Live data from Hacker News

Facebook Employees Slam Zuckerberg over Militia Groups and QAnon After Kenosha

buzzfeednews.com

81–90 of 118 posts

Re: Facebook Employees Slam Zuckerberg over Militia Groups and QAnon After Kenosha

#81
post #70
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Framing BLM as being a source of violence is racist AF. I was called a racist on HN because I said "white people suck" in the context of White Nationalism. If one doesn't think that systemic racism is real or a problem, then that individual is either ignorant or racist.

"white people suck" is a cut and dried racist comment, regardless of context.

Hmm, so being a white person myself and criticizing other white people for using their whiteness as proof of their so-called superiority is racist?

I don't think so, and your opinion doesn't change things.

Re: Facebook Employees Slam Zuckerberg over Militia Groups and QAnon After Kenosha

#82
post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Id argue that defining community as where you live isnt the only way community can be used. Community could also be the place you work, the place you protect, the place you participate, the place you consume in, the place you interact with. Property, ownership, are only some of what make someone a community member.

Yes you can have your own local definition I suspect you will face an uphill battle for it to be accepted though. I suppose that means the protestors could be called the community too and since they outnumber both the militia types and the police they are the majority? Ultimately it’s the transitory nature of the participation that marks it out as not part of the community. For example a landlord might not be conside…

I guess it depends too if you consider a suburb a part of the community of the city it surrounds.

https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Antioch,+Illinois+60002/Keno...

Re: Facebook Employees Slam Zuckerberg over Militia Groups and QAnon After Kenosha

#83
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes you can have your own local definition I suspect you will face an uphill battle for it to be accepted though. I suppose that means the protestors could be called the community too and since they outnumber both the militia types and the police they are the majority? Ultimately it’s the transitory nature of the participation that marks it out as not part of the community. For example a landlord might not be conside…

I guess it depends too if you consider a suburb a part of the community of the city it surrounds. https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Antioch,+Illinois+60002/Keno...

I mean you can have fun playing semantics by changing your position per reply but this doesn’t seem fruitful or meaningful to the case at hand?

Re: Facebook Employees Slam Zuckerberg over Militia Groups and QAnon After Kenosha

#84
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's disheartening to see so much racism among the community here.

Hopefully its more single issue trolls. They're new, low karma accounts and HN is going to be a target for proletarization.

Unfortunately not. Racism is a disease that affects all walks of life.

Re: Facebook Employees Slam Zuckerberg over Militia Groups and QAnon After Kenosha

#85
post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shouldn't you be arguing for fewer police killings, period? Last I checked more white people were being killed by police than black people.

You're misinterpreting the facts. Black people are more likely to be killed by police - they're not more in number because they're only 13% of the population [1]. The problem is the power of police unions and qualified immunity which is a legal construct made to be abused. https://news.northeastern.edu/2020/07/16/the-research-is-cle...

I misinterpreted nothing: more white people are being killed by police than black people [1][2]. Which part are you challenging?

[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/585152/people-shot-to-de... [2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6080222/

Re: Facebook Employees Slam Zuckerberg over Militia Groups and QAnon After Kenosha

#86
Typical IANAL:

W.r.t the Kenosha shooter.

1. He was 17. It was illegal for him to possess that rifle. In his home state you have to be 21, in Wisconsin you have to be 18. This was crime 1

2. Crossing the State line with an illegally possessed weapon is a pretty big deal and a big fat #2 on crime list

3. Wisconsin totally allows for the use of deadly force in self defense, but the caveat is that you can't be committing a crime by possessing that rifle.

4. Wisconsin has a Castle Doctrine, but you can only deadly force if the perpetrators are in your dwelling or place of business. For a place of business, you have to owner be in charge of operations of said business. You can't just post up to protect a random business, also you can't chase people if they decide to retreat like this 17yo did. Wisconsin V. Charles L Chew is the case law if you want to have a look.

5. It is not self defense when you get in a car with a rifle and drive 15 miles to another town and walk the streets with a rifle.

He had every option to stay home, but he chose to get involved in this situation with the plan to be involved with the confrontation (hence the rifle). Also in Wisconsin self defense law, you can't be the instigator and claim self defense. He became the instigator once he pursued.

6. Wearing gloves but no mask is also gonna be hard to explain. He is not concerned about covid-19 infection because his respiratory system is exposed. The blue gloves were on to hide fingerprints and any gun powder residue often used to convict shooters. He had intent to murder.

No lawyer can defend these blatantly dumb mistakes. This wanna be future cop probably can't pass a psychological test to become one.

Wisconsin 948.60

Possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18.

(1) In this section, “dangerous weapon" means any firearm, loaded or unloaded; any electric weapon, as defined in s. 941.295 (1c) (a); metallic knuckles or knuckles of any substance which could be put to the same use with the same or similar effect as metallic knuckles; a nunchaku or any similar weapon consisting of 2 sticks of wood, plastic or metal connected at one end by a length of rope, chain, wire or leather; a cestus or similar material weighted with metal or other substance and worn on the hand; a shuriken or any similar pointed star-like object intended to injure a person when thrown; or a manrikigusari or similar length of chain having weighted ends.

(2)(a) Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.

(b) Except as provided in par. (c), any person who intentionally sells, loans or gives a dangerous weapon to a person under 18 years of age is guilty of a Class I felony.

(c) Whoever violates par. (b) is guilty of a Class H felony if the person under 18 years of age under par. (b) discharges the firearm and the discharge causes death to himself, herself or another.

(d) A person under 17 years of age who has violated this subsection is subject to the provisions of ch. 938 unless jurisdiction is waived under s. 938.18 or the person is subject to the jurisdiction of a court of criminal jurisdiction under s. 938.183

Re: Facebook Employees Slam Zuckerberg over Militia Groups and QAnon After Kenosha

#87
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess it depends too if you consider a suburb a part of the community of the city it surrounds. https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Antioch,+Illinois+60002/Keno...

I mean you can have fun playing semantics by changing your position per reply but this doesn’t seem fruitful or meaningful to the case at hand?

I don't see a suburb as inconsistent with my previous reply. A suburb, by definition, is going to be economically dependent on its metro. That interlinking blurs the definition of community.

I don't think it's black and white whether you can say his communitiee were or weren't a part of the larger communities.

Re: Facebook Employees Slam Zuckerberg over Militia Groups and QAnon After Kenosha

#88
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the kind of more controversial comment Id like to see upvoted to spur good discussion. The Second Amendment says well regulated militia. Should a group of people be able to organize, with guns, to protect businesses from riots and looters? This one is looking like a very complicated situation as it unfolds. Someone underage, carrying an illegal gun, probably doesn't fall into well regulated. (Furthermore, wha…

I think the crux is well regulated and you nailed that well. If there are random people showing up with guns is that well regulated even if they have similar aims and might work together? One of the clear things from this incident is that the shooter was alone. Basically a cardinal sin from a military standpoint. Add to that AFAIK it’s not necessarily legal for random people to show up and stake a claim to defend pro…

>well regulated

You need to make sure you use the term in the way it was when it was written, and properly translate it to modern parlance.

All well regulated meant back then was "working as intended" or "fit for the task at hand". Not "activity specifically organized and constrained by formal procedures established by a governing body or authority".

Back then, you could use the phrase to apply to a person, their work, a machine, a system, etc...

There is absolutely no stipulation that the bearing of arms guaranteed by the Second Amendment is dependent on the condition of being part of an established militia. The entire militia clause exists as an explanation or justifying reason for the subsequent clause's command.

The concept of someone being "underage" to enjoy a Constitutionally guaranteed right without an explicit carve out in in the Constitution (I.e prescriptive age limits for holding office, delegation to States for implementation details of the choosing of Electors for Presidential voting) is a further farce, made only more extreme by the clear and unambiguous phrasing of the second amendment, namely that the right to bear arms shall not be infringed.

I mean, if you haven't dismissed me as impossible to reconcile with your worldview, it's quite a bit less complicated than it appears. It is only complicated if you're looking for a way to try to twist the clear and unambiguously constructed writing to mean something substantially different than it does.

Re: Facebook Employees Slam Zuckerberg over Militia Groups and QAnon After Kenosha

#89
post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're misinterpreting the facts. Black people are more likely to be killed by police - they're not more in number because they're only 13% of the population [1]. The problem is the power of police unions and qualified immunity which is a legal construct made to be abused. https://news.northeastern.edu/2020/07/16/the-research-is-cle...

I misinterpreted nothing: more white people are being killed by police than black people [1][2]. Which part are you challenging? [1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/585152/people-shot-to-de... [2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6080222/

Again, adjust for population.

> Results: Victims were majority white (52%) but disproportionately black (32%) with a fatality rate 2.8 times higher among blacks than whites.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6080222/

Re: Facebook Employees Slam Zuckerberg over Militia Groups and QAnon After Kenosha

#90
post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can we try to make Facebook responsible for every damn thing that happens on their platform?

Telephone companies and email providers as well. Full transparency, no encryption, proactive censorship for the purpose of safety and protection. They shouldnt be letting anything dangerous over their tubes ever, and we shouldnt be tolerating their facilitation of violence.

The accusations are not "facilitation" so much as "promotion". Allowing Militia and QAnon groups/accounts/pages to exist might be one kind of bad, actively promoting them to improve engagement and ad sales is a different level.
Post reply on HN