upvote

points

by Yaa1014 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby goolz4 hours ago|
next
[-]
The saddest part is, most people simply do not care, my parents constantly echo the sentiment that if I have nothing to hide, I have nothing to fear. I would argue this slippery slope came about 20+ years ago during the initial Patriot Act. They normalize the behavior, take a few more freedoms, and keep on trucking. I used to be proud to be American. Now I am just worried.
reply
upvoteby forshaper16 minutes ago|
parent|
next
[-]
I used to be a proud patriot. Now I am just owned.
reply
upvoteby 2OEH8eoCRo03 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
I understand why they don't care and I don't fault them. The truth is that this doesn't affect most people in their daily lives. It sounds entitled to say that this demands their attention.
reply
upvoteby goolz2 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
A totally fair point, and I think you are correct, wish I knew a solid answer. Because their indifference is watering down all of our rights.
reply
upvoteby bigyabai2 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
It affects everyone, the question is whether or not they're held to account. Some people think of themselves as low-risk until they're detained at the border for a Facebook post they made.
reply
upvoteby jayers3 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
How is this, in principle, any different from the DOJ using a subpoena to get customer records from an adult store that was allegedly selling illegal explicit material?

Just because you use the internet to commit the crime doesn't make it not a crime.

reply
upvoteby xp842 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
I’d say a big difference is that in your example the thing that was supposedly sold was entirely illegal to possess for any reason.

The case being discussed is one where someone might be able to use the product to break the law.

So it’s more like demanding that Home Depot, Walmart, Amazon give the names of every American who’s ever bought a crowbar because the DOJ has heard that some people are breaking into buildings with crowbars.

It has been alleged that the government doesn’t want to prosecute these people who are the ones committing the crimes, they “just want to talk” in order to prosecute the company. Not sure I’d trust that without a signed immunity agreement. If I were forced to speak to these goons, I certainly wouldn’t say a word unless they gave me one of those - regardless of what I was using the gadget for.

reply
upvoteby basilgohar4 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
Tyranny comes and goes, and sometimes just changes shape and serves some more than others, and that gives the illusion to those it serves that it's gone. It's always been around in some form or another.
reply
upvoteby shimman3 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
Democratic governments can be held accountable, corporations cannot.
reply
upvoteby sneak2 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
> Democratic governments can be held accountable

Please explain to me how ICE (part of the nominally democratic USG) can be held accountable for summarily executing citizens.

reply
upvoteby pc863 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Even if this was correct (it's not), it seems irrelevant to the point.
reply