261–270 of 397 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What does this mean, and how does one take it? Googling it comes up with misogny and a documentary of the same name.
Oh sorry, yes it the matrix reference.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow. I guess if you're going to live under such rules, it's easier if you agree with them. I can only assume that you view the surveillance bill as also benevolent.
Please don't strawman me, I didn't say I agree with the surveillance bill (I do not) and I don't live in Australia - my family does though. It's a different country with a different set of tradeoffs, and is also a more free country than the United States across many important areas, which is why it rates higher in the Cato freedom index than the USA. It comes down to perspective, to take a separate topic to prove my…
Ironically, the surveillance laws were passed right after laws to disarm citizens.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is no defense against a legal power that does not limit itself. States almost-by-definition have total power should they wish to exercise it. Western states generally have limited their exercise of power, and they have structured themselves to make it difficult for one government to obtain and exercise total power. That is now changing.
They've limited themselves because people wanted it (often violently). Now the majority of people are complacent and that's when the "leaders" accumulate power. In Europe for example, complacent with the police taking away the homeless, complacent with the laws slowly eroding everyone's freedoms, complacent with the healthcare systems they pay for believing it helps people. It's the same old tired trope of "first the…
Odd choice of topics to be outraged about.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The child poverty rate increased by 10%. I would say that an increase of children living in inhumane conditions is more than an inconvenience.
I can't seem to find anything to verify your 10% claim - all I can find is stats showing that child poverty actually went down.. Are you able to post a source for that? EDIT: since my account has been rate-limited... The msn article below was released before the stats and is purely speculation. The stats before covid already indicate an increase, and NZ has long had fluctuating child poverty rates, which the current…
https://www.cpag.org.nz/news/?m=202107
"An additional 18,000 children were probably pushed into poverty in the 12 months to March 2021, even without taking rising housing costs into account, according to new modelling in the report, entitled The first year of Covid-19: Initial outcomes of our collective care for low-income children in Aotearoa New Zealand"
"This increase in child poverty of around 10% comes at a time when property owners have seen their wealth rise at an accelerated rate," said McAllister. "Loss of income related to job loss was probably inevitable for many families; but loss of income to the point of inadequacy - or further inadequacy - was due to political decision-making.
"The Government avoided one massive health and economic crisis but it enabled another one - that of poverty, homelessness and inequality - to grow rapidly."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>power to modify, add, copy, or delete your data Since when is it legal in any democracy that the police can temper (modify, add) or delete proof? That's just beyond my understanding.
Democratic != righteous, no matter we wish they coincide.
But strong judiciary and executive (and strong borders between them) is a core understanding in every real democracy.
If the executive OR the judiciary can do everything (or are completely intermingled) you have no democracy but a "Democratic People's Republic of Korea" ;)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes it is about shooting them, as that's what your deterrent is. Your threat is that you'll murder them if they don't do things you like.
No you’re missing the point I think. The point is that a gun let’s you defend yourself from tyranny. And that is a sufficient number of people find a government tyrannical they can choose to organize against them by not following their tyrannical laws which are illegitimate. And the tyrannical government would have to take up arms against these people to enforce their power with the knowledge these people can defend…
You "defend yourself from tyranny" by killing patriots of your own country. That's literally the only way to do it, so when you say things like "defend yourself from tyranny" you are saying, "I'm willing to murder cops and soldiers." because that's who you'll have to "defend yourself from tyranny" against.
There is no way around this, it is the direct meaning of the words and phrases you're using. What you are doing is using the threat of murder to try and get your way in a society.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The part about being "allowed to" go outside isn't true. Take it from me, I live here and am free to go wherever I please.
This is probably what they are referring to. Some areas are limiting outdoor time and fining people who are "outside without a reasonable excuse". "From September 13, NSW residents that are fully vaccinated against COVID-19 will be given new freedoms. Residents of hotspots can leave home for an hour of recreation on top of their exercise hour , while people in other areas can meet five others outdoors." https://twitt…
Australia is turning itself into a prison state. Citizens are allowed to go outside for maximum one or two hours, total surveillance, unconstrained searches of the property... About the same set of rights as a supermax prison inmate has, it looks like.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The part about being "allowed to" go outside isn't true. Take it from me, I live here and am free to go wherever I please.
This is probably what they are referring to. Some areas are limiting outdoor time and fining people who are "outside without a reasonable excuse". "From September 13, NSW residents that are fully vaccinated against COVID-19 will be given new freedoms. Residents of hotspots can leave home for an hour of recreation on top of their exercise hour , while people in other areas can meet five others outdoors." https://twitt…
Wow, that's Orwellian to say the least.
Freedom is never granted, it is earned.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the police have a warrant to watch you, then, no. But that is as it should be. As long as there is correct judicial oversight of these capabilities, then this is the correct way for things to be. Nobody should have an expectation of being able to conduct criminal business without surveillance. The issue comes in when the justice system is not providing correct oversight for this capability. That is wrong and shoul…
Would this philosophy extend to phones then, too? Assuming a phone is being used for criminal business. A Ring camera, assuming the house is being used for criminal conduct? I’m playing devil’s advocate, and am interested in a stance arrived at reasonably.
Sure. Wire-tapping has been a thing almost as long as phones themselves. With a warrant, it is best that the police should be able to surveil your phone calls.
> Ring camera
With a warrant? Absolutely.