Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
@tsstevens: Why bring autism into any of this? As an autistic person myself, I'm pretty offended, and at least one of my autistic friends is a Trump supporter so they'd be offended.
And what does your post even have to do with autism, for that matter?
Leviticus 19:34In some parts of the internet, "autistic" is the new "retarded".
It's as offensive as it sounds.
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.> What are the odds Mueller indicts Roger Stone? Wa Po is reporting that he's asking the House for the transcripts of their closed door hearing with him.
Very likely,he'll get blood from a Stone if he has to,at this point I struggle to think anyone who can't be indicted aside from President obviously
have a listen and have a link to my discord serverGonna go ahead and hollar then move on.
Stone looks to be the next person to be indited, after Stone it's really only the family left, Muller going after one of them is likely to be the point of rapid escalation.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranPolice, schools had no duty to protect Parkland school shooting victims, judge rules
I fucking bet the judge would've been singing a very different tune if her own child was among those students.
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.It’s already in the past been ruled that in the US the police have no duty to protect individuals, their job is to protect and enforce the law as a concept, nto individual citizens.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranOur law regarding the duty of care is often... really shitty.
There’s a case from the 1980s that’s to blame here. In De Shaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services (1989), the Supreme Court grappled with the fundamental question of a state’s constitutional duty to protect victims of child abuse. The Supreme Court concluded that the Constitution does not legally require states to protect its citizens, including abused children, from harms that the state did not directly generate.
Basically: if the government take you into custody, they have to protect you. If you’re running about independently, they don’t, unless THEY made the danger. That said, the lawyers should have argued (or may have) that students are in the school’s care when at school, and therefore the school/cops have a duty to protect, even if they didn’t make the danger.
It makes more sense in context:
"Lawyer Kristoffer Budhram filed suit claiming the 15 students suffered "psychological injuries" as a result of the attack. The suit claimed the school district and county either have a policy of allowing “killers to walk through a school killing people without being stopped” or failed to adequately train employees to respond."
In other words, the school and the local police were being sued because they hadn't prevented the shooting from occuring. That's unreasonable, the judge rules, because how could they have?
I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.Honestly whut? It makes no sense to basically sue the school for - failing to mention that the shooter has left the building? I mean, whut? so yeah, the students were afraid for a little bit longer, but I kind of have a hard time to see how it makes much of a difference if you wait for 15 minutes or 30 minutes in fear of being shot.
Plus, it is a SCHOOL. If the police did something wrong, okay, but if the parents want their children in a virtual prison during the day for their "protection", well, maybe look for another school?
Reading tropes such as You Know What You Did
I sincerely apologize and am sorry for making a reference to Tropic Thunder to say what Trump has done is the same as Hitler. I certainly did not intend it to be offensive, absolutely had no intention of hurting people, the best I can explain it is having had enough of the Youtube wars, Twitter wars, over these issues. However much I have to flagulate myself or protrate myself to make amends I will do.
Currently reading up My Rule Fu Is Stronger than YoursAnyway, to answer your question about right-wing nuts starting a second Civil War—not much, given that their donors already control most of our government infrastructure already. I wouldn't put it past some militia deciding to suppress a protest, though...
I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.

Read any material on the Third Reich that wasn't written by a conspiracy theorist and you won't find anything about Hitler trying to build a fucking border wall and threatening to shut down the German government in the process. It's a grotesque proposition, but saying this is the straw that makes him Hitler when he built concentration camps for children and separated them from their parents is beyond grotesque and overprivileged. What the actual fuck?
Edited by math792d on Dec 19th 2018 at 12:18:09 PM
Still not embarrassing enough to stan billionaires or tech companies.