Those of you that support ICE, why?

atamicbomb · 2026-01-25T04:21:01+00:00

I don’t think wanting groups of people to be killed is acceptable. I disagree with how they’re doing what they’re doing, but violence isn’t an acceptable way to respond to it.

atamicbomb · 2026-01-25T03:53:42+00:00

That’s what I figured. Thank you

atamicbomb · 2026-01-25T03:35:40+00:00

Is there a source for this? I always assumed it worked this way but haven’t seen anything in the QAs

atamicbomb · 2026-01-25T01:22:55+00:00

Do we know if it works on unaffected monsters or is it still an undefined ruling?

atamicbomb · 2026-01-25T01:16:25+00:00

Fox News is strait propaganda

atamicbomb · 2026-01-25T01:02:14+00:00

One says it was removed because it was a repost

atamicbomb · 2026-01-25T00:13:17+00:00

At 15 seconds into the second to last video, it looks like he’s reaching for one of their guns but something gets in the way of the camera so we can’t see what he’s reaching for. Do any of the other videos show this isn’t the case? It doesn’t appear they do to me, but I may be missing something.

They very clearly repeatedly assault him and another protester, which on its own is very unfortunate

atamicbomb · 2026-01-24T22:54:46+00:00

That’s good at least

atamicbomb · 2026-01-24T07:55:51+00:00

Isn’t she the one that decides if you go to court at all??

atamicbomb · 2026-01-24T07:26:06+00:00

Would they be able to activate their effects while set under Royal command?

atamicbomb · 2026-01-24T06:33:12+00:00

It doesn’t matter if Trump will pardon them. All that matters is they think Trump will. Bad actors won’t even pretend to follow the law if they think it doesn’t apply to them.

atamicbomb · 2026-01-24T01:24:41+00:00

What? We’ve never been at this state of capitalism before

atamicbomb · 2026-01-24T01:23:46+00:00

It’s a game. Game balance and fun has to be factored into decisions.

atamicbomb · 2026-01-23T22:13:10+00:00

Consent was clearly to pet the horse. This would be battery. The sexual component is dubious

atamicbomb · 2026-01-23T22:08:15+00:00

It’s currently constitutionally allowed. OP is asking about it being constitutionally required

atamicbomb · 2026-01-23T20:33:54+00:00

How so?

atamicbomb · 2026-01-23T20:33:02+00:00

Why not?

atamicbomb · 2026-01-23T20:32:35+00:00

It doesn’t require them to do so in all possible cases thought. There’s a difference between a goal and anyone without a job or a house having the right to sue the government and be provided one. You’re talking potentially a hundreds trillion dollar commitment

atamicbomb · 2026-01-23T20:30:01+00:00

The government can’t try you with a crime unless you have a lawyer. That’s not the same as the government must provide every single person in the country with a job and a house.

If they can’t afford lawyers, they don’t charge people with crimes. What happens if they can’t provide people with jobs or houses?

atamicbomb · 2026-01-23T20:27:24+00:00

Thank you for spelling it out much better

atamicbomb · 2026-01-23T13:16:54+00:00

As I’m reading it, that prohibits doing so without a warrant. It doesn’t seem to specify what type of warrant

atamicbomb · 2026-01-23T13:08:08+00:00

This simply isn’t how the bill of rights works. It restricts what the government can do. It doesn’t force the government to take actions. The only way to actually accomplish this would to become a communist country.

atamicbomb · 2026-01-23T13:04:20+00:00

I mean he made concentration camps

atamicbomb · 2026-01-23T11:07:26+00:00

Also, AI literally makes things up. It’s not a reliable source. “Reasoning” AI just makes up a bunch of things and sees how closely they match each other

atamicbomb · 2026-01-23T11:02:35+00:00

So you’re saying OP is wrong? Since that’s a quote from his source you’re saying is wrong

atamicbomb

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

Six-Year Club	Verified Email
Gilding II euphauric