Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amazon’s Ring Is Putting Suspected Petty Thieves in Its Advertisements

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 169 posts

Re: Amazon’s Ring Is Putting Suspected Petty Thieves in Its Advertisements

#111

Post by throwawayatty »

geggam wrote: post #84
jvolkman wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When was driving considered a right?

Given the fact the constitution limits the govt and not the people. Given the fact the constitution says the govt cannot limit the freedom of movement. The govt cannot make laws limiting freedom of movement regardless of the method as they were not given that right by the constitution. Therefore driving as a form of movement cannot be regulated. There are also precedents discussing it Thompson v.Smith, 154 SE 579, 11…

There's a pretty wide gap between what you think is Constitutional and what U.S. courts think.

Virginia law notwithstanding, elsewhere in the U.S., driving is not a right and never has been. Per U.S. Supreme Court law, freedom to travel includes the freedom to cross state lines, but that right does not extend to any particular mode of travel. You're free to walk, but not necessarily to drive or fly (notwithstanding 49 U.S.C. 40103, because Congress subsequently restricted that right in 49 U.S.C. 44901-44902). Otherwise, you'd just be able to walk into an airport and board any flight you'd like without presenting identification.

Similarly, if driving were a right, states would be forced to allow anyone behind a wheel (ok, at the helm of a 2-ton killdozer) without being properly trained or insured first.

Re: Amazon’s Ring Is Putting Suspected Petty Thieves in Its Advertisements

#112

Post by therealgranton »

dTal wrote: post #58
therealgranton wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's nowhere near "the extent of 'racism' in our society at this point". You must be from a pretty affluent area if you believe racism is a non-issue. Racism is fucking disgusting, coming from a white dude. I've had to pick up tables as a server because certain (infrequent) people "don't want a nigger to touch their food". I bought my co-worker lunch that day. He felt completely destroyed by not being able to make…

You still served them?! That kind of language and treatment of staff should result in ejection from the premises and a permanent ban, do not pass go, do not collect $200. Not indulgence!

Wasn't trying to get fired, frankly. I made up to $40/hr there at 20 yo. My boss was black, too. It was in the South, so it was more of a bad fact of life and treated as such by management. I agree with you, though. Nowadays, I wouldn't hesitate to refuse service.

Re: Amazon’s Ring Is Putting Suspected Petty Thieves in Its Advertisements

#113

Post by geggam »

throwawayatty wrote: post #111
geggam wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given the fact the constitution limits the govt and not the people. Given the fact the constitution says the govt cannot limit the freedom of movement. The govt cannot make laws limiting freedom of movement regardless of the method as they were not given that right by the constitution. Therefore driving as a form of movement cannot be regulated. There are also precedents discussing it Thompson v.Smith, 154 SE 579, 11…

There's a pretty wide gap between what you think is Constitutional and what U.S. courts think. Virginia law notwithstanding, elsewhere in the U.S., driving is not a right and never has been. Per U.S. Supreme Court law, freedom to travel includes the freedom to cross state lines, but that right does not extend to any particular mode of travel. You're free to walk, but not necessarily to drive or fly (notwithstanding 4…

Problem being the interstate highways prohibit walking,horse riding and most "not automotive" methods of transportation.

You have to drive a car to travel interstate.

Re: Amazon’s Ring Is Putting Suspected Petty Thieves in Its Advertisements

#114

Post by throwawayatty »

geggam wrote: post #113
throwawayatty wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a pretty wide gap between what you think is Constitutional and what U.S. courts think. Virginia law notwithstanding, elsewhere in the U.S., driving is not a right and never has been. Per U.S. Supreme Court law, freedom to travel includes the freedom to cross state lines, but that right does not extend to any particular mode of travel. You're free to walk, but not necessarily to drive or fly (notwithstanding 4…

Problem being the interstate highways prohibit walking,horse riding and most "not automotive" methods of transportation. You have to drive a car to travel interstate.

Not every state border crossing is an Interstate highway having controlled access. In fact, most are not (US highways, county roads, etc.).

Re: Amazon’s Ring Is Putting Suspected Petty Thieves in Its Advertisements

#115

Post by leetcrew »

dzhiurgis wrote: post #71
paulgb wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In some states (including NY and CA) electricity is partially deregulated so you can choose from different providers, even though it all goes through the same grid. There are actually sales people who go door to door or set up booths to encourage people to switch, usually pitching it as cleaner energy and/or cost-saving.

US really need to deregulate (btw I find this word an oxymoron, but english is not my first language) their ISP's and most countries really need to deregulate their wireless providers. Imagine single shared spectrum easy to setup eSIM, easy to terminate contracts. Unfortunately most countries want your ID nowadays when you sign up for internet...

in case your curious, "deregulate" is not really an oxymoron. the "de-" prefix usually means something like "remove" or "undo". it just means to remove or relax some existing rules.

don't feel bad though, English vocab can be tricky for native speakers too. for example, "in-" usually means "not", like "indestructible" means "can't be destroyed", but "inflammable" and "flammable" mean the same thing...

Re: Amazon’s Ring Is Putting Suspected Petty Thieves in Its Advertisements

#116

Post by geggam »

throwawayatty wrote: post #111
geggam wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given the fact the constitution limits the govt and not the people. Given the fact the constitution says the govt cannot limit the freedom of movement. The govt cannot make laws limiting freedom of movement regardless of the method as they were not given that right by the constitution. Therefore driving as a form of movement cannot be regulated. There are also precedents discussing it Thompson v.Smith, 154 SE 579, 11…

There's a pretty wide gap between what you think is Constitutional and what U.S. courts think. Virginia law notwithstanding, elsewhere in the U.S., driving is not a right and never has been. Per U.S. Supreme Court law, freedom to travel includes the freedom to cross state lines, but that right does not extend to any particular mode of travel. You're free to walk, but not necessarily to drive or fly (notwithstanding 4…

BTW how do you restrict a right without due process or a constitutional amendment ?

Re: Amazon’s Ring Is Putting Suspected Petty Thieves in Its Advertisements

#117

Post by ceejayoz »

geggam wrote: post #110
ceejayoz wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Given the fact the constitution limits the govt and not the people. Well, sorta. "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively , or to the people."

States rights was decided during this little thing called the civil war. Interstate travel cannot be regulated by the states and since freedom of movement is a right protected by the constitution. You have to conclude interstate travel is a right. Granted the commerce clause can be used to regulate commercial travel but private travel cannot be ;)

Interstate travel is a clear right.

The right to do it as the driver of a car is less clear, given that one can freely move between states in a bus, plane, boat, taxi, or as a car passenger.

Re: Amazon’s Ring Is Putting Suspected Petty Thieves in Its Advertisements

#118

Post by throwawayatty »

geggam wrote: post #116
throwawayatty wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a pretty wide gap between what you think is Constitutional and what U.S. courts think. Virginia law notwithstanding, elsewhere in the U.S., driving is not a right and never has been. Per U.S. Supreme Court law, freedom to travel includes the freedom to cross state lines, but that right does not extend to any particular mode of travel. You're free to walk, but not necessarily to drive or fly (notwithstanding 4…

BTW how do you restrict a right without due process or a constitutional amendment ?

The "due process" is you suing the Government if you think your Constitutional rights have been violated. See 42 U.S.C. Section 1983.

Consider attending law school; it's very eye-opening.

Re: Amazon’s Ring Is Putting Suspected Petty Thieves in Its Advertisements

#119

Post by stordoff »

geggam wrote: post #84
jvolkman wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When was driving considered a right?

Given the fact the constitution limits the govt and not the people. Given the fact the constitution says the govt cannot limit the freedom of movement. The govt cannot make laws limiting freedom of movement regardless of the method as they were not given that right by the constitution. Therefore driving as a form of movement cannot be regulated. There are also precedents discussing it Thompson v.Smith, 154 SE 579, 11…

> The exercise of such a common right the city may, under its police power, regulate in the interest of the public safety and welfare[...]

> The regulation of the exercise of the right to drive a private automobile on the streets of the city may be accomplished in part by the city by granting, refusing, and revoking, under rules of general application, permits to drive an automobile on its streets

Thompson v Smith

Re: Amazon’s Ring Is Putting Suspected Petty Thieves in Its Advertisements

#120

Post by [deleted] »

jvolkman wrote: post #73
geggam wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is codified in law and society has adjusted to it. Example : Driving used to be considered a right, it has since been reduced to a privilege that gets revoked simply by accusation

When was driving considered a right?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN