61–70 of 445 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That same prime minister supports the warrant-less use of medical records in police work and the ban of encryption through chat control. She wants to prevent the Danish population from having privacy, but demands it herself. Sorry, but that's not the Western way.
Just because you disagree with someone does not make it ok to dox them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure. If you accept that we give up on equality before the law, one might be prosecutable and the other not. Some of us prefer not to give up on that though.
You dont have to give up equality under the law, you just have to accept that there is a lot more that goes into a prosecution than the act. Were witnesses cooperative and credible, what was the intent, what was context. I dont know the specifics of this case. Maybe there was a miscarriage of justice. But just the fact the acts are the same doesn't show that. There is a lot more factors to consider.
The intent and context are obviously better for the one who's clearly sending the "threat" as a political statement against selective enforcement.
> I dont know the specifics of this case. Maybe there was a miscarriage of justice. But just the fact the acts are the same doesn't show that. There is a lot more factors to consider
... and you're willing to give the benefit of doubt to those with power here. You are aware you're making that implicit statement, right?
I'm Danish and lars kragh andersen is a bit of a grey zone. He obviously goes over the line, he tried to put GPS trackers on the cars of ministers. He "stalks" their families, and dox their children online. He gave an interview on how he'd ignore people carrying a kilo gram of weed when he was a cop because he doesn't agree with the "war on drugs". On the flip-side, he's sort of right. I assume that putting a GPS tra…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are these exclusive opportunities? I'm not familiar with danish law.
Not exclusive, but in general its a bad idea to post on social media if you plan to take it up in court, as its very easy to accidentally say something that shoots yourself in the foot.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> Who cares about weed? Danes.
> When the two civilian dressed masked men entered the apparentment I think this is very irresponsible. What would happen if the owner was armed and harmed the police thinking that they were criminals?
This is a very... US comment to make.
I'd personally like to see the laws protecting this strengthened, to make sure that cops aren't charging unannounced into peoples' homes and then charging the homeowner with murder when they react with reasonable gun violence in self-defense.
Lars is good at exposing the hypocrisy of the Danish government. In a former case he, sent the exact same threatening text to a prosecutor as that prosecutor had received a police report from a third party about, and that the prosecutor refused to pursue. Lars got jail time for that. Rules for thee but not for me.
Or alternatively, 2 wrongs don't make a right. Even if the text message was exactly the same, there are plenty of valid reasons why one might be prosecutable and the other might not be.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was thinking of the police officers. Why risk your life for such a petty crime?
This is Denmark not America, there is literally no risk to their life.