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

Afroman found not liable in defamation case

nypost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

691–700 of 798 posts

Re: Afroman found not liable in defamation case

#691

Post by dghlsakjg »

lIl-IIIl wrote: post #649
ceejayoz wrote: post #614

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Let’s bring data: > Source: ChatGPT Please tell me this is a joke?

I agree and have the same reaction, but I also wonder how long before we accept "ChatGPT" source like we do Wikipedia. For ChatGpt answers we reasonably expect to cite actual sources rather than "Source: ChatGPT". For Wikipedia, most of us just stop at "Source: Wikipedia".

Wikipedia is easily viewed by anyone, and their sources are right there for further verification.

“Source: ChatGPT” frequently doesn’t include the link to the original chat, so is hard to verify that is the actual output, and we all have experience with ChatGPT wholesale making up facts when it is led towards the conclusion, or just inventing facts and sources.

I personally treat ChatGPT “facts” like “facts” from Reddit or Meta. There might be a grain of truth in it, but treating it like an actual source is a fool’s game.

Re: Afroman found not liable in defamation case

#692

Post by martin_a »

AngryData wrote: post #662
markdown wrote: post #636

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can hardly make stricter gun laws; we have a right to them in this country. It's hard to limit the guns without infringing on the right of the people. What an odd take. Gun rights weren't dictated by a burning bush. A group of 39 guys decided for everyone else that that right should exist a quarter of a millenium ago. A completely undemocratic system. Every citizen should have a say and if they will it, anythin…

I agree, but I also doubt you could get anywhere near the population needed to vote for strict gun control to start with. And if it was passed anyways I don't think enough people would accept it and give up their guns even if they had to hide or fight to keep them. I personally don't trust the US government enough to willingly vote to give them a monopoly on violence even if I otherwise don't shoot guns very often.

This is all such a strange take. What do you think would happen, what's the expectation?

Everybody goes out and starts shooting down their local police force? The military?

I just don't get how people think this would work and if the government would be intimidated by that. I think they'd just shoot first and ask questions later and that's it.

Re: Afroman found not liable in defamation case

#693

Post by giantg2 »

saynay wrote: post #604
ceejayoz wrote: post #468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most of the big payouts have to come from the cities. In other words, from the victimized populace . I think a cop who steals seized evidence should be personally liable to the person they stole from. (…and I'd note "v. City of Wichita" is clearly responsive to your question.)

I would probably say that both the city and the cop should, independently, be liable. Given the position of authority the city provides, it is ultimately responsible to hire and properly train people who will use that authority well, while the individual is also responsible for their own actions.

If the cop is following procedure, the city and others who set the procedure should be liable. If the cop is breaking procedure, then they should be liable. If there is no clear procedure, then they should both be liable.

Re: Afroman found not liable in defamation case

#694

Post by ProllyInfamous »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #455
duxup wrote: post #337

> In one of the music videos, “Will You Help Me Repair My Door,” surveillance footage shows officers swinging open a gate, kicking down a door, and roaming armed around a living room and a kitchen. >The other, “Lemon Pound Cake,” shows one of the officers, gun in hand, pausing briefly in Mr. Foreman’s kitchen by a cake inside a glass cloche. “It made the sheriff want to put down his gun and cut him a slice,” Mr. Fore…

The lemon pound cake first features in the first video, "Will You Help Me Repair My Door" and seems to have become popular (a chubby sheriff deputy glancing at a lemon pound cake, gun in hand is a viral godsend!) so he made that second video about it [1] and it completely took off. I have watched videos outside the courthouse after the verdict and supporters were even handing free lemon pound cakes [2]. Has the apple…

>[2]>"I've handed out about 120 pieces of lemoncake today — this last piece is for you [to reporter]."

What a fantastic collection of Americans supporting each other.

#FragileBlueLine

Re: Afroman found not liable in defamation case

#695

Post by mothballed »

VHRanger wrote: post #674
mothballed wrote: post #655

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah it seems you finally understand the point. Blaming the skin pigment is as silly as blaming the gun. Murder rates in US have very little to do with gun law, and they have very little to do with skin color, even though they're heavily correlated to the latter and weakly correlated to the former.

Of course within the USA the state levels laws will do little. There's free movement between states! Compare the USA to Canada, where you can't bring a gun easily. You'll see Canadian murder rates being very low. Even controlling for similar factors at the city or neighborhood level. Of course I'm blaming the gun: it's pretty hard to kill someone with other weapons. Stabbings are often survived, even.

If you just want to pick an American neighbor and make a crude comparison based on that, I could just as easily point out Mexico, which has stricter gun laws than the USA and Canada and fewer guns per capita than both USA and Canada. And yet a higher murder rate than both. And I cannot 'easily' (disputable, but lets accept on face these semantics for the purpose of controlled national border) take a gun to or from Mexico.

I assert again it is not the gun laws even if you want to do a national level view. Even a national analysis of gun laws in the three major countries of North America do not yield the conclusion you assert.

You are cherry picking to try and find causality while damning a comment where I merely pointed out a correlation between black people and murder rates. This is hypocrisy.

When you started to look at underlying causes at crime, you were so very close to getting there, but for some reason disengaged from that and went back to our flawed basis that would suggest it's the black pigment or it's the guns causing it.

Re: Afroman found not liable in defamation case

#696

Post by wl »

wnoise wrote: post #663
wl wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The laws that provide a right of action against the government generally don’t cover damages caused by police in the lawful exercise of their duties. So yeah, sovereign immunity.

Even though you would think that'd be a taking for public use.

Perhaps it should be, but the courts have not agreed. See Pena v. Los Angeles for an example of an appellate case that rejected this argument. It found that a "police power" exception to the takings clause applies in such cases.

Re: Afroman found not liable in defamation case

#697

Post by drsalt »

Henchman21 wrote: post #669
ceejayoz wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rise_of_the_Warrior_Cop Watch the short clip in https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/rcgkis/u... - American cops get shown Scottish cops' deescalation procedures, and they scoff at it. "When you say preservation of life, it is… everybody's life. Ours has a pecking order. I'm just being honest."

That should be immediately disqualifying for an law enforcement officer. Saying that on the record should end their career immediately. Alas, we don't live in a just world and they will likely be continuously promoted.

[flagged]

Re: Afroman found not liable in defamation case

#698

Post by Anvoker »

dogemaster2025 wrote: post #611
NikolaNovak wrote: post #136

I have a potentially silly question, and obviously naive - but why so many drawn guns? Fun music videos aside, what was the background here? Were they coming in on a Massive gang fortress? Or are all the stereotypes of American police forces true and they just come guns a-blazing all the time? I mean, that wasn't even police officers with hand guns, they have army-like guys with massive automatic rifles, and they see…

[flagged]

By accepting that valuing the life of a cop over a criminal is a good reason for American cops to behave the way they do, what you end up encouraging instead is cops valuing their own lives over those of citizens to a shocking extent.

Re: Afroman found not liable in defamation case

#699

Post by drsalt »

newobj wrote: post #480
Reubachi wrote: post #34

"Mr. Foreman was not at home during the 2002 police raid, but a security camera system and his wife, using her cellphone, recorded the “faces and bodies” of the officers while they were on the property, according to the lawsuit" "2002" New York Times, everyone. Props to afroman for his perfect demeanor/attitude during all this.

Surprised they didn't write 2ÖÖ2, knowing the Times' predilections

that's not how it works, you only need one umlaut

Re: Afroman found not liable in defamation case

#700

Post by djohnston »

Y-bar wrote: post #218
watwut wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, both him and Trump have similar approach to opponents or those who wronged them. In this case, the opponents are deeply unsympathetic to most, so it is harder to see. I do see how someone whose reaction to being wronged is "I fucked his wife doggy style" could be attracted to the Donald Trump personality.

I’m not at all convinced, because that would mean N A S is a Trumper because: > “When these streets keep callin’, heard it when I was asleep/That Gay Z and C*ck-A-Fella Records wanted beef” JayZ responded in kind insinuating it back on N A S. And Drake is also a Trumpist because he told Chris Brown that he fu*ked Chris’s girl. Tupac also, for some reason: > ”… You claim to be a player, but I f*cked your wife/We bust…

no! no! he said hunter biden! he said wrong! bad man! MAGA! NAzi!!!!!!!!!
Post reply on HN