I remember discussing the plausibility of some of the tracking abilities outlined in this 90's movie.
That was then. Nowadays, if you've watched even a few true crime shows, you know to leave your cell phone where it might alibi you, not where you're headed to do a crime.
The odd thing with this bunch is many of them didn't believe what they were doing was a crime. Nowadays, if you've read any history at all, you realize that those on the wrong side of a revolution are frequently treated as criminals.
The odd thing with this bunch is many of them didn't believe what they were doing was a crime.
No, they understood that what they were doing would be perceived as a crime by the institutions they sought to overthrow they simply felt what they were doing was justified. When you speak to them, they may conflate law with intention but they knew the act itself violated the law.
those on the wrong side of a revolution are frequently treated as criminals.
Overthrowing the government is intrinsically illegal which means they literally are criminals to the government they seek to overthrow.
Just following their leader. Who cares if a few laws get broken? You won't be held accountable, so long as you pwn the libs. If nothing else, you'll come out of it with a bunch of Likes and awesome selfies.
Well, turns out they got fucked by dear leader. Just like Pence and anyone else who's ever had the displeasure of working with him. A day later he was telling them "You don't represent our country." What, you wanted a pardon? Sorry, Lil Wayne and Kodak Black get pardons first. You don't have the funds to
Of course they did. Nobody openly commits and act of insurrection thinking they would fail. They took a risk on insurrection and now they must face the consequences of their actions.
Nobody was committing an "act of insurrection". Who specifically has been charged with that in court?
A few people (compared to the mass of 30K at the rally) trespassed (a misdemeanor in D.C.) and broke some windows and doors. Even fewer were involved in altercations with the police, which pale in comparison to those of other 2020 protests/riots, even just in D.C.
That's it. It's only a big deal in the press and for the Democrats (but I repeat myself) because for once it was people they opposed doing it inste
: an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government
What do you think they were doing there, trying to make friends? It's a rhetorical question so just shut up because your non-sense isn't gaining any traction here.
So you have zero answers with specifics, then? Just a bare assertion, which everyone is supposed to just trust you on?
Insurrection is a crime. It has a legal definition [cornell.edu]. There are exactly 0 people currently being charged with that crime. What's your theory on why the Democrats aren't charging anyone with insurrection, if not that they can't find any evidence anyone is guilty of it?
Enemy of the State (Score:2)
I remember discussing the plausibility of some of the tracking abilities outlined in this 90's movie.
That was then. Nowadays, if you've watched even a few true crime shows, you know to leave your cell phone where it might alibi you, not where you're headed to do a crime.
The odd thing with this bunch is many of them didn't believe what they were doing was a crime. Nowadays, if you've read any history at all, you realize that those on the wrong side of a revolution are frequently treated as criminals.
Re:Enemy of the State (Score:4, Interesting)
The odd thing with this bunch is many of them didn't believe what they were doing was a crime.
No, they understood that what they were doing would be perceived as a crime by the institutions they sought to overthrow they simply felt what they were doing was justified. When you speak to them, they may conflate law with intention but they knew the act itself violated the law.
those on the wrong side of a revolution are frequently treated as criminals.
Overthrowing the government is intrinsically illegal which means they literally are criminals to the government they seek to overthrow.
Re: (Score:3)
Just following their leader. Who cares if a few laws get broken? You won't be held accountable, so long as you pwn the libs. If nothing else, you'll come out of it with a bunch of Likes and awesome selfies.
Well, turns out they got fucked by dear leader. Just like Pence and anyone else who's ever had the displeasure of working with him. A day later he was telling them "You don't represent our country." What, you wanted a pardon? Sorry, Lil Wayne and Kodak Black get pardons first. You don't have the funds to
Re: (Score:2)
They thought they would win and Trump would hail them as heroes. They thought he would be there by their sides.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course they did. Nobody openly commits and act of insurrection thinking they would fail. They took a risk on insurrection and now they must face the consequences of their actions.
Re: (Score:2)
A decent percentage of them were relatively certain this was the Storm promised by the 17th letter of the alphabet.
If they had been right, they'd be hero revolutionaries: if they remain wrong, they're prison fodder... such is the gamble of insurrection.
Re: (Score:1)
Nobody was committing an "act of insurrection". Who specifically has been charged with that in court?
A few people (compared to the mass of 30K at the rally) trespassed (a misdemeanor in D.C.) and broke some windows and doors. Even fewer were involved in altercations with the police, which pale in comparison to those of other 2020 protests/riots, even just in D.C.
That's it. It's only a big deal in the press and for the Democrats (but I repeat myself) because for once it was people they opposed doing it inste
Re: (Score:2)
Nobody was committing an "act of insurrection".
Perhaps you need a dictionary.
Definition of insurrection
: an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government
What do you think they were doing there, trying to make friends? It's a rhetorical question so just shut up because your non-sense isn't gaining any traction here.
Re: (Score:2)
So you have zero answers with specifics, then? Just a bare assertion, which everyone is supposed to just trust you on?
Insurrection is a crime. It has a legal definition [cornell.edu]. There are exactly 0 people currently being charged with that crime. What's your theory on why the Democrats aren't charging anyone with insurrection, if not that they can't find any evidence anyone is guilty of it?
Re: Sharp as a soap bubble... (Score:2)
You really have nothing meaningful to say, do you?