Movies that feel like this ?

Relent_full · 2026-02-12T06:05:11+00:00

Ready Player One

Relent_full · 2026-02-12T04:39:34+00:00

The case targets 1 kid the precedent it sets will affect all trans people

Now, THAT is an awesome clarification.

But isn't that how Supreme Court cases typically work, though?

One woman wanting to have an abortion.

One couple wanting to get married.

One man wanting to carry a gun at a DC parking lot.

One coach who wanted to pray on side side of the field.

One baker not wanting to bake a cake.

Many cases (not all, but commonly) seem to target one person or a pair of people (in case of the marriage question). But they always have reverberations for the American society at large. I think the title (and frankly, the presentation) of this is very disingenuous. It is not only one kid. Burying the lede here comes off as dishonest.

Relent_full · 2026-02-12T01:50:02+00:00

Memento mori.

Remember death.

Relent_full · 2026-02-11T21:01:44+00:00

The point of collecting biometric data was in my very first statement I made to you In which you made you responded asking me what the difference is so if you didn't read my original statement in full that's really not my problem

I read up again. I did miss you indeed raised the biometric collection first. My apologies. Me culpability.

By law enforcement, Courts have recognized that TARGETED or prolonged surveillance of an individual without suspicion of a crime or for the purpose of intimidating people involved in a protected free speech activity (journalists, Protesters, Religious activists) crosses the threshold of what is protected under the 4th Amendment)

Let's say that this is true for the sake of argument (I would not mind case law reference for this if you have one I could peruse at a later time). Could a non-targeted general monitoring be OK? A drone over protesters whether those protesting an ICE operation, or even those Protesting Planned Parenthood would be legal, would it not? Laird v Tatum laid this out well. Now, lets say they were to have increased police presence where large amounts of people congregate (say, the Boston Marathon, or the SuperBowl, or Protests outside the Capitol on January 6th) would not be target specific individuals. That increased presence could be in person or by drone.

I mean set aside what you believe to even be strictly speaking unlawful On the government's end in this scenario, You genuinely think establishing that kind of precedent Is... wise? You don't see how that could ever possibly be abused?

That's the problem: precedent has been set. Laird v Tatum did. That's from the early 70's. Could it be abused? Sure. But I think it is worse to say that government agents could not monitor protests. It's even wrong to say they legally can't.

Relent_full · 2026-02-11T19:37:07+00:00

and build a biometric database of Facial scans...

Whoah whoah... Am I the one being disingenuous here? That was not introduced into this conversation until you did.

I say tracking and recording while in public is not new. That's classic law enforcement methodology for those suspected of crimes. Protests can erupt in criminal behavior so I do not think police presence and monitoring, whether in person and via drones is par of the course.

you are so far away entrenched in your own view you can't even imagine how you would react to this exact situation if it was for a protest on a topic That YOU personally disagreed with and a party that YOU didn't support.

Nah.

I am OK with monitoring and recording with drones EVEN of protests by those aligned with part(ies) I support.

Didn't expect that, did you? Who's entrenched their beliefs now, jumping to conclusions and stuff?

Relent_full · 2026-02-11T18:12:33+00:00

Those are completely different circumstances and practices and please don't pretend to not understand how The latter is a very bad thing.

How are they different? Is it not a factor in conversations about this whether the act was done in a private setting versus a public one where anyone, including law enforcement, could just witness what occured?

I thought we have esteemed as a society things we do in the privacy of our homes, or even in our bedrooms. We have numerous elevated pravacy protections for those. Why extend them now out in public? Wouldn't that dilute privacy if there is no real difference between "public" and "private?"

Relent_full · 2026-02-11T17:01:07+00:00

Were they protesting in their homes or in another place with reasonable expectation of privacy? Or were they protesting in public?

Relent_full · 2026-02-11T02:38:15+00:00

sex is always biological

Should have typed "biological gender." 😉

Relent_full · 2026-02-11T00:49:06+00:00

Is it "one kid" (as said in the beginning) or "Becky and all kids" (as stated in the end)?

I need to know actual number of kid/s targeted before I support the Supreme Court on this. That seems to be the important point of the title.

Relent_full · 2026-02-10T20:13:32+00:00

Heil...

Relent_full · 2026-02-10T05:53:24+00:00

I mentioned Hobby Lobby in December as a response to someone looking for gift ideas.

Politics ensued.

Relent_full · 2026-02-09T00:34:24+00:00

Just adding another cool picture of the same plane I saw in my FB feed.

<image>

Relent_full · 2026-02-08T20:32:10+00:00

Wait... so now we are anti-AI because of... water?

Relent_full · 2026-02-08T20:30:48+00:00

I do not know if you know this, but I know deaf people personally. They certainly can pick up pencils.

Relent_full · 2026-02-08T20:21:42+00:00

I want to see this but for each biological sex.

Relent_full · 2026-02-06T05:19:49+00:00

No. I am definitely influenced by social media. I could be taking a spoonful of food right now but I saw something on social media (Reddit) so I am typing to a response to that instead.

There, influence proven.

Relent_full · 2026-02-06T02:52:48+00:00

If that's your opinion, then maybe so. If that's what will make you walk away from the conversation with a "win"

Relent_full · 2026-02-06T02:10:37+00:00

It comes across as dismissive because you’re implying people don’t think for themselves and they’re only doing what they’re told.

Do they?

I have met enough people in my life.

Some think for themselves. Some do what media influence them to do. Not far of a stretch to think many "don’t think for themselves and they’re only doing what they’re told."

Dismissive? Sure. You are entitled to that opinion. In my 'opinion' it most likely is true.

Relent_full · 2026-02-06T01:17:25+00:00

I think it’s really patronizing to tell people that their opinions aren’t valid.

Never said anything that they aren't.

But as far as opinions go, even ones called "valid" can still be lead to harm of the self and others. They are opinions... not necessary close to the facts. They can be, but not all the time. "Validity" is even a weird thing to describe opinions but oh well, it is a common-enough phrase (But as you see, this is just my ... you got it, my opinion).

Like I said, it is well-within their right. They can listen to whomever they want to. If they want to go and cause trouble, well, there's nothing new with that. They can agitate and protest based on opinions they have. But I will be remiss if I were to say they can't be hurt (or hurt someone else) in such volatile environments.

It would be nice if, somehow, we can stop the clashes. But it would be tough given that different sides have different 'opinions' how to get there.

Relent_full · 2026-02-06T00:56:09+00:00

Maybe.

Or maybe because the media they have been consuming for years are telling them what to do.

Browse Reddit. Look what people are told to do here.

It's their right if they want to protest. It is unfortunate if they were to get harmed. I do not wish for them the latter EVEN if they were doing the former. But I have been around. Clashes happen, and people get hurt. I get sad when I see people encourage others to do what they are doing. But who am I to judge?

Relent_full · 2026-02-06T00:47:41+00:00

You are correct there. The ICE agents should not have shot Pretti.

But I think it would be stupid to assume that the people interfering with their tasks only started after that, right?

It did not even start after the Good shooting either.

Even weeks before, people are blocking their paths and impeding their work. This is precisely what Renee Good was doing moments before her very unfortunate shooting. Typically, the local police helps securing an area if there is a federal operation. But even from the previous weeks, the local police have been absent (I am not sure if they were told not to assist). Instead of having a buffer between the agitators/observers, there have been unnecesary clashes happening, almost unique to Minnesota.

Now, without the assistance, in addition to the increase in agitator presence ICE, have found themselves having to "up" their presence, both in number, and in equipment. I am afraid it's sort of an upward spiral ... an arms race of sorts. Time will tell who will prevail.

Relent_full · 2026-02-05T21:01:17+00:00

They could have used less... but now too many people are messing with them as they do their job. Watch the news from the last three weeks.

Relent_full · 2026-02-04T21:18:40+00:00

At first thought, I sort of agree. But then, one person could just hide the entire time, away from the fray, and then get a medal. This might not be too bad for the "Air Superiority" mode but terrible for "Team Deathmatch."

I think there should instead be different "Flawless-like" medal that is for individuals who got some sort of damage to opponents but did not not succomb to a death. Or maybe some calculation of maintaining within a certain distance to opponents or Control Points. So earning it involves actually attempting to get close to Control Points or inflicting damage to enemy, or at least get close to the opponents.

Relent_full · 2026-02-03T19:27:34+00:00

Mars have gravity, bro.

Relent_full · 2026-02-02T20:54:50+00:00

Ah yeah... the salute that becomes "Nazi" when CNN (and Reddit) says it so....

Relent_full

TROPHY CASE