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

SOPA died in 2012, but Obama administration wants to revive part of it

m.washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–57 of 57 posts

Re: SOPA died in 2012, but Obama administration wants to revive part of it

#51

Post by jbooth »

hga wrote: post #45
jbooth wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the 80s? It's 2013, man, get with the times and start ripping on Chicago. In this decade, I'd go to the anecdote from WI last year of the dude who, upon a high school party being broken up by the cops next door, shot a kid hiding from the cops on his porch and wasn't charged.

I'm referring to the '80s because that was when I was residing in Massachusetts, and that was what I could look forward to if I used lethal force in self-defense. Also an automatic 1st degree murder trial, "Let the jury sort it out" was the AG's idea of prosecutorial discretion. As for the Wisconson case you're referring to, the facts not surprisingly paint a very different picture. Per this news item: http://fox6now…

If we're being honest, the only reason to shoot the kid in that situation is because you've always hoped you'd get to shoot a home invader one day.

Re: SOPA died in 2012, but Obama administration wants to revive part of it

#52

Post by hga »

cobrausn wrote: post #50
hga wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The backlash from the nation's "soft on crime" policies started much earlier, e.g. see Dirty Harry in 1971 and I gather Death Wish in 1974. Real world traction on reversing them, I think seriously started in the '80s. But see my other reply in this sub-sub-thread: what middle ground is there between being forced by the law to retreat from your home and being allowed to use lethal force upon a reasonable apprehension…

No, I don't, but I was trying to clarify the statement. A middle ground for this is difficult, because it basically depends upon determining after the fact whether or not you or anyone else in the home was actually threatened (or whether you could reasonably perceive it that way).

Errr, the latter is how these incidents are judged. E.g. the woman who recently ran down a man carrying a sawed off air soft shotgun; especially with the orange tip removed, she could not tell that he wasn't actually threatening in that way. Similarly, a criminal using a fake gun to commit a robbery gets a charge of armed or aggravated robbery.

This is determined after the fact all the time, presumably in the Wisconsin case, and definitely in the Zimmerman/Martin case before it was politicized.

Re: SOPA died in 2012, but Obama administration wants to revive part of it

#53

Post by hga »

jbooth wrote: post #51
hga wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm referring to the '80s because that was when I was residing in Massachusetts, and that was what I could look forward to if I used lethal force in self-defense. Also an automatic 1st degree murder trial, "Let the jury sort it out" was the AG's idea of prosecutorial discretion. As for the Wisconson case you're referring to, the facts not surprisingly paint a very different picture. Per this news item: http://fox6now…

If we're being honest, the only reason to shoot the kid in that situation is because you've always hoped you'd get to shoot a home invader one day.

A 20 year old "kid"???

Yes, he's in that awkward period between 18 and 21 where he's legally an adult who can't legally do a bunch of adult things, like the relevant posited drinking (according to the more detailed accounts I read he wasn't hiding from the police, the party was broken up by the incensed homeowner of the property where it was happening arriving), but if you're going to call young men who aren't even "teens" "kids", we have no basis for a discussion, we cannot get past your idée fixe that he was automatically an innocent.

Re: SOPA died in 2012, but Obama administration wants to revive part of it

#54

Post by c0ur7n3y »

ap22213 wrote: post #16

This isn't a big surprise. The US really only has a few net-positive exports, and media products are one of the big ones (and military products, is another, iirc)

The entertainment industry is about the same size as the pet supply industry.

Re: SOPA died in 2012, but Obama administration wants to revive part of it

#55

Post by jbooth »

hga wrote: post #53
jbooth wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we're being honest, the only reason to shoot the kid in that situation is because you've always hoped you'd get to shoot a home invader one day.

A 20 year old "kid"??? Yes, he's in that awkward period between 18 and 21 where he's legally an adult who can't legally do a bunch of adult things, like the relevant posited drinking (according to the more detailed accounts I read he wasn't hiding from the police, the party was broken up by the incensed homeowner of the property where it was happening arriving), but if you're going to call young men who aren't even "…

Its Occam's razor -- if a house party full of underage drinkers just got busted, and a drunk 20 yo is hiding on your porch, do you personally think this is a flight or fight situation? Think this guy had a bit of an itchy trigger finger? Honest question.

Re: SOPA died in 2012, but Obama administration wants to revive part of it

#56

Post by nateabele »

frank_boyd wrote: post #21
mercurial wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is no reason copyrights should be protected more strongly than traditional property rights. There is one: lobbying.

Exactly. It really can't get any more obvious than that. If we don't take money out of politics our country is going to go down for good.

The only real way to get money out of politics is to stop allowing politics to have such a high return on investment. Unfortunately, that ship has probably sailed for good.
Post reply on HN