341–350 of 352 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree. I "revived" the comment by clicking on the timestamp ("33 minutes ago") and then clicking "vouch". I believe only users with a score of 200+ (points? karma?) can do so.
Does the account registration date also matter? I have 2110 points and I dont think I have the vouch button
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn't change what I'm saying. When you use a gun against an attacker with a knife expect to end up before a judge as the defendant and not as the victim. The court will decide if using the gun in this specific case was necessary (notwendig) and appropriate (geboten). Only if it was both will you go unpunished.
Once again: Erforderlich, not notwendig. And nope, nope, nope. It only goes to court if the police investigation supports it wasn't self-defence, and a public prosecutor decides to move the case forward. The realistic endpoint for a clean case is a dismissal letter from the prosecutor, not a courtroom. And this is true for everyone: even police can't kill someone and not expect an investigation. However naturally it…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Once again: Erforderlich, not notwendig. And nope, nope, nope. It only goes to court if the police investigation supports it wasn't self-defence, and a public prosecutor decides to move the case forward. The realistic endpoint for a clean case is a dismissal letter from the prosecutor, not a courtroom. And this is true for everyone: even police can't kill someone and not expect an investigation. However naturally it…
Find me one case of gun vs knife that did not go to court. You will find plenty that did exactly for the reasons I mentioned.
Prosecutor dismissals don't and shouldn't generate published decisions or press coverage the same way trials do. Why should they? They would only serve to besmirch the name of people who are innocent in the first place, and potentially put a target on their backs.
You are asking me to dig into private data that I don't have access to, and Germany is a country that respects privacy.
However here's a few samples here of cases that got a lot of publicity before there could be a case, and where the dismissals were publicized:
> "Die Staatsanwaltschaft wertete das Verhalten des Jägers als Notwehr – und stellte das Verfahren gegen den 63-Jährigen ein. Die Familie des Albaners hatte Beschwerde gegen den Beschluss eingelegt. Die Generalstaatsanwaltschaft Hamm bestätigte nun jedoch die Entscheidung."
https://www.focus.de/panorama/trotz-verstoss-gegen-waffenges...
> "Da die Abgabe eines gezielten Schusses in dieser Situation die einzige Möglichkeit darstellte, einen Messerangriff auf sich oder ihre Kollegen abzuwehren, war das Vorgehen der Polizeibeamtin aufgrund von Notwehr bzw. Nothilfe gerechtfertigt. Ein strafbares Verhalten liegt somit nicht vor."
https://www.justiz.bayern.de/gerichte-und-behoerden/staatsan...
> "Die tödlichen Schüsse wurden in Notwehr abgegeben: Mit dieser Begründung hat die Staatsanwaltschaft Göttingen jetzt das Ermittlungsverfahren gegen zwei Polizisten eingestellt"
https://taz.de/Nach-toedlichen-Polizeischuessen/!6086215/
> "Ansbach: +++ Polizeilicher Schusswaffengebrauch in Ansbach – Polizei stoppt 47-Jährigen mit Schuss ins Bein – Staatsanwaltschaft Ansbach stellt Ermittlungen gegen Polizeibeamte ein +++"
https://fraenkischer.de/ansbach-polizeilicher-schusswaffenge...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
English is not some objective, natural thing which exists outside of its usage by people. English is only how it's used by people. I would wager that for the majority English speakers, the words "theft", "robbery", and (to a lesser degree) "burglary" or more or less fully interchangeable. They may not be interchangeable in law, but the usage of English in law is famously not always in line with common usage, which is…
ESL here. To me, there is a very clear distinction between these terms, which also applies in my native language: A thiefs tries to steal without you noticing, a burglar is a thief that additionally enters a building, and a robber in contrast steals while intentionally confronting you. The intention and the level of danger each of these pose is quite different.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The whole "government can't spy on you, but can pay a corporation to do it" is crazy. From requesting data from big tech to this, it's just wild. It feels like some juvenile "I can't kill you but I can pay this guy $200k to make you go away"
These are public areas. It's not spying. Almost every house in my neighborhood has 1-2 cameras pointing around their houses. When there's an issue, my neighbors share the footages with the group, and that's so useful. And I live in a very very democrat state/city. Also, we should definitely address the privacy and access control issue with Flock. Removing the cameras isn't the right solution.
You might be right that the issues could be solved without removing the cameras, but they definitely will be solved by removing the cameras.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The law is defining the language within the law, including the required elements that must be proven in order for the crime to result in a conviction. The law does not require nor permit you to bring your own dictionary for crimes; they give you the definition for free and require to use theirs. As an example, burglary is defined in Texas Penal Code § 30.02 - Burglary: https://tcss.legis.texas.gov/resources/PE/htm/PE…
I'm aware of the structure. My comments have said that it is a mistake -- not a logical impossibility, but a bad idea -- to use existing, interchangeable terms for crimes that are legally distinct. This mistake is usually avoided, but in the case of robbery, burglary, and theft, it hasn't been. For example, imagine that someone gets really drunk, stumbles into your home, collapses on your couch, and soaks it in urine…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you think George parking his horse/car in a public parking lot outside a brothel should confer an expectation of privacy? Can a bank or ATM miles away have a security camera, just on the off-chance that George stops to withdraw cash for said brothel? Can police not stake out the brothel to gather evidence of prostitution because all the patrons have an expectation of privacy? IE, is it ever acceptable to be notice…
The issue is more that an individual has a right to be secure his/her belongings, is free from warrantless search and seizure, and a right to refrain from self-incrimination. All of these are violated by constant surveillance. Further, no such right was granted to government in the Constitution and is thus prohibited by the 10th amendment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Depends on who you ask? Are you asking someone who just had their car stolen? Or are you asking a mom who just found out there's a Flock camera that has been filming her 6 year old daughter playing in a splash pad all summer?
I assume car thieves don’t like cameras.
> Or are you asking a mom
Have you met moms? They love surveillance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Texas cops? The ones that stop parents from saving their children during school shootings?
The Uvalde police department exhibited both cowardice and incompetence, but can we stop pretending they are representative of cops everywhere? Just a year later during the mall shooting in Allen Texas, cops took down the white supremacist, neo-nazi perpetrator in under 5 minutes, probably saving at least a co couple dozen lives (he’d already killed 9). You can watch the bodycam footage from that event if there’s any…
No. There is sufficient evidence supporting cowardice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sadly that's very common on HN today. I commented under a post about some skill claiming to unleash the superpower of Claude Code. I asked, is there any evidence aka benchmark that shows it's any better than vanilla Claude Code that is statistically significant? Dead silence. But not downvotes -- easily got to -4. SMH.
It seems like HN got more 'Reddit-like' in the last year or two, at least it resembles that platform in the way people use voting not as a way to encourage good argument style and punish bad (eg. ad hominem) but rather to vote with their feelings. There are also a ton of one-line comments now, some that get upvoted to the top. That's 100 percent Reddit and 0 percent intellect.