Live data from Hacker News

Texas woman arrested for Facebook post about town water quality

reclaimthenet.org

251–260 of 350 posts

Re: Texas woman arrested for Facebook post about town water quality

#251
post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who lives this reality (arrest but no conviction), it's in practice not really so bad. It's never come up with a landlord. The last time it came up was after being accepted to grad school and I had to fill out a form about it. You do just carry with you the knowledge that if you ever get pulled over the cop can pull it up about you and have reason to hassle you more.

"I'm going to hassle you because my brethren have hassled you before." Yup, sounds about right.

They don't call it a brotherhood for nothing.

Re: Texas woman arrested for Facebook post about town water quality

#253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's quite a claim. You need to cite your sources for this one, if you want to be taken seriously.

I'm not sitting on a precompiled list I can just drop into a comment. But I do have a pretty hard rule about investing more effort than someone else already has. So this would be an unequal trade for me to go spend the rest of my Saturday building a list for someone who wrote two sentences on the internet. To add slightly more flavoring, I think its a pretty reasonable view to assume that the massive fracturing happe…

How about this: what's an example of an activist judge, according to you?

Bonus question: do you enjoy watching Fox?

Re: Texas woman arrested for Facebook post about town water quality

#254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Federal government enforces a few rules and then leaves things to the state and people. Obviously that means the state and people have no nanny to protect them from consequences of their decisions. If they drain their budgets fighting the civil rights of their population instead of fixing a problem then they might look like a lot of bankrupt municipalities. The US is obligated to let that happen.

Not really. The federal government bails Texas out of the messes they get themselves into all the time (like their shitty power grid). Historically, Texas has often received more in federal funding than it contributes in federal taxes.

> The federal government bails Texas out of the messes they get themselves into all the time (like their shitty power grid)

What (federal) bailout did Texas receive for the power grid? Unless something changed, Texas refuses fed help for the power grid because it wants to stay independent. Texas bailed itself out of the 2021 power grid failure with a couple/few billion dollars that Texas pays for. And while not great, Texas refused hundreds of millions in federal money to shore up flood protections, which came to light last year. Texas is not your typical southern state that takes and does nothing for itself.

Re: Texas woman arrested for Facebook post about town water quality

#255

Saving this one for the next time an American says, 'In your stupid European country you can get arrested for simply saying something online'

You left out the word legally. You can legally be arrested for simply saying something online. This was not a legal arrest. Small difference

Doesn't 'legal arrest' have a specific legal meaning? How have you ascertained it was an illegal arrest? And what made it illegal?

Re: Texas woman arrested for Facebook post about town water quality

#256
post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn’t rent my house to someone who has been arrested for memeing. It’s an unnecessary risk with absolutely no upside for me. What happens when they decide to meme on their landlord?

Then you're part of the problem. Convicted , sure. Merely arrested, with no conviction? Then you'd be an asshole

> Convicted, sure.

Convicted ... for memeing? I think that would still be absurd. I don't think landlords should be denying tenants for obviously unrelated matters.

Re: Texas woman arrested for Facebook post about town water quality

#257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea, an arrest on your record, even if you're acquitted and/or get a settlement for police wrongdoing, can still mess you up. There are employers and landlords who will ask you / check whether you were ever arrested, regardless of the outcome of the arrest . Mere involvement with Law Enforcement puts a permanent black mark on your record and can interfere with basic things for the rest of your life.

How would being arrested for memeing be a black mark? It would be a hilarious talking point that I would be more than happy to chat with a landlord, employer, or literally anyone else about. Anyone who would hold that against you is pretty much a textbook example of a bad person (banal evil or some such).

For low level jobs the biggest risk is being automatically filtered out early in the job application process then dying in a cardboard shelter on the sidewalk

Re: Texas woman arrested for Facebook post about town water quality

#259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea, an arrest on your record, even if you're acquitted and/or get a settlement for police wrongdoing, can still mess you up. There are employers and landlords who will ask you / check whether you were ever arrested, regardless of the outcome of the arrest . Mere involvement with Law Enforcement puts a permanent black mark on your record and can interfere with basic things for the rest of your life.

How would being arrested for memeing be a black mark? It would be a hilarious talking point that I would be more than happy to chat with a landlord, employer, or literally anyone else about. Anyone who would hold that against you is pretty much a textbook example of a bad person (banal evil or some such).

I could see less savoury companies(which is nearly all of them) to see potential whistle-blower like this as a risk in future. Most people are bad people after all. Especially those in hiring roles.

Re: Texas woman arrested for Facebook post about town water quality

#260

I'm not a lawyer, but I think qualified immunity should not apply to constitutional violations. Giving an opt-out for those violations is antithetical to the very substance of our (US) constitution.

It literally is not supposed to. The ruling that is currently used for the precedent is Harlow v Fitzgerald, which states: > The Court held that "government officials performing discretionary functions, generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." It seems to me t…

Qualified immunity shouldn't even be a thing at all, as far as state and local officials are concerned. It was a "mistake" (emphasis on the quotes).

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/15/us/politics/qualified-imm...

Post reply on HN