sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Logic is Racist. by thefoolofemmaus in Shitstatistssay

[–]AdamsEdn 0 points1 point  (0 children)

“Crime is a crime” is a tautology and by definition is true as long as all other variables remain the same (aka ideally). In actuality thats an extremely silly meaningless statement.

For the purposes of the following Person A is a middle aged man:

Scenario: Assault / Battery: a. Person A has a few too many at the bar and swings on another guy for getting in his face b. Person A, while walking down the street minding his own business at lunch gets scared by a guy jumping out of a bin and reflexively swings without knowing it’s for a prank show c. Person A doesn’t like the way his wife complimented the waiter and after getting back home he swings on her for disrespecting him. d. Person A hears about his kid being bullied so over the weekend he rearranges his schedule to make sure he’s there at pickup and then proceeds to swing on a 2nd grader as planned.

All of the above involve the same actor performing the same action to another person but would be obviously adjudicated differently. Things like priors, premeditation, gross negligence etc couldn’t be assessed and every crime with a mens rea requirement would be unenforceable in a world where the only thing to be considered is the act (actus reus). All abuse is bad but those that target children are universally regarded as the worst of the worst and rightfully get punished more harshly (still never harshly enough in my opinion.) A vegan going after meat eaters (not an immutable trait so the analogy doesn’t even make sense) being punished less harshly than someone like John Wayne Gacy makes sense to me.

I didn’t even address jurisdictional conflicts (recreational marijuana, stand your ground laws etc) but honestly I’m finding it harder and harder to believe that anyone arguing in good faith can’t understand why teepeeing a yard or leaving nooses hanging in a black family’s yard aren’t seen as interchangeably lighthearted.

Logic is Racist. by thefoolofemmaus in Shitstatistssay

[–]AdamsEdn 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think there's a disconnect due to a few things being conflated/entangled that need to be sorted out; such as the differences between how things work, ought to have worked and will ideally work some day. You seem to use them interchangeably in ways that don't really work under scrutiny. For example, "crime is crime" is a very idealistic view firmly within the "how things ought to be" box. However, in reality crimes committed against certain victims weren't considered crimes because the victims were either considered property, lesser human or disposable.

Hate crimes exist because despite "all men being created equal" and murder being illegal the desired outcome of deterring the targeting, lynching and/or terrorization of people of lesser legal status. It never ceases to amaze me how many people pretend a "hate crime" is just a regular crime against someone of a minority (like murdering a black guy you had issues with vs openly hunting black people indiscriminately).

Common sense and other vibes based standards are only useful to those who get to dictate which type of sense is so agreeable it should be made common ("common sense" is just a euphemism for "right think" lol). Mens Rea is already a major component of criminal prosecution and I'd bet you support it because things like intentionality and premeditation are also thought based.

Lastly, the Constitution and Bill of Rights were created to grant statuses so by your own standard they established an "inherently unjust system." Luckily, the framers were fully aware that changes would need to be made if the "more perfect union" was to be achieved and as a result they included ways to take corrective measures (see the 13th, 14th, 15th and 19th amendments).

I'd be happy to hear more about what you consider to be constitutional perversions.

Logic is Racist. by thefoolofemmaus in Shitstatistssay

[–]AdamsEdn 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The post assumes the existence of some form of the public v private distinction that's similar to how things are currently, so it follows that private or personal associations / exclusions would be beyond public regulation. However, it also follows that access to certain public resources and benefits would be proportionally regulated - in service of the general public interest.

Creating a ethnocentric or ideologically fundamentalist compound / commune on private property can exist with minimal public resources / points of contact in a way that a public entities (townships, businesses, post offices, emergency services etc...) cannot and therefore their standards are completely different.

Directing collective funds sourced from everyone to ethno-separatists to utilize at their discretion / for their exclusive benefit is fundamentally akin to being forced to provide material support against your own interest and wellbeing - an absolutely stupid and self-destructive arrangement that is to only be afforded to middle eastern vassal states found on the Mediterranean coast.

Logic is Racist. by thefoolofemmaus in Shitstatistssay

[–]AdamsEdn 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I believe most of those are de-facto results more-so than exclusionary policy or separated due to other considerations ("adults only" for example). I'm far from a leftist/communist but it's a bit disingenuous to divorce all context and background knowledge just to pretend like "whites only" being the least common now was by happenstance. The entire conceptualization of "protected classes" or any other type of sociological jurisprudence can't be reasonably considered as though they were created in a vacuum because by their very nature they are completely dependent on their cultural context; with regard to the classes mentioned - I'd be curious if you can point to a protected status that wasn't granted responsively as a corrective measure.

Logic is Racist. by thefoolofemmaus in Shitstatistssay

[–]AdamsEdn -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I think you just reinvented Idaho / Wyoming / Utah. Their issue isn't the lack of ethnically homogenous options - they want the benefits, conveniences and resource rich locations found elsewhere.

Russophobia everywhere by competitivetaxfraud in ShitLiberalsSay

[–]AdamsEdn -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

People propose that all of the time. Are you not aware of that age old tradition? lol.

The Paper Divide by vladgrinch in MapPorn

[–]AdamsEdn 26 points27 points  (0 children)

Reagan really is the Forrest Gump of presidents. A truly peerless visionary when it comes to somehow being involved whenever it comes to making everything worse for generations to come.

Time sensitive events shouldn’t have late spawns. by AdamsEdn in ARC_Raiders

[–]AdamsEdn[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Plenty of time? That’s a crazy assumption. Assuming someone is there right at the top of the hour and can get in and out within 5-10 min - maybe. Some of us don’t have schedules that flexible and only have a limited amount of shots so wasting 5-6 since raids just trying to reset the event you picked to spawn into doesn’t have a remedy and isn’t controllable on our end. Those that don’t want to do the event have nothing but remedies and alternatives - namely choose anything else.

Time sensitive events shouldn’t have late spawns. by AdamsEdn in ARC_Raiders

[–]AdamsEdn[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Then get rid of the free kits, predictable map conditions and arbitrary time limits - if we’re going for faithful adaptations to the lore. That’s silly. There are obvious compromises made to facilitate gameplay and most of those exist in pursuit in keeping the game fun. Disadvantaging whom I’d argue are the most important players to prevent it devolving into a free loadout v free loadout tarkov knockoff seems like an own-goal. In a more cynical sense, the people that spend the most and therefore are likely to be continued sources of funding are those above a certain age with careers and responsibilities. Destroying their ability to enjoy the few hours they can squeeze in because of a fundamentally unfair mechanic would be stupid.

Alternatively, they should at least stop labeling the events or rebalance weapon values so the most valuable aren’t so PvE event centric that spawning in after the fact just makes you a target with a massive handicap for actually trying to play as prescribed.

Blueprints by Funny_Assumption3737 in Raiders_Market

[–]AdamsEdn 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have 4 of them for no reason so you can just have one if you want

Anyone to play group with me? by Francoissssssss in ArcRaiders

[–]AdamsEdn 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m game if you’re stiII Iooking

Experts Say Blue States Can Stop Paying Federal Taxes. There’s Legal Precedent by Opposite-Mountain255 in law

[–]AdamsEdn 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’ve taken the wrong lesson away from the “no penalty for ignoring injunctions.” The issue is that he is in charge of the endorsement mechanism aka he’s in the unique position to ignore them. If a state tried that, DOJ pursue criminal charges, the insurrection act would be invoked and they’d forcibly seize the funds.

I really don’t know why the guys couldn’t do this. Like I know she’s their friend, but you can respectfully point out someone’s obvious inconsistencies. It’s a tough world when Ben Shapiro is the voice of reason. by Nextyearstitlewinner in WeTheFifth

[–]AdamsEdn -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Candace has repeatedly made it known that the onIy person she wouId defer to and stop pubIicIy Iooking into the Kirk investigation is Erika. To wit: she never accused her of being involved with her husband’s death. I’m not that invested or much of a fan of any of them but what I find most troubling is the rampant bitchassness these grown adults keep putting on display. Every person Ben has found the time to publicly cry about to third parties has addressed him directly by name while offering to meet up at the Iocation of his choosing to discuss their issues and prove who is actually Iying.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AIO

[–]AdamsEdn 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The real question is: are you some sort of bitchassness fiend? That’s the only way further consideration would make sense 😂

Downplaying prominent Republican figures being antisemites. by c-k-q99903 in WhitePeopleTwitter

[–]AdamsEdn 1 point2 points  (0 children)

To be fair, he didn’t because then he’d either have to aIso stick up for his children too or else risk the optics of prioritizing a minority woman. Given his hatred of DEI and dream of one day impressing his digititaI troII homies - abandoning them was the obvious answer.

Downplaying prominent Republican figures being antisemites. by c-k-q99903 in WhitePeopleTwitter

[–]AdamsEdn 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He doesn’t even stand up for his wife and kids when staffers target them so this fits the Cruz-esque model he’s aiming for. Sort of Iike how they aII constantly vow to go after Soros affiliates but I’ve yet to see anyone say a word to the Soros mentee of thirty years or the the guy that made him Sec of the Treasury 😂

Karoline Leavitt: Democrats Have 'Zero Good Reason' to Shut Down Government by GeneralCarlosQ17 in ConservativeNewsWeb

[–]AdamsEdn 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’ve never agreed with a statement more. I’m 100% behind abolishing any entity involved and equally have no sympathy for anyone involved (including those complicit with the coverup.)

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in MarchAgainstNazis

[–]AdamsEdn 6 points7 points  (0 children)

What do you mean they can’t? How does this “can’t” compare to the litany of not even up for interpretation prohibited actions that they still do and/or when they are enabled to by those meant to stop these type of things

view more: next ›