid (because you're not trained), or if the incident would put your life in danger. (Downed electrical lines, fast moving river, cars on fire, moving machinery, etc) It doesn't really protect you from not calling 911... even gang violence is something you can call in, if you move a block or two away.
  3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_to_rescue Laws vary state by state... by quite a bit. I'm still trying to convince my "mother-almost-in-law" to put her god damn seat belt on in my car, because it's illegal in my state not to have one on. (Luckily they ticket the offender, not the driver!) Though, I'm also tempted to just slam the brakes one day to prove the point. Here's my state's law on the matter. California seems to only care if the person looks like a minor. Should be noted, that Minnesota has all 6 seasons. So when you see a car in the ditch, that looks pretty beat up, it's pretty damned important in the winter to notify the authorities, and potentially help the driver & passengers because during certain weather events, you can get frost bite in under 5 minutes, and potentially die when exposed to the elements in under an hour. California you get Heatstroke, Dehydration, and Sun Burn.
  4. Thanks. Are you aware of any site that has compiled a list (with sources) of what each state is actually doing in plain-English as well as the exact wording used in legalese? Side Note: Apparently Legalese isn't actually slang.
  5. In this regard, we have a Ban on Machine Guns. Assault Weapons and Rifles are still legal. If we replace Abortions with Guns. Conservatives want to ban all Guns. (All Abortions) While Liberals want to keep only Machine guns Illegal in most cases. (Only non-medically required Late Term abortions are illegal.) As an aside. Did your fact check site mention anything about states that would punish people for getting abortions in other states?
  6. I didn't say it took a lot of time, Just that I had to scroll several pages worth of material down just to see actual posts from the guy and not retweets.
  7. It does when the legal language uses the word scientific word Fetus, when science states it's an embryo. If they had referred to it as a less scientific word like baby, it leaves itself with less room for attack on technicalities. It's like a Liberal calling an AR-15 a Machine Gun. No. Just No.
  8. I had to scroll quite far on his twitter page before it became indisputable that he is Muslim. The newest stuff was just regular old newsie stuff for his neck of the woods. Once I got past the news stuff and things he actually tweeted, yea he is.
  9. Know your facebook acount? I can download and copy anything on your account. I can steal your photo pretty easily. Viewing a cloud, and viewing the pictures requires the ability to download (copy). Viewing any photo on your computer downloads a copy of said photo. That's just how computers & the internet work. If you view the cloud no differently that photo hosting sites like photobucket, there is no way to offer read only access without the ability to copy/download a file, while still letting people view the contents with implied consent to view, but not distribute. Describing what you see cannot be restricted. Obviously. In your camera scenario, how do I know you have one? Granted, today we have cell phones which all have cameras, but the principle is the same. Unless you disclose to me that you have a camera, how can i then say don't take photos of these pictures? Would not a reasonable person assume, in their home, that a person isn't actively hiding a camera on their person at all times to then disseminate the private affairs that are happening within those walls? Now if you pull out your phone or DSLR camera and I don't say anything about taking photos the photo album, you might have more of a point. Many of those websites/groups have within their own rules & regulations that basically state that anything posted here is to remain private and not distributed/copied. That any and all photos are the property of the owner who posted them. Something along those lines. But yes, if you post a risque picture on your facebook wall, that's not going to help you any. But Clouds are tricky when it comes to sharing and viewing data. All I'm getting at is that laws need to get updated, and people need to get educated on what their rights & responsibilities are.
  10. Is he? All I know is he's reporter in Africa. I can't find anything about his actual religion. The best way I can put it is this. The Fulani https://www.britannica.com/topic/Fulani Predominately Muslim, and obviously not all are Muslim. Have been Quarreling with the Christian farmers for a pretty long time. It's less a Religion vs Religion as Culture vs Culture, or Lifestyle vs Lifestyle issue. To put it into another perspective, The Wild West Cowboys vs Farmer/Ranchers. Cowboy: "We've been herding our cattle here for 70 years!" Farmer: "I bought this land fair and square, this land is for my cattle!" It's a tale as old as time. One of the articles on a site like I posted, literally claimed that X Christian farmers were killed by Fulani Herders, when the Farmers actually did the killing of the herders. They also neglect to mention that both sides are tit-for-tat killing each other, and act like only the Herders are doing the killings. The BBC article at least mentions both sides killing each other. I'm sure we aren't getting the full story either. But there's only so much we can gain from Like that.
  11. https://www.livescience.com/44899-stages-of-pregnancy.html 6 weeks it's still an Embryo. It doesn't become a Fetus until 8 weeks, Hence the laws not being based on Science or Facts but emotion and religion. There is definitely confusion and misinformation (on both sides) going around. There's also a significant amount of anti-choice laws being enacted in various states with different penalties for different people with different levels of severity, which can get pretty hard to keep straight which state does what, and then you combine it with misinformation on both sides and that leads to a "what the hell is happening? What's even true anymore?" But as I said.
  12. Nah. Coprorations and printform media can totally be #fakenews. (Hence I why name bombed Inquirer.. But I don't think even they take themselves that seriously.) It's just that with the billion #fakenews websites out there, requiring more than one person to publish articles and stories in an industry that you hope self-checks itself against falsehoods and holds some form of journalistic integrity, that they might be a bit more trustworthy, than a rando-website setup in your mother's basement trying to pass off twitter articles or homeopathic/antivax propaganda as real news. Hence when you said Spanish Right Wing papers = Nationalists, perhaps? But if the same stories are coming out of NYT & WP chances are the facts are the similar, just the interpretation differs. Often #fakenews sites, make up their own facts, and claim that no one else is reporting this... When they are. I'm more concerned with #fakenews networks like this. (Clearly this isn't a racist nationalist fake news site, just a Christian one) https://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/africa/item/31824-silent-slaughter-media-quiet-as-muslims-kill-hundreds-of-christians-in-nigeria One of the articles on this particular subject within that network of news sites, named Dropped the Fulani as Muslim Terrorists and the other Group of Nigerian farmers as Christians. It mentioned a specific X number of people killed and attributed that to the Fulani. When researching further, that exact number were in fact Fulani killed by the Farmers, and that, that conflict is two sided against farmers & herders that has been ongoing.. for generations? and always peaks during elections. Here's some background on the conflict in general. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-36139388
  13. I used 56 years & JFK for a very specific reason. Do you not remember some of the most common attacks against JFK was precisely because of his being Catholic? Concerns of the Pope? Seems to me, that the Republican party still thinks all 3 of those should disqualify you for the office of POTUS. Not reading my bias into your argument, rather the bias of several of the newer conservative Judges that are probably going to say "**** it, I do what I want." Can you point out where exactly the constitution defines what a Person is? Whether Embryonic Cells, or even a Fetus are a 'person'? Clearly, you haven't been reading up on your conservative anti-choice game plan enacted across the country. They're passing their Religious Law across the country in the hopes that the Supreme Court will rule in Favor of Christian Sharia Law.
  14. Economic side of things yes, but you're forgetting that many artists don't personally profit from their works. (specially online). Many go the route of open licensing that allows anyone to use their work, so long as they acknowledge that they did the work. Effectively you're saying that if an artist doesn't seek to profit from their work, and you come along and steal it, That's fine. Because there was no economic harm. And again, the laws have not been updated to reflect technology. This is why I brought up a photo album. It exists as a physical object in your home. It is implied that photo album does not leave that house. That I may view it and it's contents, but those contents do not leave that house without your express consent. The fact that there exists technology, that I can simply scan the photos, or take pictures of those photos with the glasses I wear, and then distribute them, against your wishes is why said laws probably need to be updated to reflect technology. That perhaps it should be codified in law that personal pictures are private unless verbally or writtenly expressed otherwise?
  15. In this scenario, you are showing me your private family photo album. The fact that I could pull out a handheld scanner, scan them, and then proceed to upload them to the internet without even telling you I'm doing so. It is generally implied through social contract that a person won't effectively steal your photos without telling you the owner, what you're plans are with said photos. Just like If I were to show you artwork I painted, you take a picture of it, and then you proceed to post it online and act as if you were the original artist. The legal validity of these practices are being discussed precisely because the laws of the land & the constitution haven't caught up with technology. They' barely help to protect artists from plagiarism, and they sure in the hell don't help individuals in-regards to privacy concerns.
  16. Not really. A cloud full of pictures can exist to be viewed. (Look at services like Photobucket). If I gave you access to my cloud, You're able to view the files, you can download them, (technically seeing any picture online means you download it), but you don't own the intellectual property that is within it. Distributing my intellectual property against my express wishes, infringes upon my intellectual property rights. To put it another way. If you went to Photobucket, and started downloading artwork/pictures, and then tried selling/passing it off as your own, that's copyright infringement. The only difference between that, and revenge porn is you're more likely to get caught distributing revenge porn... getting caught distributing it is kind of the point.
  17. Knowing the Scientific definitions of what exactly is involved with abortion, and the moral & Philosophical aspects of the Mother's right to privacy and life, versus that of the Embryonic cell's/Fetus's right to life/self seems rather integral to the constitutional arguments of the validity of abortion rights. and? I just said it was interesting... It's interesting because 6 out of 9 Justices are from a religion that are vehemently opposed to Abortion. 6 out of 9 Justices are part of a religion that 56 years ago, America was convinced shouldn't have been able to hold the office of POTUS because of prejudiced view that they would hold an allegiance to the Pope, over that of our constitution and country. Unless their judicial philosophy is to say F*** precedence , liberals, and any interpretation of the constitution that doesn't conform to the republican party's view.. :Wink:
  18. You have a photo album in your house. You invite me in your home. You say "Here have a look at the family photo album" I then proceed to post it for everyone on the internet. Same thing, different technology.
  19. News Papers are a bit more reputable than the random #fakenews website that grannies share on FB. Like, even the Inquirer is more reputable than some of these organizations that brand themselves as news...
  20. They claim he's going to bring that vote, but will he really?
  21. One would think you would need to know the basics of what is being discussed, to know how it potentially impacts it's constitutionality. It's almost like they think all the Liberal judges are activist judges, and the Conservative judges are all pure constitutionalists without an activist bone in their body. Interestingly out of the 9 Justices, 5 are Catholic, 1 Raised Catholic. The other 3 are Jewish.
×
×
  • Create New...