YHK - yet another hacker news clone

This paper is heavily rejected by mainstream criminologists. It relies on victim memorial lists for a count of victims and it relies on a database made by an anti-Trans group for the perpetrator count. This leads to both a significant undercount of victims and overcount of perpetrators.

The ONS has come out against it and said that official homicide data does not track transgender status so there is no official data to back this research up on. Pretty much all mainstream criminologists reject it.

None of this has stopped rightwingers from heavily circulating this paper of course. Somehow I doubt science is the goal here.

That depends entirely on the degree to which those in power will respect the results of an election.

No, I’m not doing that. I’m not even American. But I know that giving someone a weapon means they can eventually try to use it against you.

If you have deeply unpopular policies but only 1/3rd of the country is expected to vote, telling everyone their vote won't matter is the best stance to take.

That’s not to say we shouldn’t have armed officers (or not have a capitalist society), we just shouldn’t allow rhetoric to convince us of some false ideal. The 3rd and 4th amendment have a spirit that should be much more embraced and expanded at the expense of law enforcement’s ability to do their “job”.

These aren't universally positive attributes I'm not necessarily praising them. But militaries have come down into a very broad spectrum of positions around specific coups, revolutions, insurrections etc including abetting or openly joining them, both pro- and anti-democratic.

This is also why the second trump term has been so focused on officer purges! You definitely want the military to come down on your side and making sure all of its leadership is on your side is a reliable step if you can take it.

Americans should absolutely imo not be looking for their military to help them with the problems they're facing. But depending on the exact arrangement, people in other countries may have good reason to hope for that.

classic American cope

and this round, everyone without birth naturalization is being investigated for removal based on their speech, when it doesn’t match the state opinion

Another important concept is the Dual State; there will always be some people who remain within the Normative State even as it shrinks and shrinks, and while the horrors of the Prerogative State become more and more extreme.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_St...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_incarceration_ra...

> [El Salvador (16.5/Mln), Cuba (8/Mln), Rwanda (6/Mln), Turkmenistan (5.5/Mln), United States (5.5/Mln)]

And then during the debate, when asked about another fascist, racist, far right, or white supremist group, the usual response was given, "Who dat?"

But then were told to "stand back, and stand by."

But instead a few of them had guns, and one of them decided to get into a shoot-off with the police.

You are unequivocally fucked if you have any degree of association with those people doing shit like that on federal property.

(the bodycams and security footage for this event are on youtube)

And please don't forget the attempted murder that the leader really did carry out with a firearm.

If you're using your 2a rights to fight against the government (tyrannical or not), it does not free you from facing the consequences if you don't "win", or prevent the government from fighting back (in self defense, or otherwise).

It's an incredibly serious thing to say "the government is so tyrannical that we need to use violence to overthrow it" (see: history).

Why do you need to protest at the slightest sign of the government becoming authoritarian when you have "the ultimate argument of force" on your side?

But it's an illusion. Guns are a nice hobby I enjoy as well. They are great for self defence, but good luck to you if you think you'll use it "against government tyranny"... You'll be dead and no one will care.

2nd amendment makes an ultimate duty of a citizen in a democratic country - to not allow it to turn into a tyranny, into "you don't need to worry about politics, worse case scenario you have your AR15 and a box of ammo".

While in a country without such false ideas people get out and protest in mass numbers.

I don't think I've ever heard of a proper protest happening in USA. The kind of protest that involves 10% of adults at least and happens in every city and town. (Also I'm not talking about rioting like in France)

Burning down a school to protest against class overcrowding is like something straight from idiocracy.

Peaceful protests work on governments, even those hell bent on authoritarianism, but they have to be massive.

Let's say you have a million or two of people show up in Washington. Will it make any difference? Nope. Why? Because it's under half a percent of US population.

Let's now say 10% of people in every city and town go to their town centre and protest. Does this make a difference? Yes it does, because it shows real power to everyone.

"i wonder if fly.io bothers to vet/challenge records requests or if they just hand data over".

(this one can be edited, though. very strange)

If there's a hack, HN will say, "How could Fly.io not be keeping logs? Malpractice!"

If there's a warrant, HN will say, "How could Fly.io be keeping logs? Malpractice!"

The problem here is the cops not where the computer sits.

At this point there's a non-zero chance you and your employees are detained on spurious national security grounds, or simply end up in an ICE internment centre - accidently or otherwise.

Two things are true

1) Tech has become more financial people and "techbros" than principled nerds.

2) The powers of the USG have become a lot stronger and far reaching- quite literally to the level where talking about complying with an order is itself a crime.

Now they can just chip away at whatever regulation is left, and create mistrust in oversight bodies and the rigging of the game is complete.

Better than communism, the government hardly even has to pretend to work for the benefit of the people, because the wealth imbalance has a closed circuit of money between private entities and elections. They can bring suitcases of cash, walk in the front door literally holding a chainsaw and prune off every olive branch extended toward the citizens.

These election "investments" are clearly paying off at high multiples now. Why spend your money in a capitalist competition when you can more efficiently spend it in public elections to eliminate competition, divert tax revenue directly into your businesses and eliminate any responsibility you should have? Do a Nazi salute for the whole world to see, and watch the propagandized twist themselves into whatever shape pretzel you ask them to.

I guess you can pretend Liz Warren, Ron Wyden, Patty Murray, dozens of house reps and thousands of Democratic legisltators in statehouses and towns around the country don't exist and just vote for the "party that lowered my taxes" again , right?

Homeland Security finally got one in 2003.

The Homeland Security Act of 2002 also let those offices start having their own statutory powers and carry firearms without needing to be deputized by the US Marshals Service.

If people started doing that to UPS delivery trucks I would expect UPS to do everything in their power to protect their staff.

<https://www.little-gamers.com/2001/12/13/372>

You can argue about how they should go about deporting people, but them deporting everyone even those without a criminal record is their intended purpose.

But in US human life is not worth much.

Or, you know, from the idea that they are doing something illegal and the job of law enforcement is to enforce laws.

Or they could have "moved back south" like you said, and stayed there.

Since this "program" was ended it sounds like it should be as simple as "no papers? gotta go".

Funny how democrats always care so much about "the law" and "due process" until it relates to immigration.

Um?

A nation is literally defined as an entity that has control over its borders. If it permits just anyone to enter or exit, it is technically not a nation anymore.

I’m all for changing immigration laws, giving more people a legal route to becoming temporary workers, students, residents, and citizens. But being choosy about who gets in and who does not. Attract the best and brightest to lift your country up, not freeloaders and criminals that tear it down. Look at the riots in Europe right now - and learn from their mistakes. Immigration is good but there have to be limits, laws, and control over borders.

Doesn't the qualification of them being illegal immigrants imply that they aren't going through the legal processes immigrants should go through to get work and residency?

If illegal immigrants gain the same rights as legal immigrants, why even bother following the rules?

Are you serious? The choice for them was to go back to their home countries.

Isn't that obvious? I mean I can't imagine why this would be even remotely controversial.

That said, a lot of US's immigration problems has been neglect to enforce immigration law, deliberate sabotaging of legislation throughout the years, and multiple broad amnesty decrees that basically broke the system. The system is broken by design and almost tailor-made to foment anti-immigrant sentiment that has sparked this new, ugly phase driven by unaccountable maniacs.

The other issue is intent.

I support reasonable immigration enforcement for practical reasons like added strain on public facilities like social programs. That’s rational.

Our 2024 Trump-aligned candidates ran on more of a xenophobia-centric platform. Xenophobia is irrational and unpredictable reasoning for immigration enforcement.

If you make it illegal to sleep on the street at night (by extension, sleeping anywhere that isn’t a legal residence), you are de facto making it illegal to be homeless.

That a law applies to everyone is not a “universal defence” in its fairness.

My point is that government cannot be trusted to have this kind of power because it will at some point be turned against the population when dissent threatens the people holding power; it is inevitable. The least we should do is make laws strictly controlling access and purpose of access to such tools for criminal investigations, but I don't think that's enough to stop abuse and civil oppression.